On the subject of Amazon CEO Andy Jassy’s internal (though not for very long) memo warning that a lot of corporate jobs will be lost to AI, MNB reader Jesse Sowell wrote:
I often find myself in disagreement with executive leadership in general, and with Andrew Jassy of Amazon in particular. (I find they tend to be too focused on shareholders and not enough on stakeholders like customers and employees.)
But I applaud Jassy’s memo to employees about the AI impact on jobs at Amazon. Good leaders are transparent with employees about hard truths, even when doing so will invite criticism. The fact is that AI, as suspicious as we may be of it, is coming, and companies like Amazon will be forced to use it or risk falling behind their competition. By noting that some jobs will be created, Jassy is giving his people a chance to prepare themselves by developing AI skills that will allow them to qualify for those new roles.
I learned two lessons early in my career that shaped whatever success I’ve had: 1) As much as we hate change, when our employers fail to change they’re not doing us any favors, but handicapping the company and diluting our own prospects by risking irrelevancy and decline. 2) The best way to keep a job and to advance in your career is to make yourself valuable to employers, and because the world progresses and industries change, that means continuing to learn and grow.
Regarding C&S’s proposed $1.77 billion acquisition of SpartanNash, one MNB reader wrote:
I hope that Senators Sanders and Warren will fairly review C&S’s proposed acquisition of Spartan Nash. This would contrast with their previous actions during Albertson’s acquisition by Kroger, which led to negative consequences such as store closures, layoffs, and strikes in multiple markets. I am convinced that the only two “large” things that they can support are their insatiable egos and the Federal Government.
I disagreed with a lot of the observations made by Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Massachusetts) and Senator Bernie Sander (I-Vermont) regarding the proposed Kroger-Albertsons deal. (I might have opposed it on entirely different grounds.)
But, for the record, pretty much every politician – on both sides of the aisle – has an insatiable ego. So if you are going to criticize them for that – as opposed to just because they have views and beliefs that may differ from yours – then I think you need to reconsider the premise of your argument.
As for the size of the Federal Government, that’s a debate for another time and place. Though I do suspect that a lot of people are going to miss it when it’s gone.
Kroger said this week that it close 60 stores over the next 18 months.
One MNB reader wrote:
C&S will probably buy the stores.
Maybe.
I made the argument earlier this week that retailers deciding to stock items in their stores ought to be willing to explain to shoppers why those items are in stock, and why people should invest their time, money and palates to trying them.
MNB reader SJ Slatinsky responded:
New Seasons Market “back in the day“ had a great practice of physically cutting in every new item per store with the Buyer Joel and Merchandising manager Jerry. They would basically give eye level ‘ish placement to most new items in order to highlight the new offerings. To your point if the item is good enough to carry then it should be good enough to explain to customers this complimented their active demo program and circulars. The simple act of eye level / mid eye level priority to new items was kind of revolutionary in the face of slotting and big broker support, but would highlight the variety and relevance of each category or subcategories.
Another example I hold dear is a Safeway merchandising veteran’s illustrated take on variety vs velocity: we could stock 12 ft of Safeway Apple juice 32oz based on velocity, but we need prune juice to maintain the variety of a juice category. If a customer were shopping for prune juice and could not find it what kind of example would that be?
The struggle to find variety in ketchup is a regressive example of how gigantic brands are narrowing the shopping experience. Tom Gillpatrick (of Portland State University) has a favorite story about ow he was in the USSR back in the 1980s. He kept smelling the same fragrance on the subway and amongst crowds and could not place it, until he went to a store to buy soap. There was one SKU of soap – one fragrance, the lack of variety can be a real sticking point and innovation like “body wash” liquid body soap , or men’s / women’s soaps, are now part of our accepted differentiation.
Responding to yesterday’s piece about a recent e-newsletter sent out by Stew Leonard’s, one MNB reader wrote:
Just read the latest “What’s Cooking With Stew’s” and what struck me most was his genuineness.
There was clarity in every statement and phrase.
And there was empathy and honesty.
Anybody reading his words may agree or disagree, but they will find them and Stew a breath of fresh air!
Thanks for sharing Stew with us!
My pleasure.
From another reader:
Can you imagine the CEO of Kroger, who talks to stock analysts on a quarterly basis doing the same with customers?
No. But if he did, it would be a game-changer. For the better.
On another subject, from MNB reader Rich Heiland:
I think the McDonald’s-Krispy Kreme deal failed for one basic reason.
Never have I walked into a McDonalds thinking donuts. Period. I think I am not alone.
Fair point. Maybe this is a case of the Occam’s razor principle:
If you have two competing ideas to explain the same phenomenon, you should prefer the simpler one.
Regarding my FaceTime video about business lessons from the Boston Red Sox trade of Rafael Devers to the San Francisco Giants, MNB reader Linda Brennan wrote:
As a diehard Red Sox fan, I am among a minority of fans who was glad to see the whiny Devers get traded. Craig Breslow takes the blame for the lack of communication, but in the end Devers poisoned the team vibe as he refused to take one for the team. While clear communication is critical, organizations that don’t play as one unit are maimed. In the early 2000s the Red Sox were 25 players taking 25 cabs and that all changed by the blessed year of 2004.
Also – Devers is pronounced with a short “e”, like Tinker to Evers to Chance…
Thanks for the pronunciation correction. You’re absolutely right. I’ve been a little preoccupied this week, watching my New York Mets endure a long losing streak after a first few months of sustained excellence. (It’s okay. We’ll be fine. Long season.)
And finally, responding to my piece last week noting the 50th anniversary of the premiere of “Jaws,” and business lessons from that classic movie, MNB reader Mike Moon wrote:
I was almost 13 when “Jaws” was released. Our local paper had a movie section that would show the movies playing at the theaters. Most movies lasted a week or two in the theaters before being replaced by the next release.This was the first time that I remember that a movie was so popular, that it was “held over” for weeks. I remember this so vividly because my mom would not let me see it….
Here is an image from the August 6 1975 edition of my local paper, The Lawrence (KS) Journal World. When this was over, it would spend 2 months in the local theater. I’ve often wondered how many other movies never made it to the screen or had their release shortened because “Jaws” was so popular.
Great memory. Thanks for sharing.
The post Your Views: “Accepted Differentiation” appeared first on MNB.
View Original Article
