|
September 29, 2006
September 28, 2006
links for 2006-09-28
September 25, 2006
links for 2006-09-25
September 23, 2006
links for 2006-09-23
September 21, 2006
She Don't Lie, She Don't Lie, She Don't Lie
A Las Vegas-based company, Redux Beverages, has launched a new product- a highly-caffienated cola with a highly controversial name, Cocaine. Redux bills Cocaine as a "legal alternative" to the real thing and claims it is "350 percent stronger than Red Bull" yet lacks the "sugar crash". According the The Daily Mail (UK), the drink is being marketed in Los Angeles and New York and primarily to teens. No surprise there. What's also not surprising is that Redux is not buying critics' arguments that the name is problematic or the least bit cynical.
Its maker claims the title is "a bit of fun" ... The drink's inventor, Jamie Kirby, said: "It's an energy drink, and it's a fun name. As soon as people look at the can, they smile."
Commentary
A large part of the success of contemporary marketing and advertising campaigns relies upon the sophisticated and subtle manipulation of words, images, and symbols. To give one product or an entire brand multiple layers of complementary meanings or association in the mind of the consumer is the goal to which many strive and few achieve. Naming an energy drink Cocaine is about as subtle and sophisticated as mooning. To be fair, the people who think of mooning as "a bit of fun", who look at "mass moonings" and smile, are the very same people to whom this product is targeted.
What Redux fails to account for, however, is that this demographic is already over-targeted and has been heavily exposed for their entires lives to advertisements. It is quite possible that this particular demographic is more cynical than the people so cynically and crudely trying to manipulate them.
Prediction:
I think the product is going to fizzle. Given all the buzz surrounding Cocaine, e.g. the front page Drudge link, Redux officials must be riding high right about now. But like all highs, this one won't last. The novelty surrounding Cocaine will wear off about as quickly as its buzz does- and without the sugar crash.
Continue reading "She Don't Lie, She Don't Lie, She Don't Lie" »
September 16, 2006
links for 2006-09-16
September 15, 2006
links for 2006-09-15
September 14, 2006
links for 2006-09-14
September 13, 2006
Why is this a problem?
In an increasingly interconnected, rapidly globalizing, internet-enabled, knowledge-based economy this is a problem, why exactly?
Dropping out of high school has its costs around the globe, but nowhere steeper than in the United States. Adults who don’t finish high school in the U.S. earn 65 percent of what people who have high school degrees make, according to a new report comparing industrialized nations. No other country had such a severe income gap. ... An adult with a university degree in the U.S. earns, on average, 72 percent more than someone with a high school degree. That’s a much bigger difference than in most countries.
As a college educator, I consider this to be the best education news I have heard in some time if for no other reason than that it says that it pays to get a higher education and it doesn't pay not to.
Tags: Education
Links: Conservative Education | The Random Education | Stuck on Education |
links for 2006-09-13
September 11, 2006
links for 2006-09-11
September 10, 2006
Human Rights and Human Resources
If you seek a five forces analysis of Wal-Mart, please try this page.
The world over there are men who commit acts of unspeakable cruelty against their fellow man, against the defenceless, against even women and children. The trail of their devastation fills our TV screens each night, making some numb and others convinced there is no way to stop such carnage. At the same time there are a number of determined groups who have made it their noble life's work to document the horrors and abuses committed by the wolves among us. Collectively I think of these groups as the "Human Rights Movement" (HRM) and I see their calling as a high one and their achievements something in which they can justifiably take pride.
And yet, knowing organization behavior as I do, I recognize growth strategies, mission creep, (un)related diversification, and brand dilution when I see it. I recognize when pride in even the noblest of deeds can make organizations and their leaders wrongly desire to see their franchises extended and the scope of their influence expanded. I also know when people from outside a field or "industry" watch the success and legitimacy built by other groups and decide to appropriate it for their own purposes. And above all I recognize when prior success in one market can make organizers think that strategies and rhetoric that worked in one place will carry over into others.
Some or all of these factors are at work in the creeping and increasingly creepy application of the terminology and methods of one HRM, i.e. the Human Rights Movement, to another HRM, Human Resource Management. Point in case is the recent announcement by AP2, the Swedish pension fund, of its decision to divest its shares of Wal-Mart, a move widely believed to be influenced by a similar one made by Norway this past summer.
September 8, 2006
Disclosures and Discredits
If you seek a five forces analysis of Wal-Mart, please try this page.
Appearing in today's New York Times is an article by Michael Barbaro and Stephanie Strom entitled "Wal-Mart Find's an Ally in Conservatives." My first reaction upon reading the title was "This is surprising why, exactly?" But as I read further I realized a rather important point is being made, one about the possible relationship between donations made by philanthropic foundations and the research produced, the opinion pieces written, and the policy positions taken by groups that receive them.
As Wal-Mart Stores struggles to rebut criticism from unions and Democratic leaders, the company has discovered a reliable ally: prominent conservative research groups like the American Enterprise Institute, the Heritage Foundation and the Manhattan Institute.Top policy analysts at these groups have written newspaper opinion pieces around the country supporting Wal-Mart, defended the company in interviews with reporters and testified on its behalf before government committees in Washington.
But the groups — and their employees — have consistently failed to disclose a tie to the giant discount retailer: financing from the Walton Family Foundation, which is run by the Wal-Mart founder Sam Walton’s three children, who have a controlling stake in the company.
That the Times picks Wal-Mart, the Walton Family Foundation, and "prominent conservative research groups" to make its point is not surprising. But to their credit, in an effort to provide some semblance of balance, just six paragraphs in the authors do mention that "liberal policy groups receive significant financing from unions and left-leaning organizations without disclosing their financing."
What I did find surprising is what I found myself saying next: I fundamentally agree with the authors about the importance of the questions they raise about disclosure. But I do have one major concern, too. Before stating it, let me begin by saying that disclosure of conflicts of interest and monetary relationships is a good thing- for all concerned, be that bloggers, columnists, academics, and professional analysts, and private researchers. But as the article makes clear, disclosure doesn't always happen. There can be several legitimate reasons why.
In the article we are told that at times individuals advocating one position or another don't always know the sources of funding of the organization for which they work. At other times, they might not think that making financial or other ties known is relevant or they may not believe donations had any influence on their thinking. Sometimes the foundations that give the money place no expectation on the recipient to disclose. All good and well.
My concern about the article is one about what our priors ought to be. That is to say, in the absence of disclosure about financial and, perhaps, ideological ties, what should we assume about the position taken by a researcher, columnist, or policy wonk? I don't mean what should we assume about the existence of ties and relationships, I mean what should we assume about the merits of the argument. The passage below makes me think that the authors view lack of disclosure as a mark against a position, as discrediting it:
The lack of a clear quid pro quo between research groups and corporations like Wal-Mart makes the issue murky, said Diana Aviv, chief executive of the Independent Sector, a trade organization representing nonprofits and foundations. “I don’t know how one proves what’s the chicken and what’s the egg,” she said.
And what I don't know is whether or not this is the most important issue. If I worry about anything in this article it is the idea that relationships between research groups and corporations are an acceptable proxy for the quality of the research or the validity of the arguments advanced. To my mind, the best use of time for Wal-Mart critics, and defenders too for that matter, is to focus less on who sponsored what research and focus more on what is actually said.
Neither side should attempt to discredit research that they don't like because it was funded by an organization hostile to their own aims or agendas. Rather, arguments should be assessed on their merits; data, sources, and methods should be scrutinized; alternative theories and explanations should be advanced; limitations of the research should be acknowledged; questions still in need of objective answers should be clearly articulated...and then the process should begin again.
And speaking of disclosure, here's mine:
Disclosure: Many bloggers get email from Wal-Mart's PR firm, Edelman, about articles and blog posts written about Wal-Mart. I found out about the Barbaro and Strom article by way of an email message sent directly to me by Edelman earlier today. My doctoral thesis at Duke University's Fuqua School of Business focussed on economic and organizational impacts of retail information systems. While there my thesis advisor and I did once meet over lunch with Wal-Mart's Chief People Officer and some other members of the organization working in the logistics function. I never did, however, receive any funding from Wal-Mart or any other retailer for my research. Here's a link to one research paper I published about stock market reactions to announcements by major retailers about the retailer's investments in information systems and technologies. Warning: don't operate heavy machinery for at least 3 hours after reading it.
File Under: Wal-Mart
Pain in the Gas
In today's Washington Post op-editorialist David Ignatius reflects on his recent 10-day trip to Iran. He begins his article by posing two questions that are anything but rhetorical:
At the end of a 10-day visit here, I am struggling with a question: Is the Iranian revolution of 27 years ago following the normal arc of history and moving toward a rational and stable society? Or is this country still exploding with radical energy and a desire to export its revolution to other Muslim nations?
Ignatius doesn't claim to have definitive answers to these questions. He does, however, point to much that is suggestive of them, to attitudes of the Iranian people and of officials that might help outsiders predict rather than react to events. Keeping with the theme of the article's title, "Tehran's Two Worlds: Veering Between Conciliation and Confrontation", Ignatius identitifies competing bases of power, conflicting interests, and ideological fault lines which the foes of Iran should be keen to exploit.
A particularly noteworthy difference of opinion Ignatius concerns the state and fate of the Iranian economy, particularly as it pertains to the price of oil:
September 7, 2006
links for 2006-09-07
September 6, 2006
links for 2006-09-06
September 4, 2006
links for 2006-09-04
September 3, 2006
The Carnival of the Capitalists
Welcome Instapundit, Businesspundit, Execupundit, and Punditpundit readers. (Okay, the last one is a joke.)
Welcome to The Carnival of the Capitalists at The Business of America is Business. This is my second time hosting the Carnival in the last month. Keeping with what has become something of a tradition, I have found myself hosting within a few days of my birthday. I’ve hosted several Carnivals this year, including a few installments of my own Carnival of Wal-Mart. Back in January I did the 132nd installment for the now-defunct “Bonfire of the Vanities.” What I wrote in the introduction is highly relevant to today’s carnival in that it explains why and how I organized the entries:
Of the most challenging aspects of pulling together a roundup or hosting a carnival involves finding a unifying theme or organizing principle for the wide variety of topic and points of view expressed in the posts. (The other is scouring the page for the trackback URLs!) The one I have settled on for this carnival is questions. Here's why.
As my regular readers know, my chosen profession is that of a college professor. My teaching and research concern the organizational consequences and strategic uses of information technology. In the last several years I have taught most of my classes in a discussion-based format using Harvard Business School cases. This means that I have gotten accustomed to asking questions and to using them as a way of organizing the thoughts and contributions of dozens of people and their varied perspectives.
One curious side effect of teaching in this manner is that I have largely changed the way I read and remember information. Now, instead of taking notes or highlighting when I read, I more often write down a list of questions to which the information I read would [provide answers]. While I have found this to be a very economical and efficient organizing principle for academic and teaching material, I have never tried it before with a carnival or roundup. Thus, I have no idea how well it will pan out. So, buckle your seat belts!
Well as it turns out, things panned out pretty well. And to the above I will add this: with today’s entries I have tried to determine what the question it is that the post answers. If any author thinks I missed the point, then by all means send in a comment and set the record straight. To keep things interesting, only the questions contain links. Contributors are not mentioned by name or their blog. They may have to hunt awhile to find their entry, but they should have no trouble recognizing their entry. Along the way I hope that a few of the questions they come across will inspire them to click and read. And now, without further ado, and in no particular order I present the entries in The Labor-Day-2006 Edition of The Carnival of the Capitalists!
links for 2006-09-03
September 2, 2006
links for 2006-09-02
September 1, 2006
Reply to Peter at "Writing on the Wal"
If you seek a five forces analysis of Wal-Mart, please try this page.
In a post entitled "Why Can’t Edelman Manage the Blogosphere?" over at "Writing on the Wal" (a much better name, by the way, than the original "No Cleveland Wal-Mart" ) Peter offers a correction to something I wrote in my "Circling" post a few days back. At the very bottom of the post I had the following disclaimer:
Note: Like many bloggers I get occasionally get email from employees of Edelman about articles written about Wal-Mart. I learned about this article in another way- by way of a "google alert" for news stories about Wal-Mart.
Here's what Peter had to say about that:
I hate to correct you Starling, but it’s not that “many bloggers” get e-mail from Edelman, it’s “many PRO-WAL-MART bloggers” get e-mail from Edelman. Edelman doesn’t want to discuss anything with us here at the Writing on the Wal. They just want to plant stories that make their client look good and, as Bruni implies, you can’t manage a debate if you only talk to one side.
Here's the comment I left on Peter's blog:
First let me say thanks for reading that far down into my post. That means I have at least one person who read (it all the way through) ! As for the substance of your remarks…point taken. I don’t know who gets emails from Edelman so I couldn’t feel confident to assert that only pro-Wal-Mart bloggers get them. Now that fact wouldn’t surprise me if I found it to be true. And if you ask me what I believe, I'd say “that’s what I believe to be true.” But since I didn’t know for sure, I refrained from assuming on this specific point. I think I probably do enough assuming as it is, don’t you? ;-)
And to that I'll add this:
MGT 301 Project | Terms Already Taken
A-C:ABC Analysis | Authority | Benchmarking | Burnout | Business Processes | Centralization | Change agent | Charismatic leadership | Coercive power | Cognitive Dissonance | Command group | Company committment | Conflict | Consideration | Contingency theory | Cross-functional teams | Cross-cultural management | Cultural diversity | Culture shock cycle
D-F: Delegation of Authority | Devil's Advocate | Diversity | Division of labor Downward communication | Dysfunctional conflict | Emotional intelligence | Employee Assistance Programs | Empowerment | Ethics | Expatriate manager | Functional conflict
G-H: Gainsharing | Global corporation | Globalization | Grapevine | Group Cohesiveness | Groupthink
I-L: Informal Group | Host country nationals | Informational diversity | Internet | Intellectual capital | Individualism-collectivism | Job analysis | Job content | Job enrichment | Job design | Job description | Job rotation | Job satisfaction | Job sharing | Leader-member relations | Locus of control |
K-Q: Knowledge managment | Machiavellianism | Matrix organization | Motivation | Nonverbal communication | Organizational change | Organizational culture |
R-V: Re-engineering | Recognition | Relationship conflict | Role conflict | Self-efficacy | Skill-based pay | Skunkworks | Social learning | Social Support | Span of control | Stereotype | Stress(ors) | Task conflict | Team building | Telecommuting | Transformational leadership | Type A managers | Type C managers | Type D managers
W-Z: Uncertainty avoidance | Virtual teams | Wellness program | Whistle-blowing | Workforce diversity |
links for 2006-09-01
Search
About Me
- Profile My Academic Work
- An Old MIT Page
- MY CV
- Open Trackback Policy
- Contact: starlingdavidhunter at gmail dot com
Categories
- Ask the Professor
- Belmont Club
- Business Concept Innovation
- Core Strategy
- Customer Interface
- Strategic Resources
- Core Competencies
- Core Processes
- Strategic Assets
- Value Network
- Coalitions
- Partners
- Suppliers
- Business News Links
- CANSLIM
- Annual Earnings
- Current Earnings
- Institutional Sponsorship
- Leader or Laggard
- Market Direction
- New Products, Management, and Highs
- Supply & Demand
- Dubai
- Five Forces
- Four I's
- Market Direction
- Middle East
- Open TrackBacks
- Organizational Behavior
- Photos
- Political Economy
- Resources & Capabilities
- Financial Resources
- Human Resources
- Organizational Resources
- Physical Resources
- Question of Imitation
- Question of Organization
- Question of Rareness
- Question of Value
- Road to Serfdom
- TV & Movies
- Lost
- Ocean's 11
- The Godfather
- The Office
- Ugly Betty
- Video
- Wal-Mart
- World of Work
Archives
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
- July 2006
- June 2006
- May 2006
- April 2006
- March 2006
- February 2006
- January 2006
- December 2005
- November 2005
- October 2005
Recent Posts
Blog Roll
- Jack Yoest
- Accidental Verbosity
- Businesspundit
- a different kind of biz
- Catallarchy
- Business Opportunities Weblog
- Crossroads Dispatches
- Business Opportunities
- BuzzJungle
- Successful Blog
- nPost
- Business Blog Wire
- Going Global
- Commerce Bucket
- Pundita
- The Shopfloor.org Blog
- Private Sector Development Bank
Powered by
Movable Type 3.31
Movable Type 3.31