Tanya Sharma's Blog

”If  the United Nations was fully funded why would we need the Arc or social enterprise?”

The United Nations is primarily known for “peacekeeping, peace building, conflict prevention and humanitarian assistance” (“Bodies”). In a way they maintain and develop relations between countries in order to improve the standards of living and human rights. On the other hand, “social entrepreneurs are individuals with innovative solutions to society’s most pressing social problems(“What is”)”. The Arc Initiative is a program created by the Sauder School of Business to build a relationship between countries through collaboration with the goal of increasing economic wellbeing.

I believe that it is essential to keep programs such as the Arc Initiative or the concept as social enterprise even if United Nations was fully funded. This is because the United Nations aim to increase the way of life in terms of healthy living. However social enterprise and the Arc Initiative can ensure and provide further education in terms of business. The Arc Initiative provides further knowledge to countries such as South Africa, Ethiopia, Columbia and Rwanda.

Sources

“Bodies, History, Visits, Employment, Address, Members, Budget, Information.” UN News Center. UN, n.d. Web. 11 Nov. 2014. <http://www.un.org/en/aboutun/>.

“Sauder School of Business.” The Arc Initiative. N.p., n.d. Web. 11 Nov. 2014. <http://www.sauder.ubc.ca/Global_Reach/ARC_Initiative>.

“What Is a Social Entrepreneur?” Ashoka. N.p., n.d. Web. 11 Nov. 2014. <https://www.ashoka.org/social_entrepreneur>.

The following opinion by Richard Williams is part of an extensive debate whether the F.D.A. regulate the use of “Natural” on Food Products. Since 2002, the word “organic” has been defined and regulated (“What Makes”). However, the Food and Drug Administration has declined to define the frequently used term “natural” (“What Makes”).

In 2012, two mothers were suing General Mills, stating that the company had labelled its products as natural when they actually contained highly processed ingredients (). Williams states that defining the term would be a waste of F.D.A resources as it would cost money and labour to try defining labour. In addition, individuals try to avoid food that has been genetically modified (even if it has been deemed by safe). He believes that people who want to eat “natural” should research and pay attention to the nutrition label.

In my personal opinion, I disagree with William’s point of view. I believe that the consumers should know what they are buying and should receive accurate information. Therefore, it is important that the F.D.A. should define natural, because ultimately, the consumers should know what they are putting in their bodies. If not, the F.D.A. should encourage companies to try to stay away from using the word “natural” in their marketing.

Sources

“Defining ‘Natural’ Is a Waste of F.D.A. Resources.” The New York Times. The New York Times Company, 10 Nov. 2014. Web. 11 Nov. 2014. <http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nytimes.com%2Froomfordebate%2F2014%2F11%2F10%2Fshould-the-fda-regulate-the-use-of-natural-on-food-products-15%2Fdefining-natural-is-a-waste-of-fda-resources>.

Strom, Stephanie. “Lawsuit Forces General Mills to Defend the Accuracy of Its ‘Natural’ Labeling.” The New York Times. The New York Times, 26 July 2012. Web. 11 Nov. 2014. <http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/27/business/general-mills-sued-over-natural-labeling.html?_r=0>.

“What Makes ‘Natural’ Natural?” The New York Times. The New York Times, 10 Nov. 2014. Web. 11 Nov. 2014. <http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2014/11/10/should-the-fda-regulate-the-use-of-natural-on-food-products-15>.

This blog post is a response to Jocelyn’s post, where she discusses the different employee strategies implemented by Google and Walmart, and which maximizes profit.

As Jocelyn mentioned, the two companies have very different ideologies in respect to employee benefits. Google gives free food, massages, bike repairs, hair care as well as full health insurance coverage. While on the other hand, Walmart doesn’t even supply health coverage for part time workers. In retrospect they are trying to make more profit, Walmart is trying to cut their labour costs while Google is attempting to keep employees motivated to innovate. I ultimately agree with Jocelyn that Google’s strategy may be more profitable in the long run. The employees would be motivated to stay working rather than quitting, which ultimately increases productivity.

It has also been proven by Zappos. They have created an environment in which all employees feel equal and a vital part of an organization, as if they have purpose, which in return, have caused them to fully support the company. I believe adopting this ideology and employee mindset is essential for a company to prosper as it then becomes not only the head of the company’s job but also the employees job to ensure profits.

Sources

“Google Adds Benefits, Walmart Cuts Them; Oddly, the Logic Is the Same.”Harvard Business Review. N.p., n.d. Web. 10 Nov. 2014. <https://hbr.org/2014/11/google-adds-benefits-walmart-cuts-them-oddly-the-logic-is-the-same>.

Jacobs, Alexandra. “Happy Feet – The New Yorker.” The New Yorker. N.p., 04 Sept. 2009. Web. 10 Nov. 2014. <http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2009/09/14/happy-feet>.

“Jocelyn Kwong’s Blog.” Jocelyn Kwongs Blog. N.p., n.d. Web. 10 Nov. 2014. <https://blogs.ubc.ca/jocelynkwong/response-to-google-adds-benefits-walmart-cuts-them-oddly-the-logic-is-the-same/>.

This blog post is a response to John’s post on Toula Drimonis’ reaction to the Jack Astor’s ad shown above.

Toula Drimonis’ View

In Drimonis’ blog post she touches upon the fact that the following advertisement is not only “tacky and sexist” but also demeaning for women as they use the derogatory term ‘cougar'(Drimonis). She claims that doing so they are promoting the idea that older women who date younger men are “overly sexualized predator(s) on the hunt for helpless animals”(Drimonis). She also mentions the double standards regarding the reaction of when men date women younger than them and when women do.

John Whaley’s View

John believes that although “Drimonis has a valid point in terms of the phrasing of the sign” and he understands why some individuals would be offended by the ad, the ad may still be deemed as affective. John mentions that the brand is known for “gaudy advertisements, attractive waitresses and their appeal to dry humor” and affectively brands themselves for their target market.

My View

I agree with John to an extent, in which Jack Astors is simply effectively targeting their market. Although the advertisement is effective, is it necessary? I believe that their advertisement was completely unnecessary. In retrospect, ads today are becoming less and less sexist in their views (compared to the 50’s) as the ideologies of society have changing. More people have been supportive of basic human rights which includes equality. However, the ad that they have portrayed defames and distorts women, albeit not the the extent Nine West has with its new line of shoes. Therefore, by supporting such ads there will be people that would be offended, like Drimonis, which would create a negative views associated to the restaurant. I believe that Jack Astors should think of redefining their values and goals into a way that adheres to the mindset of society today.

Sources

Drimonis, Toula. “Jack Astor’s New Sexist Ad Proves They Really Are Asses.” The Huffington Post. N.p., n.d. Web. 09 Nov. 2014. <http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/toula-foscolos/jack-astors-sexist-ad_b_5555943.html>.

Newman, Andrew Adam. “A Suggestion for the Right Shoe for Unusual Moments.” The New York Times. The New York   Times, 31 July 2014. Web. 09 Nov. 2014. <http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/01/business/media/a-suggestion-for-       the-right-shoe-for-unusual-moments.html?ref=media&_r=2>.

Whaley, John. “John Whaley’s Blog.” John Whaleys Blog. N.p., n.d. Web. 09 Nov. 2014.                                      <https://blogs.ubc.ca/jwhaley/2014/11/07/jack-astors-new-sexist-ad-proves-they-really-are-asses/>.

taken from http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2014-10-23/aid-groups-are-using-drones-to-save-lives#r=nav-f-story

Rigi’s drone that drops life preservers

Since their creation, autonomous and remote controlled drones (like UAVs and PRAs) have been used as tools of surveillance as well as violence. They are known for being a weapon employed in feuds that has become increasingly popular as it insures and promotes safety of pilots. The following article discusses Amin Rigi’s belief that “drones should be used to save lives, not spy or kill”, his innovation and the vast capabilities that drones possess for the greater good. According to the article, Rigi is “launching RTS London to manufacture flying robots that drop life preservers to drowning people”(Leiber). In addition, in the past, UAVs have been experimented with by organizations such as Doctors Without Borders, the UN as well as, WHO in hopes of preventing poaching, finding survivors of natural disasters and other humanitarian tasks (Leiber).

Will this work?

Like any other technological advancement, I believe that the use of drones for humanitarian purposes will definitely revolutionize the ways in which we can preform tasks with the focus of peace and safety. Especially since the technology is still, as the article put it, in “its shiny object phase”, in other words, not still fully developed and can be improved upon. There are many hurdles that must be overcome. First of all, the possible negative stigma behind drones would have to be reduced. As the product would be sold commercially it is important to distinguish military drones from the ones being sold for safety reasons. However They will also need to be able to ensure the public that privacy standards will be maintained. The main reason why I think it would work is because the product is creating a new market segment by simply redefining an existing version of itself.

Works Cited:

Leiber, Nick. “Using Drones to Make Peace, Not War.” Bloomberg Business Week. Bloomberg, 23 Oct. 2014. Web. 08                Nov. 2014. <http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2014-10-23/aid-groups-are-using-drones-to-save-                               lives#r=nav-f-story>.

Recently, there has been a debacle between the Tsilhqot’in, a first nation tribe, and the mining company, Taseko Mines. Taseko Mines have launched an 1.1 billion New Prosperity project in the Cariboo Regional District in British Columbia. According to Huffington Post, the site is said to be 125 km southwest of Williams Lake (B.C. Gold). In addition, this area is considered as traditional territories to a multitude of First Nation tribes, including the Tsilhqot’in. Although the mining area is outside of the First Nation boundaries set and recognized by the courts, the Tsilhoqot’in are attempting to change the area into a tribal park boundary (Pynn). With that being said, Taseko Mines are still trying to move forward with this project despite being already rejected by the courts.

In this situation, the political and environmental side of the PESTLE analysis would have to be taken into consideration. First and foremost, the First Nation community is heavily bounded to their cultural beliefs, which in retrospect, is vastly connected to the ecological environment. In the environment section of the PESTLE analysis, it is important to point out that moving forward with this project would not only damage the natural water flow (input and output) of Fish Lake and but will also affect the natural habitat in that area. In addition, to mine and separate the minerals, the company would have to invest in some sort of factory, which would lead to the destruction of areas of the land and may also lead to pollution. In the political side of the PESTLE analysis, the company would is up against the government, specifically the federal government as the project has already been rejected twice. In addition, in my opinion, it is necessary to respect the needs of the First Nation tribes, as after all, it is their culture and heritage that is being protected.

Works Cited

                          “B.C. Gold, Copper Mine Rejection Will Be Fought In Court.” The Huffington Post. Ed. The Canadian Press. N.p., 15 Sept. 2014.Web. 06 Oct. 2014. <http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2014/09/15/tasesko-mines-new-prosperity-_n_5822904.html>.

                            Pynn, Larry. “Tsilhqot’in Set to Declare Site of New Prosperity Mine a Tribal Park.” Www.vancouversun.com. Postmedia Network Inc, 11 Sept. 2014. Web. 06 Oct. 2014. <http://www.vancouversun.com/news/metro/Unilateral%2Bpark%2Bdeclared%2BTsilhqot%2Bincludes%2BProsperity%2Bmine/10192766/story.html>.

The Story

The following article from BGR (click here) discusses the recent revelation that Windows 10 discreetly asks for their user’s permission to collect their data. According to the article, stated in their privacy policy, Microsoft 10 asks for permission to store and send data to the company, unbeknownst to the user. Unfortunately, these terms of conditions are usually ignored by customers. “If you open a file, we may collect information about the file, the application used to open the file, and how long it takes any use of it…Examples of data we collect include your name, email address, preferences and interests; browsing, search and file history; phone call and SMS data; device configuration and sensor data; and application usage”(Smith). It is stated in the article that Microsoft claims to use such data to improve their operating systems.

Why does this matter?

Have you ever googled a product or a service and a few webpages later you find an advertisement somewhat related to that particular topic? In our growing technology-reliant society, it has become apparent that the lines between privacy and and public information has grown thin, or disappeared altogether.  In addition, this isn’t the first time a company has faced accusations of invading an individual’s privacy. There are many cases, such as the allocations against Google’s Street View Cars, Facebook taking information to customize advertisements, and phone companies storing data of their users (including location, phone calls and text messages). In some cases, receiving information about your customers is helpful, in the sense of what demographic does the company attract, how should they market themselves to attract more customers (extremely important for business plans) However, in my personal opinion, people don’t realize the type of information can be stored and how individuals from the outside can use that specific information. For example, JP Morgan’s hack a couple of days ago, in which millions of passwords and other secure pieces of data was obtained by third parties, and in extreme cases can lead to identity theft. What is necessary in this situation is control, at least control of the information received by second and third parties. In Microsoft’s case, it is perfectly legal for them to take information from their users once they have been given consensus (as it was stated in the terms and condition page). However, I believe that it is both at the faults of the consumer and producer. The consumers rarely read the terms and condition document while they should as it is a legal and binding contract. The producers, on the other hand, shouldn’t use such ‘under the table’ methods of retrieving such information. Big Brother shouldn’t be watching you constantly, he should only see what you wish to share with the world.

Works Cited

                 Smith, Chris. “Windows 10 Preview Lets Microsoft Collect Private Data in Frightening Ways.” BGR. BGR Media, 03 Oct. 2014. Web. 04 Oct. 2014. <http://bgr.com/2014/10/03/windows-10-privacy-policy/>.

BBC covered a story revolving around the fact that the US and the EU are attempting to create free trade areas between the themselves though eliminating tariffs. If this plan follows through, the article said that it would be “the world’s biggest free trade zone”. Follow more upon the article by clicking here.

In my opinion, there are benefits and disadvantages to this plan, but the advantages may outweigh the disadvantages. In some cases the abolishment of tariffs, would be somewhat beneficial to the consumers in both the US and the EU. This is because it promotes greater choice of product for consumers and producers at lower prices. Consumers will now be able to buy less expensive products (domestic and foreign) and producers would be able to purchase less expensive raw materials and semi manufactured goods. In addition, opening up the market to foreigners without a tariff calls for increase in competition. Domestic firms will now be competing with foreign firms. However, there are some costs that accompany the abolishment of tariffs. Infant and domestic industries in either country (mainly the US because the EU is already a monetary and economic union) would be at a disadvantage. The infant industries would not be able to compete with the larger industries in the US and EU, as for domestic and infant industries, competition has increased immensely. On the other hand, it allows for an increase in jobs and helps the industry grow.

The article:

http://www.bbc.com/news/business-29482892

Resources:

http://www.investopedia.com/terms/e/europeanunion.asp

For the past few weeks, Air France pilots have been on strike “over the creation of the discount carrier Transavia, where their colleagues would learn lower wages” (News). The main reason for this strike was that the pilots feared that “their jobs would be outsourced and pilots would be employed on local foreign contracts” (News).  While Air France is estimated to lose 280 million euros due to the strikes, the following BBC article (click here) covers the story of how the low-cost carrier Easy Jet has been booming with revenue.

Air France’s competitor and substitute, EasyJet has been gaining handsomely due to the strikes that have been occurring. According to the aforementioned article, revenues boosted up by about 5 million Euros and it increased shares as well (Air France). This is a prime example of how competitors (or substitutes) are beneficial for companies as well. When we look at substitutes and competition, we often look at how they can threaten the company in question. This is mainly due to the fact that companies do not have control over the actions of their substitutes, its an exogenous cost that must be dealt with and monitored. In this case, Air France has harmed itself which has allowed their competition to advance immensely.

Works Cited

http://www.cnet.com/news/apple-chastised-for-unsafe-working-conditions-in-supplier-factory/

Major companies that provide goods and services which are known as luxury or high demand goods often lean toward cheaper costs of production. With the goal of increasing profit in mind, in order to decrease the costs of production, these multinational companies resort to low-cost labor (especially in places like China and Bangladesh) to fulfill their requirements or quotas. Although low-cost labor is favorable for the multinational companies, it is not favorable for the workers themselves (Shah). This is where we must consider business ethics. For example, in the Tibken article, we notice that the article is specifically about Apple’s discrepancies and its “serious health and safety, environmental and human rights violations” (Tibken).

Ethically, it is important that all businesses follow the rules and regulations listed under the human rights act, specifically for two main reasons. The first, in order for the product, or service, to be manufactured at a higher quality, the business must satisfy the customers needs and wants. Essentially, to allow your company flourish your employees must be comfortable and pleased with the standards of their work area, to present higher quality goods and services. Secondly, unacceptable work conditions, like those found in the Catcher Suqian base, can lead to higher liabilities for not only the company but the workers themselves. If the worker turns ill it would be at the risk of the company and would result in one less employee, and to a larger extent, less profit. This encompasses Edward Freeman’s Stakeholder Theory, which states that successful businesses must create value for all stakeholders, they can’t be viewed individually (What is). Essentially to understand the value of each one of the stakeholders and how they work together to allow a business to flourish (What is). Therefore, ethics revolving around low-cost labour as well as other aspects in business are all equally important, as they exist to allow the business to expand and sustain in a productive and healthy environment.

 Work Cited

                      What Is Stakeholder Theory? – R. Edward Freeman. Perf. Edward Freeman. Youtube. N.p., 1 Oct. 2009. Web. 10 Sept. 2014. <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bIRUaLcvPe8#t=32>.

                      Tibken, Shara. “Apple Chastised for Unsafe Working.” CNET. N.p., 4 Sept. 2014. Web. 10 Sept. 2014.

                      Shah, Anup. “Corporations and Worker’s Rights.” – Global Issues. -, 26 May 2006. Web. 11 Sept. 2014.