In response to Shuting Lin’s blog post regarding employees and their “napping time” in the workplace, according to my opinion, it is unnecessary to allocate resources towards napping time for employees simply because it results in a large opportunity cost. In the post, it states that companies who encourage napping time for its employees benefit in terms of increased productivity in the work place.

However, the opportunity cost would be great. Employees would be paid during napping time as well therefore increasing the cost of production for the firm resulting in lower profits. In addition, napping time may encourage employees to associate work with sleep and therefore it might even lead to decreased productivity as the workers look forward to napping time during the day. In order for the mind to remain active, it is essential for workers to be in situations which makes them exert and exercise their brains rather than rest it. I would propose a different solution if a firm wishes to increase productivity; provide incentives for employees who work effectively and efficiently, encourage team building activities which not only increases workers skillset but increases motivation in employees and provide counselling services for workers who feel demotivated. Thus, allocating napping time for employees would encourage indolence rather than productivity.

References:

https://blogs.ubc.ca/gretalin/2013/11/18/blog-assignment-10/

Should You Allow Your Employees to Nap While on the Job?

The premise is simple. You’re a CEO in one the biggest multinational auto company in the world attempting to monopolize in one of the largest car markets in the world. There is a large consumer segment with low incomes who cannot afford cars but would have like to. The logical step would be to expand the consumer base by providing cheap and affordable cars to low income groups and therefore procure greater profits. What could possibly go wrong right?

As it turns out, in this particular scenario, a lot. Tata Nano is an interesting case study for business students because it puts theory into practice with the assumption that cheaper cars result in greater sales and higher profits. The case study of Tata Nano interested me as I was first introduced to it in the ‘marketing meets accounting’ comm 101 class. I decided to investigate this topic further and to construe reasons as to why such a project with such great potential resulted in a colossal failure.

In the external blog, “Autoblog”, the blogger examines the extent to which Tata Nano has failed, with projected sales of 20,000 to 25,000 cars to a mere 1,200. One of the reasons why the project failed was simply because of image of the product; no one, regardless of socioeconomic status, is willing to buy a product if its main attribute is to be cheap. The stigma associated with buying the product will lead consumers to choose substitute products that deliver the same function, a motorbike for instance. Hence, the product image and perception led to the demise of the Tata Nano

References:

http://www.autoblog.com/2011/10/12/is-the-tata-nano-a-failure/

http://www.businessinsider.com/tata-nano-failure-2011-12

It is an exciting period for human beings, where information management and technology are integrated to provide an array of services that are beneficial to us. A project initiated by Ninja Blocks based in Sydney Australia is committed to contribute to the digital sphere with cutting edge technology that defines the next generation, right in our living rooms.

Ninja Sphere is a device that claims to let the user takes control of his/her environment by providing instantaneous feedback on changes in the environment with accurate in-home location data. The device detects changes in temperature, lighting and any other objects that the user wishes to monitor.

Innovation comes at a cost though and Ninja Blocks requires funding for its device in order for its ambitious idea to become a reality. Through Kickstarter, Ninja Blocks is gauging whether there is sufficient demand for the product and are assessing the consumers’ willingness and ability to buy the product. Ninja Blocks is also relying on the “Lean Startup Model”; through initial development kits and beta testing of the device, they are modifying and reconfiguring the device based on consumer feedback. With the heavy reliance on information management through kickstarter and social media such as Twitter and Facebook, Ninja Spheres can procure valuable data in considering which direction the company should head in. Customer development and agile practices might ultimately transform Ninja Blocks’s vision into a reality.

References:

http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/ninja/ninja-sphere-next-generation-control-of-your-envir?ref=category

http://ninjablocks.com/

In response to Colin Lam’s intriguing perspective into the future of gaming, the direction of gaming as I see it is in a slightly different perspective. With the recent release of PS4 and Xbox One, both heighten the core entertainment features rather than exclusively video game development therefore resulting in alienation of customers who label themselves as hardcore gamers. For instance, the development of the new console was significantly based on forging of new partnerships with TV channels, shifting the focus on solely video gaming to diversifying the services offered in order to increase the current consumer base.

Fixation on certain features will imminently and inevitably alienate consumer who solely buy the console for its gaming value as there has been a compromise in development of video gaming experience. Some consumers will simply not require such features such as Netflix or ESPN, both of which are quite limited in provision of its services. However, both Sony and Microsoft have recognized that diversifying its services can increase sales as it can be seen when the PS4 sold over 1 million units on launch day. Thus, if markets wish to expand their consumer base, inevitably, there will be negative implications that includes the crowding out of a specific consumer segment that might potentially hurt the company in the long run.

References:

https://blogs.ubc.ca/colinlam/2013/11/15/response-the-future-of-gaming/#comments

http://www.businessinsider.com/dont-buy-a-ps4-or-xbox-one-2013-11

http://www.businessinsider.com/sony-sells-1m-ps4-units-2013-11

If I had assertively pitched my idea to a room full of people that the professions of a tall, high profile Wall Street man with shiny Armani shoes and formal business attire could be comparable to a sweaty, rough football player, I would be labelled a madman. Truth is, football and business have a symbiotic relationship.Successful football strategies can be used for businesses and vice versa.

For instance, in football, the team must have a high chemistry and a strong work ethic in order to impose the philosophy the manager wishes to employ in his players to win games. That can be said about business as well. A CEO must impose his philosophy on his employees to procure profit maximization. In order to execute this, employees must learn to work as a team instead of independent silos and posses high chemistry and a strong work ethic. When every football player knows his role and his responsibilities, both on the individual and team level, the team usually achieves its objectives. This parallels businesses as well. In addition, the right football player must be bought who can be prove to be constructive and advantageous for the team. As a result, human resources management in businesses must be extremely selective of which employees they hire and the specific skillset they offer. The hiring process must not only include employees that excel in a particular skillset, but the skills they posses must be beneficial and add value to this business. Hence, running a good football team is like running a profitable business.

References:

https://www.b2bcfo.com/article/if-youre-company-was-a-soccer-team.html

http://www.businessweek.com/smallbiz/tips/archives/2010/11/why_successful_football_strategies_should_be_applied_to_business.html

Amongst the backdrop of incessant rants over the imminent extinction of cable television promulgated by the media and ‘experts’; it comes to no surprise that the general consensus is that cable television as we know it is dying. With the recent surge in Netflix’s popularity and its market share value of $349.76 as of today, most pundits feel compelled to spell the end of cable television. However, the facts show otherwise.

For instance, 97% of all video was watched on a television. Less than 3% was viewed online

The point here is that the perception of cable television dying is deceptive because we are looking from the perspective of young university students who habitually use the internet for our daily dose of entertainment gratification. For us, accessibility to use the services of Netflix is highly convenient. However, Netflix isn’t suitable to satisfy the needs of a larger and older demographic. The older generation, for instance, hasn’t quite grasped the concept of Netflix as of late as they’ve already been conditioned to watch cable television to satisfy their needs.

An established consumer base with high brand recognition and an extensive reach to families worldwide are just some of the reasons why cable television isn’t dying any-time soon.  In addition, with the lack of expansion into international markets for Netflix, the added advantage for extensive distribution channels for worldwide consumers to use the services cable television provides is highly significant. Thus the statement that TV is dying is redundant – Nothing could be further away from the truth.

References:

http://www.businessinsider.com/in-case-you-thought-tv-was-dying-2013-1

https://www.google.ca/finance?cid=672501

http://www.businessinsider.com/nielsen-says-television-isnt-dying-2012-8#you-can-watch-the-complete-conference-video-below-14

http://adcontrarian.blogspot.ca/2013/08/tv-dying-more-alive-than-ever.html