In the article posted by Harvard Business School, Clay Christensen’s Milkshake Marketing theory is explained. To sum it up in a few words, it is the idea that a product or service should be marketed depending on the job that future consumers will hire it to fulfill. This theory is somewhat contradictory to the usual idea of marketing towards the targeted segment, and I personally believe it to be viable. When I go to Starbucks before my 3:00pm class, I don’t just buy my coffee because I am a pretentious UBC student, I buy it because it does the job of keeping me awake during Math and Econ, and believe me, there are many other students doing the same. This insight creates a market for Starbucks, to market to those students feeling drowsy in the afternoon and need a pick-me-up so they don’t end up failing their first university midterm.

Source: http://www.theslenderstudent.com/tag/starbucks/

Even though I do find truth to it, I do believe there are room for errors such as it is only useful when past data is available. All in all,  “Milkshake Marketing” is a perfectly sound idea, but is not completely superior to the standard targeted segmentation approach.

reference: http://hbswk.hbs.edu/item/6496.html

Throughout the years, the connection between the corporate world and the common man has become more prominent. Though in articles such as, “When the job inspector calls”, written for the Economist, we are reminded of the daily injustices and lack of social responsibility from those in charge. As issues such as dangerous work environments to low wages continue to make headlines, it causes one to wonder how exactly these companies are implementing change. In the chapter written by Milton Friedman from the book, Corporate Ethics and Corporate Governance, businessmen and corporate executives alike are portrayed somewhat like game pieces on the topic of social responsibility, as they are controlled to make all the right moves, but their intentions remain cynical. With this idea, it is key to note that at one time the decision to outsource factory work to save on costs was agreed upon, but also that these companies have now seen the fault in these choices. With the introduction of audits, the lobbying of NGO’s, and departments dedicated to the elimination of such issues, the ethics in question and reputation of companies are attempting to be salvaged. These attempts do provide evidence for the Stakeholder Theory presented by Mr. Freeman, concluding that the stakeholders do have power in the actions of a company and the standards it is meant to uphold. Though this pressure to change is ongoing, the real question is, if these issues were never brought to the attention of the public, would the companies themselves ever realize their own ethical trespasses?

References:

• The Social Responsibility of Business is to Increase Profits http://site.ebrary.com/lib/ubc/reader.action?docID=10187339&page=171
• What is Stakeholder Theory? – R. Edward Freeman https://www.youtube.com/embed/bIRUaLcvPe8
• When the job inspector calls; working conditions in factories http://www.economist.com/node/21551498