Feedback week 1 (19-9): Friedman & IE puzzle
Sander van Nielen
I could not reply on your first two blogs, so therefore you can find my feedback below.On your blog called “Sustainable Business”:
You have chosen a quite interesting phenomenon, the higher stock of sustainable businesses. You have a very pleasant way of writing!
What do you exactly mean by ‘confidence’ in your first argument? Do you mean those businesses are less likely to go bankrupt? Or do you assume those companies are more transparent towards the investors, shareholders and banks? Because interesting thing is that those companies do not necessarily make more profit, compared to non-sustainable businesses.
You conclude the argument by stating that sustainable companies have to be comparable to non-sustainable companies, but I believe the point of the sustainable is that they want to differ: they produce the same service or product, yes, but the management is supposed to be different, right?
Your second argument is very plausible, but you leave out all the smaller, younger sustainable companies that enter a market of (almost) perfect competition, like biological coffee for example. It is not the case that no company like that ever enters a market (of course for a market of less competition it is easier to maintain and therefore your argument holds). I am wondering how you can explain those businesses.
I could not agree more on the third argument!
On your blog called “The business of business”:
I agree on your reasoning that a manager makes decision in favor of the company he is paid for to do.
It is amusing to notice the turning point you apparently have made between the first and the second blog. In the first you defend that sustainable companies (I assume those are managed by CEO’s that have a sustainable mindset) have higher stocks, and in this blog you reason that ‘environmental friendly’ businesses will be competed out by conventional businesses.
I am wondering, what is your actual point of view about this? :)
Your solution for the ‘problem’ of environmental businesses is a task for politicians and consumers. You explain both sides very well and clear. I personal side note: if your first point is true, that environmental businesses are not self-supportive, isn’t that also caused by consumers? We prefer cheap over sustainable, so in fact consumers are responsible for the problem of environmental companies. Ofcouse, I agree that if the problem is solved, consumers start buying more expensive, responsible product, consumers are also the solution.
Your final conclusion was really nice!
Ilonka Marselis
First of all, I really appreciated the general introduction to your blog about the black background :)!Is it true that I missed your second blog about “the business of business is to increase it’s profits”?
You have a very clear and profound introduction to the first blog.
Your first explanation is a very strong one. It was not the exercise, but I am just wondering if you think the free market could overcome this problem by itself?
I agree on your second argument about the little transparency of products. But don’t you think it can be a responsibility of a consumer in a free market to address different products and their production chains? And if they do not address them, the cheaper price of ‘conventional’ products is preferred by them, above the sustainable production chain?
…Which is the exact point you make in the third argument I see!
Not much more feedback can I give on your blog, even though I do not agree with your conclusion, but that is just a difference of opinion :).
Feedback week 2 (2-10): Newsitem on rational decisionmaking & development Friedman Proposition
Tim de Vrijer
-Paulina Criollo
Thanks for writing your blog, my apologies for the late comments.On the first part of the blog:
The outlook with the picture is well done! Also, my compliments on the topic you have chosen, it is not very obviously. I have no comments on the content of your blog, good job!
My only comment is that you could try to write more like a journalist, so your blog is more of an article than an assignment for a course. That makes it more ‘fun’ to read.
On the second part:
You have nice, funded arguments. Your English is very well, making this complex subject more understandable. Your arguments are build straight-to-the-point, which I consider to be an important skill.
My first comment is again the feeling I get after reading that you have not been able to leave the scholastic aspect of the assignment and write the blog like an article. You could elaborate about the video, for readers that haven’t watched id for example.
My second comment is that I miss out on the development of your proposition about Friedman. Maybe you can add how one argument resulted from the other and if you have switched “sides” one time, apart from a summary of last week’s assignment.
Thanks again!
Feedback week 3 (9-10): Ostrom's SES and Friedman
Rebecca Joubert
-Hsiu-Chuan Lin
Q 1- I liked your blog a lot, the lay-out with pictures and clear structure of the titles of the assignment was nice. I appreciated your introduction about the framework and the settings of the coffee market. I also liked your argumentation, especially the extra work you have done in the paragraph about the Tragedy of the Commons.Not many tips, only the point that your blog was very long. Maybe you could cut it a little short?
Q2 - Thanks for writing this blog. The lenght and to-the-point argumentation is better than the previous. I like your citation too.
One point of feedback: in the first part you talk about the government enforcing rules. Friedman is against governments imposing rules right? And how can local farmers make others distribute resources? Those diffences result from an inefficient market I believe, making it not nessecary to distribute, because that will support the existence of an inefficient market. What is your opinion?
Feedback week 4 (16-10): Nokia Video
Romée de Blois
Thanks for writing your blog, my apologies for the delay of my feedback.Your explanation of the video in the beginning is well done, especially for readers that haven't seen the video. Your argumentation is also very clear, maybe you could add some more arguments, apart from the ones that defend your point of view, that attack arguments against your point of view?
Your blog has a nice lenght, not too long and not too short: all the information needed is present, well done!
Could you elaborate a little more on the legitimacy of the supplier in the video? Your explanation on the legitimacy of Nokia is very well done!
Could you be a little more 'to-the-point' in the last part about a coördination mechanism? The one you propose is more governmental regulation, what regulation do you mean? Regulation in developed countries where the products are sold, or regulation in China? And how can this be achieved?
The blog looks and reads still like a 'school assignment' instead of an article or blog. Maybe you could write the questions that had to be answered more in a story instead of the dots.
I have some comments, but overall your blog was really good!
Vigil Yu
Thanks for writing your blog, my apologies for the late reply.Your blog is actually a blog (instead of a school assignment) well done! The introduction, consisting of a summary of the Nokia Documentary, is a good addition.
Also very nice you have used your own experiences of growing up in China, that makes it even more interesting to read.
You have a very strong way of argumenting and your English language proficiency is clearly at a high level, which convinces a reader to agree with you.
The only thing I missed was the part where you describe a new coördinating mechanism. I think you try to do that in the last two paragraphs, but could elaborate a bit more on that, mainly about the practical implication of such a system.
One point of critique is the length of the article. Even though it was very interesting to read all of it, you could try to be a little shorter in your argumentation.
Thanks again, it was a pleasure to read!
Feedback week 5 (23-10): Regio networks, linkages and constraints
Jorinde Vernooij
Thanks for writing your blog, my apologies for my late reply. You have chosen an interesting subject, and the questions in the introduction make me cutious to read further. It is a real blog, not just a school assignment, well done! Nice visualisation of the network you have made in figure 1.I could not open your second figure about material exchange, which is a pity.
Maybe you could try to implement your own opinion about this case, since your blog is not too long.
Thanks again!
Rens van de Peppel
-Feedback week 6 (6-11): Harvest game
Milan Veselinov
-
Franco Donati
-Feedback week 7 (13-11): External control and LCAs
Zev Starmans
-Paulina Gual
-Feedback week 8 (20-11): Evolutionary game
Wybren Brouwer
-Alice van Rixel
Thanks for writing your blog, explaining how the evolutionary game works. You have explained it very clear to my opinion (but I was in your group so I know exactly what game you are explaining, what makes me a little biased of course) and also structured it nicely.
The conclusion on that to learn from this blog is a nice addition too!
My only comment is that you could try to write it a bit more like an actual article or blog, instead of an assignment for a course, by leaving out the word 'assignment' and assuming that the reader has no idea why you write this and what happened in class.
Thanks again and good luck!