Sure, but from a customer service standpoint the article would be too abstract, and from a worker standpoint it's apples and oranges to compare Olympic volunteers with Zipcar employees, who are getting paid. Is the point that it's good to have half of your workforce be unpaid? Is it perhaps that not paying people is the key to good customer service? I really can't tell. I've been thinking about this for a day now and the only concrete positive I can pull out of it is to "have a good product," with the implication that, well, if you have a business that can't thrive with a 50% unpaid workforce, your product must be bad. I may have too much imagination.