With the recent opening of Target in Lansdowne Centre, Richmond, I was intrigued with what the Canadian reception of this American based company would be like. Not too great, apparently.

Target Canada Ad

When Target first announced in late 2010 to the public it’s plans to expand in to Canada, it was reached with massive excitement and it’s debut became “the most anticipated arrival of a foreign retailer in a generation”, as described by a Globe and Mail article.

Despite overwhelming buzz, Target’s sales have fallen well short of predicted numbers. This is because customers were familiar with the stores before they even launched in Canada due to cross-border shopping. Consequently, many consumers expected for Target Canada to match the cheaper US Target pricing.That is, of course not the case.

So, if Target is not providing goods at a cheaper price, what exactly is it’s point of difference among other retailers such as Walmart and Shoppers Drug Mart? New brands that Canada has never seen before, of course! I believe that as time passes and the price perception stint dies down, Target will remain profitable by offering new items to Canadian soil.  According to Porter’s Five Forces, Target’s large supplier power and unique competitive advantage will allow the company to sustain in Canada.

Picture – Target Canada Ad

Social entrepreneurship is a growing concept that serves as a marriage between business and change-making. While many companies focus on maximizing profit, social enterprises tackle social problems often at a cost. But in an ever so socially-conscious generation, it makes a business that much more attractive.

While I was going over the obligatory readings about the Arc Initiative and entrepreneurship, I decided to further extend my studies by visiting the project’s Sauder website. In the “About Arc” section, it states:

“[this] is not a “Let’s Save Africa” project.”

Because it’s not: Arc is an opportunity for professors and students to aid local local business management (in South Africa, Ethiopia, and Columbia in 2012) by providing business skills workshops to entrepreneurs.

Me in Nuevo Amanecer back in March 2012

Last spring, I embarked on an 11 day trip to Guatemala with a school club where I lived among locals in a small railroad-side village and was involved in the construction of a small local school during my stay. With this experience in mind, I am certainly interested in learning more about the Arc Initiative. The fact that I can use all that I have learned in a first year business course – COMM 101 – and guide others in the real world is simply amazing.

Picture: Arc Initiative Logo

Ah yes, Snapchat. The go-to mobile application for sending short-lived “snaps” of photos, videos, and of course embarrassing selfies. Since its inception of 2011, the photo app has grown to become an essential to many users (including myself) and there are numbers to back that up – more than 26 million US users and 350 million “snaps”sent per day. In just two years, the simple one-button app has become a serious threat to social media companies as it shares the same user demographic of young teenagers.

In fact, social media giant Facebook recently tried to acquire Snapchat for a whooping $3 billion, but to no avail. In Gracia’s blogpost, she explains that the alternative to beating a competitor isn’t always acquisition as Snapchat is not a sustainable business. While it is true that Snapchat doesn’t make any money, I believe that it has insurmountable potential for it.

For one thing, the company possesses the first-mover effect, with a loyal customer base and strong brand recognition. In fact, in June 2013 investors valued the company at $800 million, and raised $60 million in funds. There exists numerous opportunities to open up revenue streams, such as capitalizing on its popularity by introducing ads to generate money. Was the rejection of Facebook’s offer smart for the company? Only time will tell.

Globe and Mail Article
Picture – Snapchat logo

Save on Meats is an iconic restaurant and butcher shop based in Vancouver’s Downtown Eastside, a neighbourhood notorious for being “Canada’s poorest postal code”. Entrepreneur Mark Brand employs a unique commercial strategy to improve the social well being of DTES, by not only feeding the poor, but also providing job opportunities to barrier employees. That is, Save on Meats employs those who would normally be overlooked because of their obstacles, be it drug addiction or ex con records. In addition, the social enterprise offers meal tokens of $2.25, in which it can be redeemed for a hot sandwich.To date, Save on Meats has been featured in numerous newspaper articles and TV shows like The Big Decision, Gastown Gamble,  and Diners, Drive-ins and Dives, which is all free marketing. In this sense, the business has created a very strong brand identity.

A play on the saying “When Pigs Fly”, as Save on Meats strives to break down the employment barrier.

While Save on Meats has met with tremendous success, is the business really sustainable? Quite often, corporate social responsibility and profit collide.For Save on Meats, the answer is yes. Because of the social enterprise’s unique value proposition, partners such as Dragon’s Den’s Arlene Dickenson have offered a helping hand.

Globe and Mail article

Picture – Save on Meats Logo

The other day, I came across a blog post in the Harvard Business Blog Network that had to do with the organizational culture, an aspect of business we recently learned in class. In the blog, Deidre Campbell explains the significance of organizational culture. However, the common question is, does having a positive work environment really increase productivity?

She states that

“great leaders know they should invest in their people. Those companies who are comitted to a strong workplace culture tend to perform well [.]”

 

In fact, companies with strong organizational culture such as Microsoft and Google have generally placed high on rankings such as the 2011 World’s Best Multinational Companies list. After a series of research and surveys, Campbell offers a compiled list of similarities between some of the top companies in relation to their organizational culture.

Among the list, a certain point particularly resonated to me:

A part of Google’s “culture”

• They recognize that culture is critical to talent retention

In an increasingly competitive business world where talent is invaluable, a strong workplace culture can attract employees with the same values. In Google’s instance, the company’s friendly,open, and ‘no fear” environment brings in the best talent from all over the globe. Google employees are offered more creative freedom and empowerment, thus promoting innovative ideas and thinking.

 Picture – Google’s workspace