In today’s day and age social media accounts have become so useful that companies are now asking their hiring staff to use them to look for potential employees. That is why keeping your social media account professional is very important. It can hurt you if you have negative stuff on there as well. The author in the article goes on to talk about how knowing someone is still how companies would rather hire people. As was discussed within class, networks are very important and the more people you know the better. Network effects play a key role in the hiring process.
Social media has made it very easy to stay connected and build your network. People definitely should take advantage and try to use social media to their benefit and build a greater network of people and stay in touch with them over time. Many times this is how people land their jobs; by the people that they know.
Companies hire people through their social networks because someone has vouched for that person, and it gets rid of the uncertainty of how that person will behave. Companies would more rather hire someone that a present employee already knows, rather than an unconnected person outside of their social network.
One of the disadvantages of relying mostly on networks when hiring makes diversity in the workplace diminish. I think companies should not always hire people from their social network to keep the network of people more diversified.
In this day and age, I always come across ads that I know are personalized just for me. Advertising has grown tremendously since the internet. Now companies are able to learn things about consumer buying behavior that they never could have otherwise.
The authors of the article entitled, Online ads know who your are, but can they change you too?, has many interesting points. It states that companies use behavioral targeting to learn about consumer purchasing patterns. Some of the things include what pages you click on or how much time you spend on a particular page. The main point of behavioral targeting is to predict what a consumer will buy in the future.
I think that is a very interesting tactic, and how certain companies already know what I will be buying in the future dependent on my past purchasing and browsing history. This power of marketing is very effective and may even steer consumers into buying things that marketers think they should be buying.
As described within the book, Networks, Crowds, and Markets: Reasoning About a Highly Connected World by David Easley and Jon Kleinberg, advertising is directly tied to search behavior. There is just so much information search engines get just by following a person for one day. I think it is fascinating to think about all of the information that they may have and how they could even know more about you than you may know about yourself.
Ever since Dietrich Braess came up with the idea, people have been using Braess’ Paradox to clear up traffic in congested cities. It basically means that it is better to close a road that is jammed up instead of adding another road in that area, because it will only make travel times worse instead of helping. The article discusses how this same notion can be used when talking about consumer choices.
It explains how people are better off when they have less products to choose from instead of more. The article describes that when people have to choose a new computer, having many different options makes it difficult for them to research about each one. This in turns makes it harder to pick the best one. If they had less options, an increased number of people would be more fortunate in buying the better choice of computer.
The article goes on to state how Braess’ Paradox would be beneficial for product managers to give them an idea of when it would be good to initiate a new product into the market, or if it would be ideal to remove a certain product.
Within book Networks, Crowds, and Markets it states, “we all have an informal sense that upgrading a network has to be a good thing, and so it is surprising when it turns out to make things worse (233).” I always thought the opposite as well, that having more things to choose from would be beneficial. However, that is not always true and many times having to pick from a limited number of products is actually better.
During this weekend, the blizzard did not really allow people to be out and about, but instead many were inside watching their favorite shows and movies on Netflix. Popularity for this company is high and ever growing. An article states that Netflix is economically at the top of the television industry with more people subscribing to it daily. In the past, television networks would first run the pilot and if that was successful, then they would purchase the rest. However, Netflix broke out of that pattern and buys shows in complete two season packages at a time.
This is putting pressure on regular networks since they can either sell to Netflix and receive more money, or not sell to them and make less. The article describes this as being a prisoner’s dilemma. The prisoner’s dilemma for the media companies is that they can either continue selling to Netflix in order to gain short term profits, or stop selling to help preserve the industry in the future.
The company who stops selling to Netflix first will be cutting their revenue and they would not know if the rest of the networks would end up following them or not. This classic example of the prisoner’s dilemma is one of the things that we will be discussing in this weeks lectures. It is described as being a scenario where two people act or pick a strategy which is benefiting themselves instead of picking the strategy which will benefit them both. They end up not getting the best outcome if they had chosen otherwise.
The article went on to talk about how Netflix has millions of people subscribed “to an unsustainable model.” I am interested in seeing how other media companies deal with Netflix and how long it can stay at the top of the industry.