quality

Youtube Vs. Cable TV

Posted on by spr1333cpulido

A recent report suggests that YouTube will begin charging viewers for subscriptions to certain channels. It is rumor that has been circulating in the past week that YouTube will allow certain channels the opportunity to charge subscribers or viewers of their channels a small monthly fee. If YouTube indeed enters this market, they will be joining Netflix, Hulu, and Amazon.com as companies that provide content that would otherwise be found on cable television.

YouTube already has partnerships with certain companies such as Disney, Viacom and Paramount and offers a rental service but the content is not as vast as other similar services. With this deal, YouTube is expected to announce anywhere from 25 to 50 premium channels that will charge viewers for their content. Some of the expected channels include content aimed at children such as a Sesame Street channel to channels for sports such as one featuring the UFC.

This seems to be a process management utilizing incremental changes since YouTube will reportedly test out the paid subscription service with only a few partners at first. YouTube is stated to be exploring this approach to see if there is other methods to generate revenue other than the heavy reliability they have from advertisements. It will be interesting to see the reaction of people that use YouTube. It will be interesting to see if people who utilize the site for its free content will subscribe to the premium channels to view content they would have generally only been able to see on TV package they already pay for.

Do you think YouTube, with over a billion monthly viewers, could potentially have an impact on the way cable providers offer their services to their customers? When it comes to a service, quality is very important because every customer wants to be satisfied. With only a few major cable companies, do you think customer loyalty is only due to the fact that there only a limited number of providers from customers to choose from?

It is interesting to note that in class it was mentioned that in regards to service quality “giving customers some extra value will delight them by exceeding their expectations and insure their return.” I believe this could ring true for YouTube is they offer premium channels that offer popular content that could otherwise only be viewed if your a cable subscriber. By charging a small fee to view these premium channels, YouTube could challenge the cable market and force the large cable companies to reconsider their business models and offer packages that customers truly want instead of forcing them to sign up to bundle packages like many companies do. With the YouTube service, you would be able to pick and choose what content you would like to subscribe and pay for.

Would you consider testing out a premium content channel from YouTube if it offered content you already watch on cable television?

 

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2013-05-06/youtube-said-to-plan-1-dot-99-subscription-channels-in-coming-weeks

http://www.ibtimes.com/youtube-premium-content-channels-charge-paid-monthly-subscription-fee-1251585

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/05/09/net-us-youtube-subscription-idUSBRE9480Z520130509

The End of A Dynasty?: Clash Between Industry Titans

Posted on by spr1333cpassage

 

The battle for technological dominance is beginning to heat up. Apple and Samsung have been at each other’s throats competing over market share and cultural relevance for years now, with Apple seeming to come away the victor year after year. However, the momentum has seemed to shift in Samsung’s favor recently. So why the sudden change? In 2013, Samsung took a huge leap forward against their arch rival by enjoying a monumental 56% surge in sales pertaining to smart-phones. Whereas Apple only saw a disappointing 6.6% increase in sales within the smart-phone sector. Samsung now has a stranglehold on the market share, controlling 33% of the smart-phone division compared to Apple’s mere 18%. With this sudden charge in 2013, Samsung experienced soaring profits and revenue sales of $47.6 billion, a 17% increase compared to Apple’s 11% increase.

People are beginning to wonder why Apple has become so stagnant with their products, while Samsung continues to innovate, push the limits, and surpass new boundaries as a organization. As we all know, Apple as a company has gone through major changes when it comes to management ever since the passing of their charismatic and brilliant leader Steve Jobs passed away on October 5, 2011. However, they are not helping themselves with their lack of new products entering the market, along with their rather “elementary” tweaks to the iPhone 5 that have left many longtime customers of Apple disappointed and looking elsewhere for new and innovative mobile devices. For example, Apple upset a good portion of their customer base by changing the adapter that charges the battery life for a majority of Apple products. One of the major draws for Apple’s iPhone line was the fact that their mobile devices had become standardized with the ability for users to charge their phones just about anywhere, even if they forgot their phone charger because they could just use someone else’s. All the while Samsung continues to focus on the quality of their products by offering a wider range of specifications regarding smart-phones that have consumers clamoring for more. Also, Samsung’s new handset, the Galaxy S4, has premiered to critical acclaim among customers and could potentially threaten Apple’s iPhone as the gold standard among smart-phones in the industry.

Samsung has been able to achieve this triumphant comeback through intense quality focus and strong leadership throughout the organization. Especially at the top with former Chairman Kun-Hee Lee who strove for product quality so much that he took a trip to one of the company’s plants that had developed a batch of defected products and required all 2,000 employees to wear headbands that read, “Quality First”. Through this philosophy, Samsung has been able to efficiently produce quality products at a cheaper price compared to industry standards, which in turn allows them to charge a higher price that consumers are willing to spend. The end result, an incredible first quarter of 2013 for Samsung and a devastating blow to Apple. Will Apple recover from this disappointing 2013 start? Possibly with  the iPhone-5S. Or will Samsung continue jabbing away at heavyweight champ?

Source: http://www.forbes.com/sites/petercohan/2013/04/26/samsung-trouncing-apple-gangnam-style/

 

The Perfect Bra Size: An Algorithm Away

Posted on by spr1333dperez

If you wear bras and are tired of never finding the right fitting cup, then True & Co promises the solution for you. True & Co aims to relieve the stress of having your saleslady come in go with a tape measurer and the wrong cup size. Sometimes the trip for a new bra becomes an intruding nightmare. This e-commerce company has devised an algorithm that matches the right fit for their customers and a truly intimate way.

 

True & Co asks customer’s a 15 question quiz which range from cup and band size to how your favorite bra feels and looks. The customer is then invited to choose three different style bras and with the information gathered, it uses an algorithm to choose two additional bras to be sent to you. Michelle Lam, the entrepreneur behind this,states that they have 2,000 algorithms that defines each body types.  Once customer receives the bras they have no obligation to purchase any of the five bras and the company claims that women buy more of the bras chosen by the algorithm than their own choice. But all matches are currently existing brands and none are their own designs. The prices are from $45- $62 and shipping is free.

 

This company seems to have a user based view upon entering this online bra market. They are concerned with how well the bra is fitted and so its quality is measured by the overall bra fit. The correct fit is determined in an individual matter and its quality is measure by customer’s individual taste. They offer to match the correct size and style to satisfy its customers in a quick easy matter.

 

So even though they do not manufacture custom bras, with such information obtained from the women taking their questionaires, naturally they can expand later in producing and designing their own bras and panties. Therefore, then expanding their level of serviceabililty, personal aesthetics, features,  and performance dimensions of quality.

 

There are some skeptics who question the algorithm and considered it a bit “ridiculous”, stating that a bra must touched and tried on before taking it home. Also, one of the issues Linda Becker, Linda the Bra Lady store and online seller, finds with online fittings is that there are some individuals who are extremely hard to fit and can be very difficult to help them out over the phone. But even so, Linda says that only 10 percent of LindaTheBraLady.com are returned.

 

In the history of commerce, shoes were once seen as product that was unsuitable for customers to buy since shoes are also one of those products that must be “tried on”.  But with the success of Zappos we know it can be done. Victoria’s Secret and HerRoom.com are some of the older sellers of online lingerie which proven selling bras can be successful online. Let’s see how well the True & Co algorithms reach success with this Amazon-like approach.

 

Sources:

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/24/business/bra-selling-web-site-uses-algorithm-to-determine-fit.html?ref=smallbusiness&_r=0

https://trueandco.com/

http://mashable.com/2012/05/30/true-and-co/

 

Questions to think about:

-What is your opinion on the business?

-What do you suggest about their future?

-Do you think it will measure up to the success of Amazon or Zappos?

-What are the chances you’ll choose True & Co versus going straight to the site?

Going Nuclear: Building the World’s Largest Puzzle

Posted on by erytych

An international nuclear fusion project, known as Iter, has been making progress by finally gaining approval for the design of a component that will be one of the most challenging to install. In a forest of Provence in the south of France, there has been the construction of a site that’s purpose will be to harness the nuclear power of the sun and stars. 34 nations have joined together in what is known to be “the biggest scientific collaboration on the planet.” If this project succeeds, then global energy demand will increase by three-fold, and it will change our world that has been struggling with the fight against climate change.

This highly complex fusion reactor will be built with about a million individual parts and each component will come from different regions built around the world. Then it will be assembled “like a giant Lego model” in a building near the site. These individual parts can get as big as small houses, and the building they’re assembling it at is equal to 81 Olympic-sized swimming pools. I already cannot imagine what it will take and has taken to bring so many countries together and decide what is going to be built where. It reminds me back to one of our first classes where we made the paper fortune tellers and how it took majority of the class to work together and complete the project.

 

Complexity of Iter has been proven through the length it had taken to reach the initial stages of construction. The earliest start time for this project dates back to 1985 with meetings and discussions between the nations. Today, scientists involved have claimed it will still take another ten years of building work and an extra ten years after that for testing the reactor before it can go online. If you were one of the managers on the team for this project, how would you being planning and creating a Precedence Diagram? Do you think there could be multiple critical paths in a project like this? One of my concerns about an enormous project is the time it takes to complete it. Over time, information becomes stale and the technology used becomes outdated because of the changing markets.

A critical phase of the project is injecting plasma, a super-hot electrically-charged atomic fuel, and it is scheduled for November 2020; unfortunately, because we do not live in a perfect world, there have been delays that pushed this phase back to October 2022. An unforeseen circumstance where a worker left a towel on one of the superconducting cables became compressed within the coil causing extra work by scraping off the debris left behind. I believe this is a perfect opportunity for the project managers to consider crashing this project because it is becoming behind schedule. Do you think that crashing a critical path in such a big project dealing with nuclear reactors would be a good idea to enable them to finish the project by the due date?

 

Links: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/one-giant-leap-for-mankind-13bn-iter-project-makes-breakthrough-in-the-quest-for-nuclear-fusion-a-solution-to-climate-change-and-an-age-of-clean-cheap-energy-8590480.html

UPS: The Industry Leader in Quality?

Posted on by frankr301s12

            The United Parcel Service (UPS) has been recognized as an industry leader when it comes to quality for quite some time. In fact, in 2010 they were recognized in the third spot of 10 for top companies for quality only behind Disney and Intel. [1] They have always been concerned with being the best in the industry of their product, which is actually a service that is delivering packaged goods across the globe. UPS delivers 16.3 packages daily only losing less than 1% of those packages yearly.[2] UPS was one of the first companies to have tracking on their packages and more recently with the ever-growing use of smartphones was the first to have an app that allows senders and receivers to track their packages through their app, a first for the industry. With its excellent track record overall especially for on time deliveries one would think UPS has quality under control. Recently, however; the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) fined UPS $4 Million for failing to make required repairs on their aircraft, maintaining proper records, and flying unsafe aircraft (due to the failed repairs.)

One would think a company that has such a great track record for delivering goods on time and in good condition would have every aspect of their business including the quality and condition of their fleet on trucks, cars, and aircraft. Clearly the FAA does not think UPS is doing such a great job in that department. In thinking about the reasons why they may not be maintaining their aircraft, a few ideas come to mind. First, aircraft repairs take time and money. With profits of 5.8 billion dollars last year, it is safe to assume cost was not the issue.[3] Time is the single biggest thing UPS has to deal with. When providing their service, shipping, they are guaranteeing that package will arrive its destination at a particular time. If an aircraft is being repaired, it cannot fly. If it is not flying, packages are not being delivered. Packages, those are not delivered or not delivered on time is simply bad for business. It is easy to see the domino effect that ensues thereafter. Perhaps there has been a cutback in mechanics and/or inspectors and so there were many oversights. It is also possible that they did make repairs but failed to keep adequate records, which is also alleged by the FAA. Finally, maybe this is all a big misunderstanding.

A spokesperson for UPS states they will defend themselves for this “unreasonable and unwarranted fine.” He says, “UPS has a long history of operating a safe, compliant airline, there was never a safety issue.” Apparently, this fine is stemming from only 9 repairs out of the thousands of repairs they make. Overall UPS has a pretty good safety record. According to the Safety and Fitness Electronic Records System (SAFER), for the last 24 months UPS has had 0 air accidents and 0 fatalities. [4] Maybe this is just a big misunderstanding and poor reporting. I find it hard to believe that UPS would not properly maintain the very things that drive their business. Aircraft are the very thing that delivers the packages. Without them, UPS has no business. It will be interesting to see how UPS defends themselves. What do you guys think? Can you see a company overlooking the quality of their fleet in order to save time? Do you know of any other companies that actually do this?  Let’s hear them in the comments!

Source of Main Article. 

[1]http://money.cnn.com/galleries/2010/fortune/1002/gallery.mostadmired_product_quality.fortune/3.html

[2] http://www.pressroom.ups.com/Fact+Sheets/UPS+Fact+Sheet

[3] http://www.investors.ups.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=62900&p=irol-newsearnings&nyo=0

[4]http://safer.fmcsa.dot.gov/query.asp?searchtype=ANY&query_type=queryCarrierSnapshot&query_param=USDOT&original_query_param=NAME&query_string=1111792&original_query_string=UPS%20AIR%20CARGO%20INC
*Logo used for Educational Purposes, www.ups.com*

Strategic Alliances Between Video Game Developers and Media Firms

Posted on by spr1332bhalan

Strategic Alliances between Video Game Developers and Media Firms

By: Brett Halan

So basically the situation at hand is that media companies like Disney are starting to develop their own video games rather than export the development. The skill to develop and program games was once extremely rare and difficult to learn. Today it is being taught by more and more universities, and the skill is more widespread. Companies like Disney and PIXAR have a strategic alliance to create games like Toy Story and many others. They still do have an alliance, but Disney is experimenting by creating their own methods to creating games. Other media companies are following their lead as well.

These companies originally make a film that is later turned into a video game. Toy Story is an example of this process. The problem is that as of lately the video games that are extracted from original movies are not successful whatsoever. Disney and the others had to ask themselves why?  They concluded that the quality of the games is terrible. The video game developing companies spend much of their effort working on original pieces of work like Halo or Call of Duty that attract the largest consumer base. They spend little time on these movies turned video games because they are historically weak sellers. The quote “quality is subjective, and perception is reality” pertains directly to this situation. The only real person who can claim that one game has more quality over the other are the end consumers. The media companies and the developing firms are essentially making the same mistake over and over again, and they need to accept change.

To fix the lack of quality going into the games there are a few alternatives. The most popular is that the media firms are buying smaller video game development companies. They are expanding in a way to give them a higher amount of control over the end product. As we saw in class during the ball passing game, when you have control over the process and design the end result is improved. Another alternative could include simply end making video games based off movies.     

Overall, the consumers of the big box office movies seem to really enjoy the movies, so why are the video games not popular? Media firms blame the video game developers for not putting maximum effort into the games. There are a few questions we should consider. The first is how do the media firms go forward with improving the transcendent definition of quality of these games? The second question is how are the video game developers going to stay in business with their strategically aligned partners?

Even though the information for this post is from 2008 the information is still relevant for today. I imagine we will see less and less video games based off of movies in the meantime. Further down the road I imagine some movies will have a more advanced feature where you can control the action similar to a video game. Today they have alternative endings to movies, but I think that is just the beginning of interaction with the audience.    

Sources from:

M. Marr and N Wingfield (2008). “Big Media companies want back in the game.” The Wall Street Journal, February 19, 2008.

C. Salter (2002). “Playing to Win.” Fast Company. December. Pg. 80.

C. Edward (2008). “Morphing Video Games into Movies.” BloombergBusinessWeek. March 19, 2008. http://www.businessweek.com/stories/2008-03-19/morphing-video-games-into-movies

 

Will HTC survive?

Posted on by spr1332umoroz

HTC has been a leading competitor in the smartphone market for years. Recently, their revenues plummeted by 98% compared to last year. HTC claims this is due to the high competition from the market, especially Apple and Samsung. With the decline in revenues, it is only natural that their stock prices fell as well. HTC is struggling to keep up with Apple’s iphones and Samsung’s Galaxy models. HTC was supposed to release the HTC One smartphone in March, but they dropped the ball on that plan due to no revenues coming in and still having their fixed costs. In an attempt to hang on in the market, they recently announced a collaboration with Facebook for the feature of Facebook Home.

In class we had discussions that just because prices of stocks went down, does not necessarily mean that the quality of their product went down. The problem with the smartphone, and technology, in that matter, is that everything is fast-moving and changes are always taking place quickly. I have an HTC Thunderbolt smartphone, and there were extremely high hopes for it. It was a great phone until software started getting updated, such as different apps, but HTC Thunderbolt did not come out with a new update for the phone. Apple has a software update very often. Samsung has come out with the Galaxy and Galaxy 2 during the time that loyal HTC customers have been waiting for the update.

Part of the reason for HTC’s struggle is because they cannot keep up with the quick pace of change. That is one of the main complaints of customers.  This is why benchmarking is crucial. HTC does not need to come up with a new update every week, but they should try to improve their products so that they could keep up with app updates. I waited two years for my update. Before I received it, basic apps such as GMAIL, were not running properly on my phone because the app was no longer compatible with my phone’s software. My phone was essentially outdated. What did I decide to do? I am switching over to Apple and getting an iphone. Many customers have lost faith in HTC because they are taking their time with launching new products and updates.

A decline in revenues means that HTC’s products are not selling. In even a simpler way of putting it, customers are not interested. HTC is in big trouble if more customers start moving away from them and looking into Samsung or Apple products. HTC’s collaboration with Facebook is also up in the air because Facebook Home has not been fully tested out with customers. Currently, it will be an optional feature for your phone, but whether customers will want it is unknown. Before making this a permanent feature on the market, Facebook and HTC should run surveys to see if customers are even interested in something like this.

Do you think that HTC will survive in this constantly changing market? Is the collaboration with Facebook a good idea or a desperate measure to stay competitive in the market?

http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2013/04/08/for-htc-its-still-a-tough-road/

 

Saving Minutes With Facebook

Posted on by spr1312jlin

Facebook has come out with a messenger app that allows free voice calling for iPhone users. How convenient would that be?! Instead of using our minutes, we could get free minutes! That is like a dream come true, right? There are positives and negatives about this app as well. Because this is a new app, it is understandable that there might be a few glitches, like almost every new product out there.

Some positives about this new free calling messenger app is:

1. This app does not need to be updated in order to be used.

2. You save your minutes! It is really helpful if you just happened to use all of your minutes, or your family used them up for you if you have a family plan.

3. You can get free calling in a tap of a button. There will be a circled “I” icon in the conversation that the user is in. The user can press that button and tap free call to have this free messenger app call the person.

4. You can leave voice messages.

5. This is like a regular messenger where there are emoticons that you can choose from.

Based on the following positive traits stated in the article, it does seem tempting to just switch over to Facebook. It is a phone and a regular messenger all in one! You can call, leave voice messages, and emoticons! Because I could leave “stickers”, which are emoticons, I would assume that I can leave text messages as well. Then again, there would have to be more information about the texting.

According to this article, the only negative to the new Facebook messenger app is that the quality is really poor. The sound of the other person was fuzzy and tinny. I would not want to spend time to just understand what the person is saying on the other side. People do not like lag! They want this convenient. Don’t you just not like it when someone is talking, and they are cutting up and you can’t hear what they are saying? In this situation, I get frustrated and want to attempt to make my internet faster. This is, again, understandable because it is a new app.

I have rarely seen a new released product that does not have a negative side to it. Because Facebook let people sample on them, they would get their feedback and, I would hope, further enhance the new messenger. By doing this, they would need an update.

Question: Would this new Facebook app be a new trend? I know there are many other messengers out there that have free texting and free calling, but they only give you so many minutes. After you use them up, you would have to pay for them. Therefore, with unlimited minutes, would people start to just go over to the Facebook application for calling, even with low quality? If this Facebook messenger application was enhanced with higher quality, would you decide to switch over to use this new Facebook messenger app?

 

Sources:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/breaking/la-fi-tn-facebook-android-voice-calling-messenger-20130419,0,3217608.story

Wrong CEO, Crazy Damages!

Posted on by f1222sghatila

Wrong CEO, Crazy Damages!

Someone might think that a big company might have all the resources and very intelligent people working because they can afford to do so. In addition, those people will make the right decisions to improve the quality of work and increase the profit in the long run. J.C. Penny is one of the big companies that with one critical decision they lost almost a billion dollar. The hired the wrong person, which lead to critical changes that did not work out in the favor of J.C. Penny and increasing their profits. When Ron Johnson was announced as the new CEO of J.C. Penny the stock prices was $34 and within 2 years, the current stock price is at $14. The reason behind such a dramatic change is the structure of J.C. Penny. The CEO made changes to update the entire store and eliminate the coupons. Johnson did not pivot the idea that start off small and once people accepted the change and wanted that change increase though out the nation. Johnson took a big leap and caused J.C.Penny’s regular customers to look elsewhere for their purchasing needs.

Myron Ullman who was the CEO before Johnson had agreed to go back to and reverse the changes implemented by Johnon. He has agreed to stay until J.C. Penny has the right CEO. The changes made by Johnson eliminated the middle-market customers, which where their target market. Even though someone might think that updating the store and keeping a low price while eliminating coupon will cause more people to come is not necessarily true. Ideally, any idea sounds good but pivoting the idea is to make changes without losing a lot of money. Ulllman’s plan is to change things back and bring back the lost customers what where their target market but getting someone to come back after they have lost the trust is somewhat hard. Ullman has the niche to fix things, which he has done before and J.C. Penny is counting on him to bring back the people and profit into the stores again. His biggest challenge will be to remind the customers that what J.C. Penny was before and nothing has changed.

Quality of management makes a huge difference in the success of any company. Being in this state and losing a lot of money is very critical for J.C. Penny. If they continue to do so they will soon have to declare bankruptcy and that is a whole other situation. Being in economic crises right now and extreme competition from places like Macy’s and Kohl’s’ it will be hard to J.C. Penny to gain the customers because the rivals are trying to take up as much market has they can of lost customers. J.C. Penny is at a critical position right now; the question now remains whether they will be able to reverse the damage.

Do you think the J.C. Penny will gain its customers back and be able to create profit that they use to?

http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2013-04-11/j-dot-c-dot-penney-rehires-myron-ullman-to-clean-up-ron-johnsons-mess#p1

It’s About Quality, Not Quantity

Posted on by spr1331jdelatorre

During the 1980s and early 90s, fitness became a widely-popular trend in American culture. Many Americans started taking their health seriously, so they began to exercising regularly and eating healthy. In 1991, my dad and a couple of his friends decided to invest in this fitness trend and create a partnership; thus, Festhalten was born.

Festhalten is a San Francisco-based fitness accessories company that specializes in grip enhancement technology. Festhalten is derived from the German word that means “to hold on to”. Festhalten’s first product was the Festhalten Multipurpose Grip. The grips are designed to offer the user a cushioned grip that will not slip under most conditions.

In 1992, the partnership was dissolved. Over twenty years later, Festhalten was reborn, thanks to my dad giving me the company to rebuild. I am the Chairman of the Board, President and Chief Executive Officer of Pan American Airways System, the parent company of Festhalten. One of the challenges I face is ensuring that Festhalten finds good suppliers that are able to provide high-quality raw materials and manufacture high-quality products.

In MGT 322, I learned that there are several definitions and dimensions of quality. Quality can be defined as “the degree of excellence” or the “conformance to requirements or specifications.” Quality also has different dimensions: transcendent (excellence), product-based (quantities of product attributes), user-based (fitness for intended use), value-based (quality versus price), and manufacturing-based (conformance to specifications). Given the definitions and dimensions of quality, it is important to create a quality program. After all, it’s about quality, not quantity. The program consists of the following components: (1) marketing; (2) design engineering; (3) procurement; (4) process design; (5) production; (6) inspection and test); (7) packaging and storage; and (8) service.

Finding a good supplier is a very time-consuming process. I remember when I used to travel to San Antonio every month to meet with a prospective supplier. They marked up their prices because they thought that they were the only supplier on our list. Negotiating for a low price is one thing; making sure they have the capacity to manufacture a high-quality product is another.

When starting a manufacturing company, always remember that “it’s about quality, not quantity.” I cannot stress enough the importance of finding good suppliers. Before you manufacture anything, make sure you create a list of potential suppliers. Never have just one supplier. In addition, make sure you are using high-quality raw materials. You can have the best manufacturing in the world, but if you have low-quality raw materials, you will manufacture low-quality products. Last but not least, when it comes to manufacturing, make sure you create standards and implement a quality program that you constantly reassess. Without measurements, there is no way of knowing whether or not you are producing a high-quality product.

Are you an entrepreneur? If so, what steps are you taking to ensure that you are creating a high-quality product/service?