<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Brand Delivery - For Free</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.eggstrategy.com/blog/2009/06/working-for-free/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.eggstrategy.com/blog/2009/06/working-for-free/</link>
	<description>The Dozen is an eclectic take on innovation, branding, media, strategy and research, brought to you by the creative minds at Egg Strategy.</description>
	<pubDate>Sun, 01 Aug 2010 00:55:43 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Marty Krashoc</title>
		<link>http://www.eggstrategy.com/blog/2009/06/working-for-free/comment-page-1/#comment-28030</link>
		<dc:creator>Marty Krashoc</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 19 Jun 2009 14:43:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.eggstrategy.com/blog/?p=604#comment-28030</guid>
		<description>Very interesting question Alison.  I think if I were served by accomodating people I knew were working for free, I personally wouldn't value the service any differently.  However, I would now associate that value entirely with the employee(s), and not the firm/brand.  Any such disconnect in the eye of the consumer can only do harm to the brand, in my opinion.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Very interesting question Alison.  I think if I were served by accomodating people I knew were working for free, I personally wouldn&#8217;t value the service any differently.  However, I would now associate that value entirely with the employee(s), and not the firm/brand.  Any such disconnect in the eye of the consumer can only do harm to the brand, in my opinion.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Alison</title>
		<link>http://www.eggstrategy.com/blog/2009/06/working-for-free/comment-page-1/#comment-27979</link>
		<dc:creator>Alison</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Jun 2009 22:30:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.eggstrategy.com/blog/?p=604#comment-27979</guid>
		<description>Well, the analogy to our business is a good one.  We sell smart people.  BA sells accomodating people.  How much is the consumer supposed to think these services are worth if they know for a fact they are free?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well, the analogy to our business is a good one.  We sell smart people.  BA sells accomodating people.  How much is the consumer supposed to think these services are worth if they know for a fact they are free?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Marty Krashoc</title>
		<link>http://www.eggstrategy.com/blog/2009/06/working-for-free/comment-page-1/#comment-27974</link>
		<dc:creator>Marty Krashoc</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Jun 2009 20:31:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.eggstrategy.com/blog/?p=604#comment-27974</guid>
		<description>Thanks for the great post, Richard.

I agree that this is likely to have adverse brand value implications.  So much of a service organization's brand value comes from its employee culture, and so much of that is built around a mutual agreement of work terms between the firm and the employees (balance of salary, benefits, work conditions/environment, etc.).  Upsetting an established cultural equilibrium is sure to take its toll.

One way they could have approached this differently would be to offer these employees (underwater) stock options in exchange for their service. This would be perceived as a more 'mutual' exchange of compensation...One which truly aligns the goals of the organization to those of the employees.  This just might have gotten those wagons a circlin'.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for the great post, Richard.</p>
<p>I agree that this is likely to have adverse brand value implications.  So much of a service organization&#8217;s brand value comes from its employee culture, and so much of that is built around a mutual agreement of work terms between the firm and the employees (balance of salary, benefits, work conditions/environment, etc.).  Upsetting an established cultural equilibrium is sure to take its toll.</p>
<p>One way they could have approached this differently would be to offer these employees (underwater) stock options in exchange for their service. This would be perceived as a more &#8216;mutual&#8217; exchange of compensation&#8230;One which truly aligns the goals of the organization to those of the employees.  This just might have gotten those wagons a circlin&#8217;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
