Facing competition from Apple, Blackberry, Microsoft, and a host of other companies, Google has made a bid in order to strengthen the positon of its organization in the realm of mobile phones. A couple of months ago, Google carried out its largest acquisition to date when it purchased Motorola Mobility for around $12.5 billion. One of my classmates, Maria Fung, posted about the acquisiton, and presented a unique approach to the issue. Her blog post, entitled Google buys Motorola ,  expresses her opinion on how the acquistion and integration of Motorola with the Google brand will increase Google’s market power and reduce risk:

I beg to differ.

Google’s Android technology is used by countless cellphone companies (such as Samsung, LG, HTC, to name a few) and perhaps buying one of these companies competitors will not reduce risk, but increase it. The way I see it is the Android technology will now be available to Motorola phones first: Google will harness Motorola to try and push back at the progress made by the notable mobile tycoons, Apple and RIM’s Blackberry. Google could actually lose market share by pushing its now-competitors to developing their own technology or turning to alternatives.

Essentially Google went from having a handful of friends to facing a group of foes. But is Google’s goal to become a mobile frontrunner out of reach? Not at all.

Link to Maria’s blog: https://blogs.ubc.ca/mfungcomm101/

Innovation. It’s a word we throw around all the time: for me I define a social innovator as someone who directs a significant problem away from a path of destruction, towards a path of construction. That’s why when I stumbled upon social entrepreneur  Jyothindra Nath, I was truly inspired by what I found. As opposed to trying to seek government intervention or aid from the private sector, social entrepreneurs identify a problem and, to put it simply, try to fix it by implementing inventive solutions. They can alter the fate of a society just by starting the conversation and getting attention to the problem.  In 2006, at the age of 20, Jyothindra Nath founded a non-profit social enterprise called Youth United based out of Chandigarh, India. Youth United is about empowering the youth of the nation to help each other and tackle problems such as primary education, gender equity, and maternal health.

In short, Jyothindra Nath and his organization believe in the potential of India’s youth and are seeking ways in which the hundreds of millions in the next generation can improve their own futures.  As someone who has seen the disparity in India first hand and lived in a rural village for over 2 months, I cannot quantify my appreciation and admiration for this social entrepreneur and the feats his organization is conquering. India is a different world, the sadness truly lies within every bright child who has all the potential in the world, but will stay in the vicious cycle of poverty; all because there were no accessible resources. 

Jyothindra Nath is the embodiement of the phrase “be the change you wish to see in the world.”

Read more about Youth United here: http://www.youthunited.in/index.php?option=com_content&view=category&id=31&Itemid=54

Outsourcing in a nutshell:

Okay, maybe that was a bit of a dramatization. But in all seriousness the decision to outsource a sector of a company overseas is fairly significant when discussing managerial accounting. The over-riding question is: Is it worth it? When most of us think of outsourcing overseas, some ideas that come to mind are: cutting costs, and lowering wages. But maybe the question isn’t “is it worth it to outsource?”; but “HOW can a company make it worthwile to outsource?” Instead of viewing outsourcing as a means through which a company is divided and essentially split up, perhaps it’s time to see how outsourcing can be harnessed to create a stronger organization as a whole. For the past twenty odd years, traditionally jobs in IT management, customer service, and data collection (to name a few) have been sents overseas, and become detached from the company as a whole. To read more, there is an insightful article in Bloomberg Businesweek talks about “tapping in to the global talent pool” when talking about the future of outsourcing.

In short, outsourcing can be a platform for globalization as well as an expansion opportunity for a company.

Every once in a while we all come across an article that ignites thought and challenges our imagination.

Renewable energy is an industry that is continually growing as environmental concerns have risen over the years. University of Virginia graduates Chip Ransler and Manoj Sinha are powering Indian villages; one rice husk at a time. The business is called Husk Power Systems and uses empty rice husks leftover from harvest and turns them into biogas which then fuel miniature power plants. But the buck doesn’t stop there, the ash then accumulated from the gas can be used as a fertilizer or a cost-effective portion of cement.  In India as hundred’s of millions of homes remain unlit, it’s great to know that one solution is sustainable and manageable for countless communities.

Click to read more about this dynamic duo’s: Bright Idea’s

How can a company maintain high productivity and generate innovation, all while keeping its workers motivated and inspired to create new ideas. The answer lies within the realms of organizational culture.  When analysing any company, the dynamics are generally quite diverse; employees have differentiable needs, goals, work habits, and motivators. One central unifier of an organization is its culture and relationship each person holds with the company itself.  This culture is easily visible and measurable when seeing the way workers act when they’re not being monitored: It’s a set of common beliefs shared by the entire organization. Companies around the world recognize organizational culture as fundamental in keeping workers satisfied, motivated, and happy. Google has become masterful and creating new ideas; undoubtedly a by-product of having such a strong culture.

They have the right balance. My question in regards to organizational culture, is how much is too much? Take Zappos for example: I love how focused they are on creating an open environment and bringing enjoyability to the office, where workers are intrinsically motivated and focused on customer service. If you take a look at what CEO Tony Hsieh’s desk looks like below, you’ll imediately catch on to the open office policy the company has created.

But will the finance department still be racing toy cars when the company is losing revenue? Will staffers still blow horns and ring cowbells if the profit isn’t rising by 5%? Is Zappos’ culture too extreme? I question the longevity of this kind of culture in the workplace, but only time will tell.

How much organizational culture is too much?

Forbes Magazine put together a tribute to the legendary Steve Jobs by having celebrities and prominent CEO’s share thoguths about the technology tycoon:

Innovative. Passionate. Visionary. I have never met Steve Jobs, nor have I seen an interview of him, or even heard him speak prior to his passing; yet somehow, if you asked me to describe him in three words, these would be the ones that came to my mind.  Most of us know almost nothing about him personally, but each of us has most likely owned an Apple product at one point in time. Strange, isn’t it, how a person we hardly knew, shapes the workings of our daily lives in one way or another. Think of how many people you know who would dare to not have their shiny black iPhone in their pocket, or who would humour the idea of tackling the daily commute to school without an iPod plugged in. Steve Jobs plucked products that were non-existent and unheard of, ten years ago, out of thin air and made them necessary means through which we all function. Since the release of the first iPod at the turn of the century, it seems that Steve Jobs and the Apple Corporation have led a cavalcade of technological innovations, and we’re all cheering them on unquestionably. As Steve Jobs once said, “Those who are crazy enough to think they can change the world, usually do.”

Thank you, Mr.Jobs

After we discussed the values of market research in class, I was curious to see how companies could use these strategies in the real world. I stumbled upon Bokardo: the blog of Joshua Porter, a self-procliamed specialist in interface design, and social interaction. His blog has been running for around six years and I came across his post on why Apple doesn’t do market research. Now when I see that arguably one of the most influential companies in the world doesn’t conduct any form of market research, it makes me question its relevance. To quote Steve Jobs directly from the blog post he once said,

                   “We figure out what we [Apple] want. And I think we’re pretty good at having the right discipline to think through whether a lot of other people are going to want it, too. That’s what we get paid to do.”

Apple has the philosophy of focusing on innovation first and letting the business follow. This leads me to believe that market research doesn’t have to be a common thread amongst all organizations in every industry: it is very much dependant on the niche of the company. Perhaps it can be useful in a recession, or when testing a product prototype: either way Market research has its place in certain industries, and is irrelevant in others.

When browsing through my peers blogs, I came across an interesting post titled Holt Renfrew’s Vancouver success – reaching out to a larger demographic authored by Cole Routtenberg. I was intrigued by the title; since the last time I checked Holt Renfrew and “large demographic” were not synonymous. Turns out, Holt Renfrew is attempting to lose its exclusive atmosphere and expanding its target demographic to include customers ages 18 to 34. The company has built its reputation as being one of Canada’s premier destinations for high end fashion, comparable to world-renowned fashion destination such as Barney’s in New York, or Selfridge’s in London. It isn’t an easy mould to break.

Yet somehow the luxury retailer is coming off of its most profitable year to date, attracting somewhere between 10 to 15 times more business from 18-34 year olds than before it implemented its cheaper, more affordable clothing line. Apparently the strategy is working: Holt renfrew has managed to uphold its image as a reputable high-end fashion retailer; all the while enticing an entirely new demographic, and succeeding at it.

I think I need to pay a visit to 737 Dunsmuir Street to see this for myself.

Link to Cole’s blog: https://blogs.ubc.ca/cleonoff/

Link to article: http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/todays-paper/Holt+Renfrew+mantra+sizes+ages/5392457/story.html

Once, in the startup days of Facebook and heydays of less-prominent social networking sites (Friendster, hi5, Nexopia), there was one website that boasting the most potential. Myspace.

The idea was fresh: a place where emerging music talent could harbour a fan base, or where the average person could post about themselves and look at their friends profiles. It set out to reinvent the average person’s experience on the internet. So how did the website go from one of the most popular online destinations, to something most people would call obsolete? In the world of social media, consumer wants can be described as impulsive: people gravitate towards what’s new and exciting. Once rumoured to be valued in the billions of dollars, Myspace sold to new management for a mere $35 millon this past summer. Perhap Myspace got too comfortable around the height of their success in December of 2008 and gained a sense of overconfidence, maybe they weren’t quick enough or able to keep up with the rapidly growing power of Facebook since the end of 2008. In the end, maybe Myspace had a moment in time where they could’ve ruled the social media world, or maybe they were destined to fail. Either way, Facebook won.

Click here to read more about the Rise and Inglorious Fall of Myspace.

Secrets, Lies, and Sweatshops

This article was published in November 2006 on BusinessWeek,  and highlights the issue of unfulfilled labour rules in the factories of Chinese suppliers to American importers. Entitled “Secrets, Lies, and Sweatshops”, the article suggests that, although American companies insist that they carry out regular inspections to ensure optimal conditions at their supply factories, many of the factories have just become more skilled at hiding malpractice. For instance, the article uses the example of a major Wal-Mart supply factory in China, which covered up the poor work conditions of its employees, by presenting the Wal-Mart inspector with false, but authentic-looking, records. These records give the impression that all labour rules are being upheld, when in actuality the workers are subject to strenuously long hours, with a pay rate lower than what the company has outlined as appropriate. This issue has apparently become quite the practice in China: suppliers of major American importers keeping double records of the inner workings of the factory. Furthermore, the article states that Chinese export manufacturing totals to just under $300 billion yearly, and yet American companies still insist on lower prices from their suppliers in order to provide North American consumers with inexpensive products. The article says, “Factory managers in China complain in interviews that U.S. price pressure creates a powerful incentive to cheat on labor standards.” This ethical issue leads to the major underlying questions: How do U.S. manufacturers deal with upholding labour rules in an effective way? How do you stop the cover-up of malpractice in Chinese factories?

Article: http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/06_48/b4011001.htm