Hope you enjoy reading my blog and that my posts aren’t too boring… I actually had fun writing the last batch 😀

LOL sorry my blog posts are long…. got too excited

Ever since Facebook has been charging companies who have fan pages with over 400 likes, many companies are beginning to shift their marketing strategies away from Facebook and towards other social media websites such as Twitter. Facebook’s recent “Pay for reach” strategy basically encompasses a new feature called ‘promoted posts’ where companies with over 400 likes pay for their posts to appear on user’s news feeds. Unfortunately, for the businesses who refuse to pay for the extra reach are now experiencing a drop in their fan engagement. However, there is a solution to the sudden drop in “fan” interest and activity: a new facebook feature that allows users to choose to receive constant notification on fan pages updates: “fans can click on the “Get Notifications” option under the “Liked” button on a brand’s Page he or she is following. Brands can encourage their fans to enable this feature. The more fans that activate it, presumably the greater reach brands will have.” Another option that allows ample company exposure is something called the “interest list” where users can subscribe to topics they care about and see updates on their news feeds.

It’s interesting to see how much of a difference Facebook now makes towards the success of a company. While I think that constant updates from companies are rather annoying, I would much rather see it on a facebook news feed than receive multiple promotional emails on my phone. It’s also true that if we are not updated on companies we have interest in, we will not willingly check it out ourselves. While a part of me finds it ridiculous how reliant we are on Facebook now a days, I can’t disagree that Facebook plays a vital role. Technology is now more important than ever. It is not until enrolling in business school where I finally appreciate the power of information technology. It is also fascinating how much of everything is tailored to the consumers liking.

For example, a website I recently stumbled on, called pulse.me, is a place where I can customize what kind of news I want to read, and what topics I want to see.

(Pulse takes your favorite websites and transforms them into a colorful and interactive mosaic)

I encourage all my fellow colleagues, TA’s and Professors to check out www.pulse.me

Before this website, I was never interested in reading the news, or watching it on TV. This resulted in difficulty of not only completing my Comm 101 blogs, but also keeping up to date with my surroundings in general. But now, while I am exposed to things I am actually interested in, writing these blogs have become an effortless experience, and I find myself actually engaged and passionate about my posts.

The reason why I mention pulse.me in this post is because the idea of Facebook completely allowing users to control what they see on their feed. The trend of customization has become a definite asset to any company looking for more exposure and consumer activity.

Other apps and websites that come to mind: Instagram and Songza.

References:
http://www.entrepreneur.com/blog/224957?utm_medium=referral&utm_source=pulsenews
http://www.mindjumpers.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/facebookforbusiness.png

In Nina Garcia’s blog, she talks about the value of being original and the importance of focusing on a high quality design rather than turning to the ‘fast fashion’ trend route and applauds Robert D. Austin’s 2008 HBR article “High Margins and the Quest for Aesthetic Coherence.” According to Garcia, businesses that focus on quality and coherence and stick to a well thought design tend to have more of a lasting impact versus companies who focus more on quantity and cheap products.

“It’s the companies that have integrity and stay true to their aesthetic that are ultimately more profitable. Those that cut quality and turn to knock-off designs just don’t survive long-term.”

I found this blog particularly interesting, because it puts into prospective on what is completely true, yet overlooked. Because of the new technologies, the demand of consumers has increased substantially. Before internet existed, consumers would have to see new products and designs in person in order to want it., but now, consumers can see the new trends via twitter, facebook, and google, even before they hit stores. Like Garcia writes in her blog, “consumers not only see products sooner, but also want them faster.”

The concept mentioned above reminds me of that one class in Comm101 where we talked about the success of Zara and how Zara is able to keep up with the trends and release new styles weekly to achieve customer return and excitement. However, while Zara’s quality is very good, Garcia and Austin’s blog posts challenge this tactic:

“As “Aesthetic Coherence” suggests, it is crucial to emphasize design and delivery, even in a fast-paced modern market. I’ve seen that beating out the competition is not just a matter of offering the lowest price. Companies must also understand that consumers want special and well-thought-out products wrapped in a holistic experience from the point of discovery to the point of purchase.”

This makes me wonder if Zara will be as successful as they are now in the future. Will they continue to be successful once the other companies start using their same tactic? Do customers go back for the new trends, or the quality of the Zara brand?

In my opinion, Zara is doing a good job. Although I never really noticed the amount of different styles they have weekly until Comm101, I don’t think Zara is exactly cheap (although in Comm101, they say it is). Because of Zara being more out of my ideal price range, I will always have the impression that Zara makes quality clothing, which falsifies the argument found in “Aesthetic Coherence”. However, other brands, such as Forever21, I believe fall into the category of companies making the mistake of choosing quantity over quality. While they are highly successful due to their reasonable prices and “cute” selection of clothing, many times I have gone home only to find that my new purchases have loose threads and missing buttons.

As a prospective business woman, I will definitely keep in mind that quality will always beat out quantity; no matter what costs.

References:

http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2012/11/staying_in_fashion_in_the_digi.html?utm_medium=referral&utm_source=pulsenews
http://hbr.org/2008/01/high-margins-and-the-quest-for-aesthetic-coherence/ar/1
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-JJ84dEUtN40/TwN8XhjsXWI/AAAAAAAAA2o/Llq1cyLs-s8/s1600/quality-enhanced-life-days-a-new-metric-for-hospital-sustainability.jpg

A popular topic explored in Comm 101 is entrepreneurship. On top of that, I would have to say that 3 out of 5 people I ask want to be entrepreneurs after receiving their BCom degree at Sauder. However, can Sauder professors–or any business school professor– actually teach someone to be innovative and creative? Are we guaranteed successful entrepreneur status if we attend a business school of entrepreneurship? According to an unnamed entrepreneurship professor students  “need to go out and actually build a business to get a full education in entrepreneurship.” Compared to an accounting degree, where you are pretty much assigned a firm and automatically make liveable yearly income, entrepreneurship is a hit or miss: many companies struggle to break even, and some make millions quickly after starting up. You can’t place an average income or value on entrepreneurship.

“The value has to be a question of whether or not the degree helps a brand-new entrepreneur start her first business—and if it improves her chances of creating a business that either lasts or has a successful exit.”

While I don’t believe that learning entrepreneurship is a waste of time, I’m just wondering if it’s a waste of money. There are certainly advantages of learning entrepreneurship, especially the networking aspect of meeting existing entrepreneurs and learning the tricks of whatever industry; however, no matter how many courses of entrepreneurship you take, or how many entrepreneurs you speak with, you are never guaranteed success. Entrepreneurship is about being innovative, thinking out of the box, and being the creator of something that does not exist. Many successful entrepreneurs, Bill Gates, Steve Jobs and Mark Zuckenberg, didn’t even complete their degrees, and look at them now!  You can even google the list of billionaire drop outs, and the list goes on and on.

Getting personal with this article, sometimes I even question why I’m at Sauder. Of course, I love my faculty, but at the same time so far in my first year of university, I’m barely even taking any business courses. I would like to think of myself as more of an ‘Advanced’ arts student. As I reflect upon the students at Sauder, YES, everyone here is great at what they do, but for the most part, the best thing about being in a business school is not  the courses we take, but more of the opportunities that are given to us. Like what the article mentions:

“Any college degree is worth only what you make of it. An entrepreneurship degree might not have the intrinsic ability to help you found a successful company that much faster than you could figure out on your own. But a university is full of resources that are harder to access without a student ID.”

As I’m getting rather off track from the article I’m supposed to be focusing on, I’d like to redirect back to the whole question about entrepreneurship: Each new business is difference, so how can university professors teach their students to be successful in entrepreneurship? My question is: Are entrepreneurs born or made?

References:

http://www.businessinsider.com/should-you-consider-an-entrepreneurship-degree-2012-11?utm_source=Pulse&utm_medium=App&utm_campaign=partner&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=pulsenews
http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m29nai89Q91rn91bdo1_r1_500.jpg

As I am a teller at a financial institution constantly encouraged to promote VISA’s and traveller’s insurance, I definitely understand the pressures that come from making “sales”. Natural instinct as it is, I was automatically attracted to the headline: “The World’s Dumbest Sales Mistake“. Before the overload of technological innovation, the most common mistakes were as follows:

-Obvious sales person attire
-“The salesman voice” (overly excited, high pitched, enthusiastic)

But now, with internet, the new way to approach a customer is via email. Of course, this avoids face to face communication, which hinders the automatic shutdown and avoidance from customers; however email etiquette should now be put into prospective.

“…the dumbest thing that you can do today is to try to communicate to prospective customers using “salesy” language.”

Apparently, to my dismay, I am a user of such “mistakes”:

• “Thank you for your interest in our product!”
• “We guarantee customer satisfaction.”
• “If you need further information, do not hesitate to call.”

Now, after reading this article, I am left confused. How am I supposed to interact with consumers etc… professionally while utilizing the suggested “write like you’re talking to your pals” rule?

On the other hand, I can see why workplace culture is important to the success of a company. Companies such as Lululemon and Zappos use informal interactions with their consumers in order to stimulate loyalty and promote their business. By using less professional approaches such as off-topic and lengthy phone calls, as well as offering yoga classes and quirky window displays, you create more of a personal touch to your “professional” interactions, and thus making you appear more of a person than a typical sales person hunting for profit. While this is harder with email, learning to balance professionalism and “being a real person” is a good skill to keep in practice!

References:

http://www.inc.com/geoffrey-james/the-worlds-dumbest-sales-mistake.html
http://images.quickblogcast.com/4/3/9/5/9/238726-295934/usedcarNixonposter.jpg?a=56

In today’s society, it’s pretty hard to keep up with all the different technologies coming out. As a consumer, it’s hard to decide between whether or not you should buy the iPhone 5, or wait until the iPhone5S. If it’s already tough enough as a consumer, think of it on the suppliers side! With so much access to new technology, we can imagine how hard it is for a company like Best Buy to compete with other third party suppliers such as Future Shop, Walmart, etc… As a result, such competitiveness and similarities in products have caused Best Buy to slip in sales. However, Best Buy’s new CEO is considering one bold move that could save Best Buy and bring Best Buy to a new competitive advantage and brand identity: buy up smaller electronics companies so customers can’t buy them anywhere else.

In a way, this strategy is pretty risky. Because Best Buy is buying the smaller and less demanded brands such as Hitachi and JVC, success rate can be low, considering the fact the trend is to buy either a Sony or the Apple. However, this strategy is also very smart, as it can save Best Buy by giving them a brand identity. Should this strategy go through, Best Buy, to me at least, can be the company that sells the cheaper products for the consumers that can’t afford the Apple, the Sony, or the HP.

By buying out the smaller brands, Best Buy now becomes more exclusive, and becomes the main supplier for these brands.

Interesting to finally see the  ‘Brand Positioning & Value Propositions’ lesson from Comm101 being put to work!
References:

http://www.businessinsider.com/best-buys-turnaround-plan-2012-11#ixzz2CH4daSek
http://contrarianedge.com/wp-content/uploads/bestbuy-logo.jpg 

So far as a business student, I’m slowly learning that time is a powerful thing. When I finally have a day off from all the assignments and studying, instead of feeling relieved, I feel as if I should be doing something productive, and actually feel guilty or regretful to be having “spare” time. A recent paper from the University of Toronto suggests that companies who practice goal setting and offer performance bonuses to employees as motivation actually causes it’s workers to be increasingly unhappy. Of course, stumbling upon this article sparked much of my interest, since it totally contradicts my first year organizational behavior course in university. That being said, the paper argues that these company tactics prevent us from enjoying time off because we always think of it as losing money.

“When we think of time as a resource and connect that to money, we’re more likely to constantly feel stress, even when we’re not on a deadline or under pressure.”

Do I agree with this? Reading the article for the first time, I found it ridiculous to criticize companies for adding employee incentives in the workplace. Bonuses and goals are great ways for employees to become productive, and to add value  and purpose to their work. However, as I read the article for the second time, I realize that that it is indeed true, that companies have sculpted the minds of its employees; have brainwashed us to prioritize work over family and friends.

Being in Sauder, I realize that most of my colleagues are motivated by the monetary value that comes with a BCom degree. I myself am guilty of being in business just ‘to be in business’. As I reflect upon the society that surrounds me, I now see that money has become the mind’s motivation. We have become these work-driven robots, constantly stressed and constantly telling the people around us that we are “too busy” or “super stressed”. Even when we actually don’t have that much to do, we still make the appearance as if we are busy, and begin to naturally list out all the things we have due.

In conclusion to reading this article and skimming the paper, I agree that we feel pressured and stressed to achieve; however, I can’t think of anything that could elevate the situation. The problem is recognized, but unfortunately, as much as I would like to enjoy and indulge in time-off, we live in a world where everything has become a competition, and where the amount of time you put into work, is the amount of value and importance you contribute to yourself. 

References:
https://gsbapps.stanford.edu/researchpapers/library/RP2123-1.pdf

http://www.360solutions.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/time-vs-money1.png

http://www.businessinsider.com/people-now-believe-that-time-is-money-2012-11#ixzz2CGvlBbes