How FNAC became a customer experience role model to other companies?

FNAC is an international entertainment retail chain of cultural and electronic products, founded in 1954 initially as a members-only discount buyers' club.

This company argues that they differ from its competition with a "unique brand positioning based on the exaltation of pleasure to discover the diversity of cultures and technologies”.

In my opinion FNAC does much more than that.

FNAC aims at the customer “top of mind” positioning through a customer experience policy and orientation.

As I perceived it, FNAC welcomes you in their stores even if you don’t seek to buy anything at that moment.
- You can find in FNAC stores, sofas which allow you to read comfortably and go through any book for free even if that book is for sale.
- Also, you can find a coffee shop inside the store enabling you just to hang out a bit.
- All the products are displayed in a way that invites you to check them without seeking assistance from an employee.

This customer experience strategy relieves the buying pressure from the customer and increases the number of visits per each customer.

So what is the benefit to FNAC, if many customers regularly enter in their stores and don’t buy at all in that visit?

This investment in the customer’s emotional connection with FNAC brand returns as revenue, when those customers find themselves in need to buy something in the FNAC product range, they will think FNAC first, therefore this is called “top of mind” positioning.

Should the Government Increase the Minimum Wage? Why or why not?

Increasing the minimum wage is a popular political policy that is 95% financially supported by the private sector, because usually, the minimum wage employees work in the private sector. So, it can be an evil mean of government propaganda (government receives appreciation from the electors but it is the private sector that pays the bill).

There are arguments in favour and against of this kind of policy.

In favour:
- Many political deciders and some “left wing” economists believe that corporations are always looking to exploit the employees, specially the less skilled employees, which have less job options, therefore even with big profits, corporations don’t care enough by those employees in the bottom of the structure.
- By increasing some people’s income, it will have a good effect on consumption increase, therefore stimulating the economy.

Against:
- Increasing the minimum wage will affect much more the smaller companies than the big ones. And smaller companies are already under pressure by companies from other countries with cheaper labour costs. It is expected that some smaller companies cannot afford the extra cost and will loose competitiveness in the market, and could even close their doors. The final result of minimum wage increase could be unemployment increase, therefore contributes negatively to the economy, because it will generate less consumption and increase government welfare costs with unemployed people.

My opinion:
- Both arguments have merit, therefore it is a question of when is more appropriate to increase the minimum wage, achieving the purpose of the policy with minimum effects on unemployment.
The answer of "when" depends of each country economic status, but surely that minimum wage increase is a bad policy during an economic downturn, because it will contribute even more for the downhill.