Stephen Ilagan's Blog

In response to Adrian Fung’s blog post “Is Social Entrepreneurship Really Possible?”, I would have to agree that Social Entrepreneurship is just another marketing ploy used by profit-driven businesses to attract sales. Adrian uses the examples of TOMS shoes and their “one for one” campaign. I have no doubt in my mind that this campaign only drives home the point that consumers should buy them as they are not only going to look fashionable, but they are helping other people. Ingenious, really. I side more with Milton Friedman when it comes to theories about how companies operate. The rise in “social responsibility”  is a response to consumer demand shifting to goods and companies that are environmentally and socially responsible. So really, Adam Smith’s “invisible hand” controlling the markets is still at play.

Of course, social entrepreneurs like Jamie Oliver and Muhammad Yunus are at play and do make a nice profit from their enterprises. However, these are extremely rare, and most of these social enterprises are focused on that – a social goal, rather than being a profit-driven business. The reconciliation of both is extremely difficult and most social enterprises end up functioning like charities, rather than businesses.

To find an innovative company, one simply needs to open the closest web browser. Google has completely redefined cyber space to the point where it is taken for granted. Google has gone even further than Schumpeter’s definition of the entrepreneur “revolutionizing the pattern of production”. Google has changed the way we think. That, in my opinion, is the true mark of an innovator, of someone who not only takes advantage of change, but pushes it forward as well.

When Larry Page and Sergey Brin launched Google in 1998, their mission was to organize the internet. Their “pursuit of opportunity” definitely exceeded “the resources they currently controlled” (Stevenson’s definition of an entrepreneur).

It hasn’t stopped at their search engine either. Google has constantly been trying to innovate; to take control of the fast-paced technology sector. In fact, in 2011, Google had over 50 acquisitions.

Their next big project? Google Wallet. If that isn’t innovation – completely changing a staple in our lives  and making it digital – I don’t know what is. As Drucker said, the entrepreneur “always searches for change, responds to it, and exploits it as an opportunity”. That is exactly what Google is trying to do in our digital age.

Here’s an article that all of us in Comm 101 should take a look at: The Top Eight Rules of Networking, by Kelly Eggers, a regular blogger in FINS finance. True, most of this is common sense, and a select few of us are well-practiced at applying these basic rules in real life, but it does point out a few intricacies such as the differences of how to look at a person during a professional or social conversation.

Interestingly enough, the article also pointed out that business cards are beginning to trump random resume passing. Coincidentally, it seems like I’ve had to hand out more and more resumes whenever I want a job just to get an interview. It seems like you have to know someone in the company for there to be even a remote chance at landing that job. For all those wanting holiday or summer jobs, take note. This is trend that is affecting us now and will affect us in the future: job hiring (and business in general, for that matter) is becoming more and more personal. The sparkly resume simply doesn’t cut it anymore. But hey, I guess that’s why we are all in Sauder, right?

For all you sport-nut Sauderites, here is a recommendation for a sports show that puts a business twist on topics. Tom Mayenknecht hosts a show on the TEAM 1040 (better known for rants and in the words of David Pratt, “yahoo callers”) every Saturday from 9am to 12 noon called “the Sport Market“. Mayenknecht is a 30-year veteran in sport marketing and brand management and his insights often reveal things that are overlooked for most spectators of sports.

Think of Mayenknecht’s show as BusinessWeek meets ESPN Radio. Concepts that we have been learning in class – from brand positioning to supply chain operations to the effect of technology – are applied in a sports context. The application of those concepts to a real-world entity makes classes exponentially more valuable. The fun part is, of course, it involves sports, which, for a sports fan, should be a real treat, as all the perks of your regular sports radio shows – athlete guests and caller opinion – still exist.

Take last week’s show, for instance. Mayenknecht was talking about this year’s small media market World Series and the implications on TV Revenue and Baseball’s dependence on the Series reaching seven games (which it did).

If you have nothing else to do on a lazy Saturday morning on campus, tune in to AM 1040, even if its just for a few minutes, for some entertainment and learning.

While reading Thursday’s issue of the Globe and Mail, one of the articles that caught my eye was the investigation by the antitrust subcommittee of the American Senate into Google possibly “abusing its dominant position to stifle rivals”. In fact, Google Chairman Eric Schmidt was busy this past week testifiying to a group of US Senators, who are claiming that Google rigs its search results to have it’s products appear before competitors.

Now, my instant reaction to the article was that the Senate was wasting its time. Logically, if I were Google, of course I would list my own products and services (such as Google Shop) first on my search list. The reasoning is that I invented the search engine, after all. I am merely trying to maximize my profit by getting one step ahead of my competitors who didn’t invent search engines. Boo-hoo for them, welcome to capitalism.

The more I thought about it, however, the more I realized just exactly why the Senate is going through all this trouble. Google was recently involved in two substantial transactions – the purchase of Motorola and Zagat. Ever since their inception, Google has been steadily acquiring technology and internet based companies (they own YouTube, as well). What I find alarming is that given their dominance over any other search engine, Google can control what the average consumer sees on the internet. Now, coupled with the fact that Google is further expanding into other sectors (Flight and Food Reviews, to name a few), this is quite a scary thought. To the average person, an internet search is merely that – a simple search for information. Now, imagine how many internet searches on Google are run everyday. To Google, each search is becoming an opportunity for profit, not only from advertising (which was their original plan), but now from a wealth of services that the company is quickly acquiring. If you were to think of the internet as a city, you could say that Google is re-directing all roads to their companies alone. Now, that is some pretty powerful stuff. In a sense, they are becoming the Wal-Mart of internet businesses. Like Wal-Mart suffocating small businesses every time it builds one of its esteemed “supercenters”, Google is doing the same to internet businesses every time it enters a new market by purchasing another company.

Video: Google’s Schmidt denies cooking results to favour own products (via the Globe and Mail website)

Hello Sauder and the rest of the world,

As my first crack at the blogging cyberspace (yes, I know, I’m a bit late to the party), I feel the urge to make this somewhat memorable. Unfortunately, the creeping drowsiness that seems to rear its head at the most inconvenient times is back with a vengeance. In other words, I’m a bit tired and my brain is drawing blanks. My body must be hinting at payback for that Frosh weekend. Go figure.

Scrambling for business stories really isnt the best way for someone to start their blogging foray, as you can imagine. And considering this is the first post, and Kroeker (I really hope I nailed that spelling; true, I could check online for the proper spelling, but I figure this post wont formally count since we have not gotten to talking about the blogging portion about our mark in class yet). Scratch that, instead of “I figure”, I really should have typed “I hope”. Oh well. So much for backspace.

Anyways, I could actually move on and start talking business now. This is about as informal as it gets, with clauses and sentence structure being thrown wherever my somewhat deranged mind places them. I could ramble on about the events that have transpired with News Corp, more specifically its now defunct tabloid News of the World. If you have no idea who or what News Corp is… they are only one of the biggest media empires in the world. I believe they rank only second to the BBC in the world as the largest and most influential media group. Not only do they own television channels like FOX and National Geographic,  but they also own a vast majority of the world’s major newspapers, including News of the World, one of Britians most popular tabloids, which has also gotten them into a little bit of trouble… If you’re not sure about the trial I’m referring too… I suggest you google it or wiki it. Pretty interesting stuff. Honestly, its Murdoch’s son James thats getting the short end of the stick here (Thats Rupert Murdoch, the founder of the company). James is likely to lose his job as CEO of the company… and lets face it, Rupert is already among the rich of the rich, and the guy is getting up there in age. Unfortunately for James, hes a young guy, and well, so much for inheriting the company on a good note. But hey, daddy’s inheritance must be pretty good right?