Explore The Relative Advantages Of Both Market Driven Marketing Essay

Explore The Relative Advantages Of Both Market Driven Marketing Essay In marketing research and literature, debate has been surrounding two approaches of market orientation that firms could adopt: market-driven and market-driving. Some argue that market-driving behavior is superior to market-driven behavior in creating customer values that contribute to growth and profitability, such as IKEA, Dell and Southwest Airlines, to name a few. (eg. Kotler et al., 2000) On the other hand, majority of authors stresses that these two behaviors are complementary. (e.g. Jaworski et al., 2000; Sheth and Sisodia, 1999) Such controversy leaves open questions to practitioners: Which is the winning approach for the firms to adopt? Should these two the competing approaches or complement each other? This essay begins with an introduction of market orientation, along with the market-driven and market-driving behavior. The next section will explore the relative advantages of these two behaviors from the marketing perspective and then to draw a conclusion to suggest that these two behaviors are complementing each other of which both play important roles in generating sustainable competitive advantage in todays dynamics business environment. Overview of Market Orientation Since late 1980s, significant amount of research in marketing suggesting that market orientation is the most effective strategy of achieving and maintaining long term competitive advantage and continue to stress its importance to the firms superior profitability. (e.g., Day, 1994b; Jaworski et al., 2000; Kohli Jaworski, 1990; Kotler et al., 2000; Narver and Slater 1990) Jaworski and Kohli (1996) defined market orientation as the organization wide generation of market intelligence pertaining to current and future customer needs, dissemination of the intelligence across departments, and organization-wide responsiveness to it. (see figure 1) On the other hand, Narver and Slater (1990) defined market orientation as an organization culture committed to the continuous creation of superior value for the customers and thus, continuous superior performance for the business. Narver and Slater (1990) classified the market orientation into responsive and proactive. The responsive approach, a typical response of a firm that exhibits a market driven behavior, is customer led, considering the market structure and customer preferences as given and focusing on the satisfaction of expressed customer needs. In contrast, the proactive market orientation, a typical response of market-driving firm, aims towards the satisfaction of latent needs, reshaping the customer preferences and market structure to enhance the competitive position of the company. (see figure 1) Figure Market Orientation Process (Neuenburg, 2010, p.49) Figure 2 below provides a framework adopted from Neuenburg (2010), which shows the whole spectrum of market-oriented behaviors that summarizes the discussion above. Figure 2 Marketing driven behavior vs market driving behavior (Neuenburg, 2010, p.46) In a nutshell, although there are differences in the precise definition, the market orientation is a fundamental approach for a firm to understand its markets, which represent an additional strategic dimension (Narver and Slater, 1998) and the implementation of the marketing concept (Jaworski and Kohli, 1990) that focuses the firms efforts on the needs of the market, learn about market developments, share this information within the organization and adapt the offering to the market. (Jaworski and Kohli, 1990) The Market Driven and Its Advantages Figure Conceptual Framework: Two Forms of Market Orientation (Jaworski et al., 2000, p.130) According to Jaworski et al. (2000), the term market-driven refers to learning, understanding, and responding to stakeholder perceptions and behaviors within a given market structure. (see figure 3) Specifically, the focus of a market-driven approach is to keep the status quo on existing customer preferences and behavior within an existing market structure. (Day, 1999a; Day, 1999b; Jaworski et al., 2000) The key element of market-driven behavior is to monitor customer satisfaction and analyzing customer needs, finding competitive advantage and strategic targeting. (Cravens and Shipp, 1991) Monitoring customer satisfaction allows firms to get an early indication about changing customer needs and preferences and the identification of future customer needs. Analyzing these needs helps the firms to prevent bad decisions or overlooking important parts of the customer value proposition as well as identifying its current or potential competitive advantage. (Cravens and Shipp, 1991) Firms gain advantage by matching the requirements of market segments with its capabilities to identify the best opportunities to serve its customers. (Cravens and Shipp, 1991) As markets become more fragmented the decision about which segments to target becomes increasingly important because each segment represents its own specific needs. (Neuenburg, 2010) Understanding of Markets, Customers, and Competitors Successful companies like Nestle, Procter Gamble, and Unilever are market-driven which reflects the conventional wisdom of marketing philosophy wherein they establish a clear understanding of markets, customers, and competitors. (Day, 1994b) Market-driven firms gain advantage to have good understanding of the market and how it is likely to change in the future. Furthermore, they hear the voice of the customers and develop differentiated products or services for a well-defined segment and then create combinations of marketing mix to adapt its offerings to satisfy customer needs. (Hills and Sarin, 2003; Kotler et al., 2000) As Day (1994b) argues, market-driven organizations are superior in their market-sensing and customer-linking capabilities, which enable them to understand, attract, and keep valuable customers. (Day, 1999a) When these two capabilities are deeply embedded within the organization, all functional activities and organizational processes will be better directed toward a nticipating and responding to changing market requirements ahead of competitors. (Day, 1994b) Therefore, market-driven firms are well equipped to achieve high levels of performance (Day, 1994b) and are expected to be more adaptable and perform better than less market-driven competitors because they stay in touch with existing and potential customer needs and competitor moves better than more internally focused firms. (Day, 1990) They are also predicted to be better and more successful at introducing new products to the market than their competitors. (Narver and Slater ,1990) They may not be the most innovative firm in their industry but, they will excel at adapting technologies to meet current and future customer needs. Thus, they often exhibit the adaptive characteristics of the Analyzer organization. (Miles and Snow 1978) Home Depot and Cisco Systems represent two examples of firm successfully adopting market-driven strategy of which their business focuses on putting customers first and sees themselves engage in the relationship business, not the transaction business. They strive to provide superior customer value through unprecedented customer service to increase customer satisfaction. This is how Home Deport leads with home improvement mega-stores by offering low prices and low frills but excellent services. IBM, on the other hand, failed to recognize market changes and customer preferences for personal computers which had resulted with a record loss for the fourth quarter of 1992 of $5 billion. IBM set a record for the largest annual loss in an American corporation in 1992 with a loss of $4.97 billion. Brand Portfolios as Assets In term of brand, companies with strong brands have more loyal customers, get greater return on marketing investments and are rewarded with attractive price premiums. As such, market-driven firms view their brand portfolios as assets to be leveraged and market development activities as investments rather than expenses. (Day, 1998) According to Day (1998), to manage a brand as an asset requires the deep market insights, organizational commitment and reasoned investment decisions that come naturally to market-driven firms. Moreover, the focus on long-run return from marketing investments enables market-driven firms to understand which customers are profitable to pursue, and knowing how to encourage loyalty by reducing customer acquisition costs. (Day, 1998) Creation of Permanent Value of the Existing Products or Services As quoted from Stoclhorst and Van Raaij (2004), customers do not always strive towards new and technologically superior products or services, but towards permanent value of the existing products or services so that the competition would find it hard to imitate. Hence, it is possible for market-driven firms to become irreplaceable for customers if the firms put serious focus on customers attempts constantly to offer something that are better and faster than the competitors and make the accessibility to the products and services easier. Importantly, there is support from research findings (Stull et al., 2007) validating that market-driven companies are 31% more profitable, twice as fast to bring products to market, twice as likely to lead, and enjoy 20% higher customer satisfaction rates. Furthermore, empirical results of another study (Vorhies et al., 1999) demonstrated that, the 43 market-driven firms outperformed the 44 less market-driven firms across adaptability, customer satisfaction, growth, and profitability dimensions. This finding supports the marketing literature about the capabilities of market-driven firms (Day, 1994; Day and Wensley 1988) and extends the findings on empirical research of market orientation. (e.g Jaworski et al.,1993; Narver Slater 1994) The Market Driving and Its Advantages Figure Conceptual Framework: Two Forms of Market Orientation (Jaworski, Kohli, and Sahay 2000, p.46) The term market-driving refers to changing the structure or composition of a market and/or the behavior(s) of players in the market. (Jaworski, et al., 2000) (see figure 4) It matches a proactive business logic that enhances the competitive position of the business (Tuominen et al., 2004) of which it involves the shaping of the market structure via deconstruction (eliminating competitors in the value chain), construction (adding players into the industry value chain) or a functional modification (shifting the functions performed by players in a market), and the shaping of market behavior by creating or reversing new customers or competitors preferences. (Carrillat et al., 2004; Jaworski, et al., 2000) Schindehutte et al. (2008) presented a different view of market-driving construct clarifying that it is an entrepreneurial phenomenon. They argue that the interface between the entrepreneurship and marketing offers a unique perspective on the market related decisions of firms and the observed impact of these decisions in achieving sustainable competitive advantage. Schindehutte et al. (2008) further argued that the market-driving behavior reflects a strong entrepreneurial orientation (EO). It has both the dynamic advantage that creates capability and a disruptive advantage that destroys the performance outcome. (Schindehutte et al., 2008) Despite the many different views on the notion of market-driving behavior, it has appeared as an alternative to market-driven strategy which has been recognized as a successful strategy for a number of established firms such as Amazon.com, BodyShop, CNN, IKEA and Dell, all of which has a clear brand image, a strong market position, and exhibit sustainable international business growth whereby success is based on radical business innovation, ventured into new markets, revolutionized existing industries by changing rules of the game. (Kotler et al., 2000) Kotler et al. (2000) indicate that the success of market-driving firms is based on two dimensions of radical innovation a discontinuous leap in the value proposition and the implementation of a unique business system (see Figure 5 and 6). Kotler et al. (2000) define value proposition as the combination of benefits, acquisition efforts/costs, and price offered to customers. While, unique business system refers to the configuration of the various activities required to create, produce, and deliver the value proposition to the customer. Figure Types of Strategic Innovation (Kumar et al., 2000, p.130) Figure Leap in Customer Value (Kumar et al., 2000, p.130) Therefore, the market-driving advocates argued that the market-driving firms gain more viable competitive advantage with greater performance and reap vast rewards than those that are not in a number of ways. Delivering Superior Value Kotler et al., (2000) suggested that the leap in customer value involve either breakthrough technology or breakthrough marketing enables firms to create a product and service experience that overwhelms customer expectations and existing alternatives. (Kotler et al., 2000) For example, FedEx constantly led its customers to ever higher expectations for quick delivery times, leaving competitors struggling to meet the spiraling demands. (Kotler et al., 2000) According to Carrillat et al. (2004), successful market-driving firms deliver superior value that best matches with their capabilities and by exploiting the competitors weaknesses. It also allows firms to exploit opportunities that competitors cannot (Hamel and Prahalad, 1994) and that includes addressing the deep-seated, latent or emerging customer needs. (Kotler et al., 2000) The study results in the paper of Market-driving in retail banking (Martà ­n-Consuegra et al., 2008) revealed that the two characteristics of market-driving: driving the market structure and shaping the market behavior if combined together contribute positively to overall performance of retail banks, particularly in terms of enabling them to satisfy their customers latent and expressed needs better. (Martà ­n-Consuegra et al., 2008) This study further suggested that bank-marketing managers should emphasize customer understanding in pursuing proactive market orientation, which will lead to improved performance. Market-driving behavior also enables firms to benefit from free advertising via buzz network through strong brand attachment. Customers are delighted by the leap in customer value of the offerings and are excited to share their customer experience with friends and public. Traditional printed media and online social media are often publicizing the review on radical new innovation. While early adopters and opinion leaders who are enthusiastic and committed to new innovation products and services has the influential power to generate excitement and emotional attachment among their followers. Consequently, The advertising-to-sales ratio is often less than that of their established competitors. (Kotler et al., 2000). Nike is one of the examples provided by Kotler et al. (2000) Nike didnt run a single national television ad until they had 1 billion dollars in sales. Phil Knight observes they instead used word-of-foot advertising by getting the best athletes to wear their products. Further more, study of Tuominen et al. (2004) revealed that market-driving behavior contribute to higher customer intimacy and is associated with generative (explorative) learning. On top of that, market-driving firms gain the advantage to establish new industry price points for the quality or service levels they deliver, either towards higher performance at lower price points or to charge a price premium that is higher than typical in an industry. Firms like Swatch and Southwest Airlines set the prices much lower than their competitors for similar products and services. (Kotler et al., 2000) For example, Southwest Airlines charged $15.00 for a trip from Dallas to San Antonio when Braniff, the next most inexpensive competitor, was charging $62.00. (Kotler et al., 2000) Such significant price gap and low price policy has successfully attracted many of the ground transportation users to choose Southwest Airlines. Their focus to compete on the ground transportation enable them to create new business opportunities in a market segment that has been ignored by their competitors. (Kotler et al., 2000). On the other hand, CNN, Starbucks, and FedEx are those market-driv ing firms that have a value proposition that is significantly more compelling than the existing alternatives, which enables them to set prices considerably higher than the standard in the industry. (Kotler et al., 2000) Implementation of Unique Business System According to Kotler et al. (2000), the success of IKEA and Dell is not only by just delivering discontinuous leap in customer value but also is attributed to the implementation of unique and radical business system which is hard to imitate by their competitors. Kotler et al. (2000) argued that such business system creates a more sustainable advantage, as it takes time for a would-be competitor to assemble the intra-organizational and inter-organizational players needed to replicate that unique system architecture. In term of distribution and channel management, market-driving firms focus a wide range of innovative practices within their industries. For example, Southwest Airlines handles its own ticketing instead of make seats available through the standard industry computerized reservation systems such as Sabre and Apollo. As a result, only 55 per cent of its tickets are sold through travel agents compared to 90 per cent for the industry, adding up to substantial savings on travel agents commissions. (Kotler et al., 2000) Reshaping the Customer Preferences and Market Structure Market-driving firm could lead customer value opportunities in new directions to achieve superior business performance by destroying the existing market segmentation and replacing it with a new set of segments reflecting the new altered landscape. (Kotler et al., 2000) For example, Southwest Airlines destroyed the market segmentation between ground transportation and airlines, attracting many ground transportation user who would not otherwise traveled by air. Jaworski, et al. (2000) suggested that firms could shape the market behavior directly or indirectly. One of the indirect options is by changing the existing preferences of customers or other stakeholders from a positive (negative) to a negative (positive) evaluation (Jaworski, et al., 2000). Examples of products that were formerly negative but are now positive are Skoda in automotive industry and Adidas in fashion and accessory industry. (Jaworski, et al., 2000) The proactive behavior of market-driving firms would also contribute to more innovative products and services, and more new product success (Narver et al., 2004) that enable firms to pioneer new markets, which would eventually lead to market ownership. In the case study about De Beers in China, Harris and Cai (2002) explored the advantage of market-driving behavior in practice and incurred, as cited from Neuenburg, (2010), firms gain significant market control in environments where markets are immature and product preferences are not yet formed. Conclusion Clearly, each of the market-driven and market-driving behavior has its own advantages and the notion of these two is highly relevant for business marketers (Tuominen et al., 2004). It is suggested that firms should well aware of the business logic they are applying (e.g. proactive or reactive) then it should be a match with the type of market orientation they emphasized. That is, according to Tuominen et al. (2004), the implementation of the specific strategic logic presumes matching marketing capabilities and learning capability. However, to sustain success in the long run, Sheth and Sisodia (1999) provided a more convincing argument, that firms need to be market-driven and market-driving simultaneously. Jaworski et al. (2000) echo such argument and proposed that truly market-oriented firms combine both behaviors of which these two are complementary. In other words, firms should devote effort in market-driven activities, such as incremental innovation and traditional market research. Nevertheless, firms should also continue to search for their next radical business innovation to drive them into new competitive position or the market leader risks being leap-frogged and deposed by upstart market drivers. (Neuenburg, 2010)

Causes of the Revolutionary War :: American America History

Causes of the Revolutionary War The haphazard and disorganized British rule of the American colonies in the decade prior to the outbreak led to the Revolutionary War. The mismanagement of the colonies, the taxation policies that violated the colonist right's, the distractions of foreign wars and politics in England and mercantilist policies that benefited the English to a much greater degree then the colonists all show the British incompetence in their rule over the colonies. These policies and distractions were some of the causes of the Revolutionary War. The interests of England within the colonies were self-centered. The English were exploiting were trying to govern the colonies by using the mercantilist system. Mercantilism is when the state directs all the economic activities within it's borders(Blum 31). England was not attempting to make any changes that would help the colonists. They limited the colonies commerce to internal trade only(Miller 9). The English were exploiting the colonies by demanding that the colonies import more from England then they exported to the colonies. They were importing raw materials from the colonies and making them into exportable goods in England. They would then ship these goods to foreign markets all around the world including the colonies(America Online ). Throughout the seventeenth century the English saw America as a place to get materials they didn't have at home and a market to sell finished products at after the goods had been manufactured. This was detrimental to the colonies because it pr evented them from manufacturing any of the raw materials they produced and made them more dependent upon England. In addition to the unrest caused by their mercantilist policies, domestic political issues distracted them from the activities of the colonies. Throughout the sixteen hundreds, Great Britain was more involved in solving the Constitutional issue of who was to have more power in English government, the king or parliament. When this complex issue was finally resolved in the Glorious Revolution of 1688, England turned its attention back to the colonies and found that colonists had developed their own identity as American. There was no central office in England to control what was happening in the colonies. The executive authority in England was divided among several ministers and commissioners that did not act quickly or in unison. Also, the Board of Trade, the branch of government that knew more about the colonies than any other governing body in England, did not have the power to make decisions or to enforce decrees. Causes of the Revolutionary War :: American America History Causes of the Revolutionary War The haphazard and disorganized British rule of the American colonies in the decade prior to the outbreak led to the Revolutionary War. The mismanagement of the colonies, the taxation policies that violated the colonist right's, the distractions of foreign wars and politics in England and mercantilist policies that benefited the English to a much greater degree then the colonists all show the British incompetence in their rule over the colonies. These policies and distractions were some of the causes of the Revolutionary War. The interests of England within the colonies were self-centered. The English were exploiting were trying to govern the colonies by using the mercantilist system. Mercantilism is when the state directs all the economic activities within it's borders(Blum 31). England was not attempting to make any changes that would help the colonists. They limited the colonies commerce to internal trade only(Miller 9). The English were exploiting the colonies by demanding that the colonies import more from England then they exported to the colonies. They were importing raw materials from the colonies and making them into exportable goods in England. They would then ship these goods to foreign markets all around the world including the colonies(America Online ). Throughout the seventeenth century the English saw America as a place to get materials they didn't have at home and a market to sell finished products at after the goods had been manufactured. This was detrimental to the colonies because it pr evented them from manufacturing any of the raw materials they produced and made them more dependent upon England. In addition to the unrest caused by their mercantilist policies, domestic political issues distracted them from the activities of the colonies. Throughout the sixteen hundreds, Great Britain was more involved in solving the Constitutional issue of who was to have more power in English government, the king or parliament. When this complex issue was finally resolved in the Glorious Revolution of 1688, England turned its attention back to the colonies and found that colonists had developed their own identity as American. There was no central office in England to control what was happening in the colonies. The executive authority in England was divided among several ministers and commissioners that did not act quickly or in unison. Also, the Board of Trade, the branch of government that knew more about the colonies than any other governing body in England, did not have the power to make decisions or to enforce decrees.

Diversity Audit

DIVERSITY AUDIT Diversity Audit at Starbucks Starbucks Corporation is a multinational company based in United States. It was founded in the year 1971 and is headquartered at Seattle, Washington. Starbucks is engaged in the business of selling coffee, coffee beans and different types of bakery products all over the world. The company also has a division known as Starbucks Entertainment division which is utilized for marketing films, music and books (Yahoo Finance, 2012). The coffeehouses owned by Starbucks are known for its relaxing atmosphere and the stores are mostly located in places where there is high traffic.This study entails about the diversity audit that have been conducted for Starbucks. The findings of such diversity audit, its assessment and subsequent recommendations have been presented in this study. Findings Diversity audit was conducted for Starbucks through an online survey of the company’s website and other information required for the purpose of conducting th e audit was mostly available over the internet. In addition, some of the employees present in few Starbucks stores were also interviewed to collect relevant facts regarding the cultural diversity prevalent in the company.The key findings of the diversity audit conducted at Starbucks are given below: Starbucks operates its business and stores in different parts of the world. Hence it is obvious that people from different cultures of the world are a part of Starbucks. The people connected with Starbucks can be any of its stakeholders, including its employees, suppliers, etc. As indicated in its website, it can be found that cultural diversity is given high priority and due respect in the company (Starbucks, 2012a). Apart from selling coffees, Starbucks is also engaged in the business of building up new human connections and relationships.Celebration of cultures and community involvement are also part of Starbucks activities. At Starbucks, diversity is defined as the composition of thr ee different aspects. They are: a) Inclusion, b) Accessibility, and c) Equity. Inclusion means human relationships and their engagements in the company. Accessibility refers to removal of barriers for all kinds of people associated with the company and the ease with which people can perform their activities within the organization. Equity represents equal treatment for all with justice and fairness being the two important virtues associated with the company.The strategy of diversity being followed by the company is considered to focus on four main areas. They are: partners, suppliers, customers and communities. The employees of the company are termed as partners here. The company management is involved in the activity of engaging people belonging to different regions and following varied cultures. The people working at Starbucks come from diverse family backgrounds. Starbucks organizes different activities meant for the development of its partners or employees by educating them and engaging them in different kinds of activities.Starbucks is also committed towards giving high levels of satisfaction to its customers by catering to their unique needs. Starbucks is prompt in its service and values the preferences and tastes of its customers. Starbucks tries to build relationships with its customers through adoption of different cultures as required for the purpose. Starbucks also arranges different community development programs as well to show their concern for the community. Starbucks also creates strategic partnerships by investing in companies in the local neighborhood.It also provides different kinds of opportunities for economic development which helps to build a strong relationship between the company and the communities in which it is operating its business. As regards the suppliers of Starbucks, it conducts a program termed as supplier diversity program. This program is meant for increasing the presence of minority groups and women as suppliers of the com pany (Starbucks, 2012a). The diversity effort of the company is mainly directed through a strategic plan formulated by them which is known as Global Diversity Strategy Plan.According to New York Times, nearly 24% of the corporate officers working at Starbucks comprises of women. Women represent around 31% of the population in Starbucks, and 13% of them are people of color. The team members of the Global Diversity team are engaged in different activities in Starbucks. Employees of Starbucks working in different parts of the world and their working environment are assessed and evaluated by the global strategy team of Starbucks. The company also tracks the progress made in the field of diversifying vendors and suppliers of the company. All these are done through an accountability scorecard prepared for he purpose by the global diversity team (The New York Times, n. d. ). The diversity program run by Starbucks named as Starbucks Supplier Diversity Program is meant for encouraging divers ity amongst all the suppliers of the company. The company has set criteria for the suppliers who want to be a part of this program. The two criteria being, a) More than 50% should be owned by either minority people or women, and b) It should be certified by any of the government public agencies like National Women Business Owners Corporation (NWBOC), National Minority Supplier Development Council (NMSDC), etc (Starbucks, 2012b).Results of Audit The interview conducted with the Human Resource Manager of Starbucks suggests that diversity is encouraged at all levels and departments of the organization. The women and minorities are given preferences. There are certain criteria laid down by the company regarding recruitment of minorities and women as a fixed percentage of the total employees recruited by the company. The findings from the interviews carried out in Starbucks store includes the employees comprising of different cultures, working together and having a good relationship with each other.It has been observed that the employees of Starbucks love to share their cultural information amongst each other and want to know more about each other. People from different communities come together at Starbucks and they are encouraged to work as a team. The employees seem to be happy while working in the relaxed and friendly atmosphere at Starbucks. Customers are always greeted with smile as they enter the Starbucks stores. Employees get rewarded for their good performance in the company. Everyone seems to encourage diversity in the company and have due respect for each other.People are found to be highly motivated to work for the company and wish to have a long term relationship with the organization. Most of them are found to be loyal to the company. Employee turnover is low and everyone likes to be a part of the Starbucks brand. People are found to be enjoying their work in Starbucks and do not feel any kind of compulsion being imposed on them. Assessment All the f indings mentioned above suggest that diversity is encouraged in Starbucks in almost all aspects of its business operations.Special initiatives are taken by the higher officials of the company to bring about cultural diversity in their organization. The company feels diversity to be the key towards being successful in their strategy of expansion of its business in different parts of the world. The corporate culture at Starbucks is multicultural in nature. The morale of the employees working in the company seems to be high and people coming from various cultural backgrounds are found to work together quite efficiently in the company.The working environment within the organization is also good. Everyone is found to be happy doing their work in the Starbucks stores. The customers visiting the stores are also found to be having a relaxed time and satisfied with the services offered by the company. The company has made a huge progress in the field of imparting cultural diversity in the co mpany through the implementation of various types of initiatives and programs. Hence the managers of Starbucks have been successfully dealing with the diversity issues related to the company.However, it has been argued sometimes that the steps taken by Starbucks regarding cultural diversity was more of a reactive type than being a proactive one (Grodan, 2008). It implies that Starbucks developed all these diversity initiatives only after they found it necessary for running a sustainable business in different parts of the world. Recommendations As evident from the findings and assessment of the diversity audit conducted for Starbucks, it has been successful in implementing multicultural activities within the organization.It is recommended that the company should continue giving value to diversity at all levels of its operations. This would help the company to maintain its competitive advantage in the market. It would also help the company to expand its business successfully in other nations of the world where it does not have presence now. Diversity in the organization would ensure that all the employees working for the company are treated equally. Hence, it would bring about a healthy competition within the organization which would in turn result in increased fficiency of the employees. Apart from the employees, the company should also continue to encourage diversity for other stakeholders of the company like its suppliers and the customers. It would mean customers from different backgrounds and culture could be easily acquired by the company, thereby leading to increased revenues for the company as well. References Grodan, G. (2008). Issues Facing Starbucks and Bank of America. Retrieved from http://voices. yahoo. com/issues-facing-starbucks-bank-america-1901086. html. Starbucks. (2012a).Diversity at Starbucks. Retrieved from http://www. starbucks. com/about-us/company-information/diversity-at-starbucks. Starbucks. (2012b). Starbucks Supplier Diversity Progra m. Retrieved from http://www. starbucks. com/responsibility/diversity/suppliers. The New York Times. (no date). Leading with Diversity: Starbucks Coffee Company. Retrieved from http://www. nytimes. com/marketing/jobmarket/diversity/starbucks. html. Yahoo Finance. (2012). Starbucks Corporation (SBUX): Profile. Retrieved from http://in. finance. yahoo. com/q/pr? s=SBUX.

Anti Smoking Essays

Anti Smoking Essays Anti Smoking Essay Anti Smoking Essay On April 23, 1985, Coca-Cola, the largest aerated beverage manufacturer of the world, launched a sweeter version of the soft drink named New Coke, withdrawing its traditional 99 years old formula. New Coke was launched with a lot of fanfare and was widely publicized through the television and newspapers. Coca-Colas decision to change Cokes formulation was one of the most significant developments in the soft drink industry during that time. Though the initial market response to New Coke was satisfactory, things soon went against Coca-Cola.Most people who liked the original Coke criticized Coca-Colas decision to change its formula. They had realized that the taste of New Coke was similar to that of Pepsi, CocaColas closest competitor, and was too poor when compared to the taste of the original Coke. Analysts felt that Coca-Cola had failed to understand the emotional attachment of consumers with Coke the brand. They felt that Coca-Cola had lost customer goodwill by- replacing a popular product by a new one that disappointed the consumers.As a result of consumer protests to New Coke and a significant decline in its sales, Coca-Cola was forced to revert back to its original formula ten weeks later by launching Coke Classic on July 11, 1985. Roger Enrico, the then CEO of Pepsi commented on the re-introduction of Old Coke in these words: I think, by the end of their Coca-Cola nightmare, they figured out who they really are. They cant change the taste of their flagship brand. They cant change its imagery. All they can do is defend the heritage they nearly abandoned in 1985. By 1986, New Coke had a market share of less than 3%. MIT-SOB PGDM- 31st Batch (Sem-I) BACKGROUND NOTE Dr. John Pemberton, an Atlanta-based pharmacist, developed Cokes original formula in 1886. It was based on a combination of oils, extracts from coca leaves (cola nut) and various other additives including caffeine. These ingredients were refined to create a refreshing carbo nated soda. Pembertons bookkeeper, Frank Robinson, suggested that the product be named CocaCola. He also developed the lettering for the brand name in a distinctive flowing script.On May 8, 1886, Coke was released in the market. It was first sold by Joe Jacobs Drug Store in the U. S. The first advertisement of Coke appeared in The Atlanta Journal dated May 29, 1886. Pemberton took the help of several investors and spent $76. 96 on advertising. Initially, he could sell only 50 gallons of syrup at $1 per gallon. To make the drink popular, it was served free for several days only after this that the drink gained peoples acceptance. After Pembertons death in 1888, Asa Candler, his friend and a wholesaler druggist, acquired a stake in the company.Coca-Colas sales soared even without much advertising and as many as 61,000 servings (8 ounces) were Sold in 1889. This made Candler realize that the business was profitable. He decided to wind up his drug business and be associated with Coca-C ola full time. As the business expanded. Candler also invested a higher sum in advertising the drink. By 1891, Candler bought the company for $2. 300. In 1892, he renamed it as Coca-Cola and a year later. Coca-cola was registered as a trademark. Only Candler and his associate Robinson knew the original formula.It was then passed on by word of mouth and became the most closely guarded secret in the American industry. Though occasional rumors spread that cocaine was an ingredient of Coke’s formula, authorities mentioned that this was not true. By 1895, Coke was made available in all parts of the US, primarily through distributors and fountain owners. Coke was advertised as a drink, which relieved one of mental and physical exhaustion, and cured headache. Later, Candler and Robinson repositioned Coke as a refreshment drink. MIT-SOB PGDM- 31st Batch (Sem-I)In the beginning of the 20th century, manufacturing firms in the US were criticized for promoting adulterated products and re sorting to misleading advertisements. Coca-Cola was an easy target for such criticisms. The US government passed the Pure Food and Drugs Act in June 1906. A case was registered against Coca-Cola and the trial began in March 1911. Eventually, CocaCola won the case. But the decision was reversed in the Supreme Court. Finally, the case was settled outside the court in 1917 with Coca-Cola agreeing to reduce the caffeine content of the drink by 50%.In 1919, the company was sold to an investment group headed by Ernest Woodruff for $25 million $10 million in cash and $15 million in preferred stock. Woodruffs major decision after taking over the company was to establish a Foreign Department to make Coke popular overseas. When Coke was released in foreign markets, several problems came up. Initially, it had to rely on local bottlers who did not promote the product with sufficient enthusiasm, or on wealthy entrepreneurs, not familiar with the beverage business. The company also faced problem s regarding government regulations, trademark registration, languages and culture.By 1927, Coca-Colas sales rose to nearly 23 million gallons. Even though Pepsi Cola emerged as its major competitor in the 1930s, Coca-Cola continued doing well. By the time the US took part in World War II, Coca-Cola was more than 50 years old and well established. In 1962, Paul Austin (Austin) became Coca-Colas tenth president and four years later, he became the chairman and CEO of the company. By 1965, soft drink sales in the US had risen to 200 drinks per capita, and Coca-Colas market share had risen to 41% against Pepsis 24%. In 1964, CocaCola also acquired a coffee business.The company developed drinks with new flavors and also targeted food chains, which were fast gaining popularity. In 1970, Coca-Cola faced tough competition from Pepsi. During that year, Pepsis advertising budget exceeded Coca-Colas. During the next few years there was a decline in Coca-Colas market share due to Pepsis rising s ales. In 1978, Pepsi was found to have beaten Coca-Cola in supermarket sales because of its dominance in vending machines and fountain outlets. Coca-Colas sales continued to decline during the late 1970s, as Austin began new ventures such as shrimp farming, water projects and viniculture.The political and social unres countries like Iran, Nicaragua and Guatemala had a severe impact on Coca-Colas market share. The companys poor performance and the increasing discontent of its employees led to Austins exit and the entry of Roberto Goizueta (Goizueta), a 48-year-old chemical engineer, as the companys new CEO in 1980. THE RATIONALE Soon after becoming CEO, Goizueta concluded that the obsession about increasing the market share was futile for Coca-Cola and in certain businesses, the return on capital employed ROCE) was actually less than the cost of capital.As a result, he sold Coca-Colas nonperforming businesses such as wine, coffee tea industrial water treatment and aquaculture. Even a fter this, Goizuetas focus strategy could not stop the decline in Coca-Colas market share, which fell from 24. 3% in 1980 to 21. 8% in 1984 a loss of 2. 5% in four years. The decline in each percentage point amounted to a loss of about $200 million for the company. All this happened in spite of the fact that Coca-Colas annual advertising budget in die early 1980s was higher than Pepsis by an average of $100 million.Despite this, Coca-Colas advertisements were not as effective as those of Pepsi were. Pepsi ads showed that even few Coke drinkers preferred Pepsi in blind taste tests. Coca-Colas market share continued to decline though it had more vending machines, occupied more shelf space and was competitively priced against Pepsi. Coca-Colas distribution was wider than Pepsi, which had enabled it to be the leader in the soft drinks industry. It was extremely popular because of its distinctive taste. By 1984, Coca-Colas overall market share had dropped from 9. 8% in the early 1970s t o 4. %. This became a major cause of worry for the top management of Coca-Cola. During the middle of 1983, the idea of reformulating 99-year old Coke formula struck Goizueta. The purpose was to increase Coca-Colas market share as well as to defend its position as the market leader. A thorough market research was conducted which included interviews with about 2,00,000 consumers. This involved an expenditure of $4 million over two years. The results indicated that consumers who were very fond of Coke constituted 10-12% of the total number of soft MIT-SOB PGDM- 31st Batch (Sem-I) rink consumers. When asked for their reactions to the change in Cokes taste, half of 10-12% loyal Coke consumers said that they may oppose change initially, but would eventually accept it, while the other half said that they would never accept any change. In some cases, the response was contradictory. For instance, some of the consumers, who had said that they prefer Coke to Pepsi, were found to be drinking Pe psi most of the times. Others said Coke was their favorite drink but they drank even Pepsi, or any other drink, which were available at that time.It was discovered that many people preferred Pepsi to Coke because Pepsi was sweeter. Coca-Cola felt that the sweeter taste would appeal more to teenagers and youth. Hence, it decided to launch a sweeter version of Coke, the taste of which would be similar to Pepsi. Coca-Cola also conducted a Focus group research 2 that revealed that many people were willing to try New Coke. However, some believed that Coca-Cola should not alter the taste of the drink. Although both the surveys (Focus group and Survey research) indicated consumer dissatisfaction, their results were contradictory to each other.While the survey result indicated that such dissatisfaction was limited only to a small segment of the market, the focus group research observed a wider dissatisfaction. In September 1984, Coca-Cola introduced a new drink that tasted better than Pepsi and scored 6 to 8 points3 in blind taste tests. The original Coke already exceeded Pepsis popularity by 10 points. The launch of a sweeter version of Coke was expected to make Coke popular than Pepsi by approximately 16 to 18 points. Though the market research had shown customer dissatisfaction, Coca-Cola ignored it and decided to launch New Coke based on the results of the blind taste tests.THE LAUNCH AND ITS AFTERMATH Coca-Cola launched New Coke in April 1985 with the punch line Catch the wave. This change in Cokes formula was publicized through the television and newspapers. The company said that the introduction of New Coke conformed to its efforts to be innovative in its marketing strategies and establish good customer relationships. The announcement reached more than 80% of the American population within twenty-four hours. MIT-SOB PGDM- 31st Batch (Sem-I) The launch of New Coke elicited mixed reactions from the public.The initial response to the product was encouraging with distributors reporting a fairly wide acceptance of it. According to the analysts, the reason for this was that consumers had not tasted the product yet, and were thus curious about its taste. The distributors stocked the product in large quantities due to such an encouraging consumer response. However, the consumers realized that the taste of New Coke was similar to Pepsis and worse when compared to the taste of the original Coke. Gradually, distributors began to accept less stocks of New Coke and later on, they did not stock any due to poor consumer response to the drink.A majority of original Coke lovers criticized the companys act of changing its formula (Refer Exhibit I). Many of them stored large stocks of original Coke at home. Consumers perceived New Coke as a me-too product4 with a sweeter taste like Pepsi. Some said that the original Coke had a unique taste that was stronger than New Coke. Some consumers reportedly complained that the taste of New Coke was similar to sewer water, furniture polish or two dayold Pepsi. An old Coke lover said that the company had spoiled the taste of its 99 year-old soft drink and betrayed the nations trust.Meanwhile, black marketers made a killing as they sold original Coke at an exorbitant price of $30 per six-and-a-half ounce bottle. Some of them even tried to import old Coke from abroad. By the end of May 1985, the scenario had worsened with consumer response at its lowest. After the launch of New Coke, Coca-Cola received more than a thousand calls per week from the Coke drinkers, most of whom informed the company that they were planning to substitute Coke with Pepsi since they found no difference between the two.Coca-Cola had received more than six thousand calls and around forty thousand letters from Coke loyalists from the US and abroad all complaining about New Coke after six weeks of its launch. Due to the protests from a huge number of consumers and a significant decline in the market share from 15% at the time of the launch to 1. 4%, Coca-Cola was forced to revert back to its original formula ten weeks later, by launching Coke Classic on 1lth July, 1985. By the end MIT-SOB PGDM- 31st Batch (Sem-I) of 1985, Pepsi had more market share than the combined market shares of New Coke and Coke Classic.However, in early 1986, Coke again became more popular than Pepsi as the sales of Coke Classic picked up. By early 1986, New Coke had a market share of less than 3% which came down to 0. 6% in 1987 and further down to 0. 1% in the late 1980s. Coca-Cola later re-launched New Coke as Coke IF in 1990 (Refer to Exhibit IV) which soon phased out due to its unpopularity. NEW COKE WHAT WENT WRONG? Analysts attributed the failure of New Coke due to several factors. Some felt that Coca-Cola had failed to understand the consumers emotional attachment with Coke.Reportedly, their attachment with the brand was so strong that one of them went to the extent of wishing his bones and ashes to be preserved in Coke cans after his death. But, after the launch of New Coke, he said that he did not want to be associated with Coca-Cola anymore. Another consumer said that God and Coke were the only two important things in his life. Analysts felt that people had a high regard for Coca-Cola because of its innovative ideas, excellent products launched and the importance it accorded to people and the environment. During the 1970s, one out of every two cola drinks and one out of every three soft drinks was Coke.It was made available in more than 140 countries to 5. 8 million people. These statistics proved its popularity. Also, Coca-Cola was the pioneer in recycling plastic bottles. Analysts felt that Coca-Cola was losing the goodwill of its consumers by launching a product that went against their preferences, taste and opinion. Some analysts also felt that the findings of the market research group were erroneous and late. The research was either in an inappropriate manner or was interpreted incorrectly. Coca-Cola failed to understand that there was much more to marketing soft drinks than winning taste tests.According to the analysts, the research could not have measured the type of consumer feelings that were evoked from reformulation. MIT-SOB PGDM- 31st Batch (Sem-I) Market researchers also felt that Coca-Cola must have gone for focus group testing of a new product concept first and then used individual interviews to verify and quantify the results of focus groups. But, in reality, Coca-Cola carried out individual interviews first and then undertook the focus group testing. Though the company knew that 10-12% of its loyal customers would not appreciate the change in its formula, it totally misinterpreted consumers response regarding taste.The company was totally unprepared for unseen possibilities and this caused its market share to decline rapidly after the introduction of New Coke. A MARKETING BLUNDER OR A PLOY? Notwithstanding the negative consumers response, some media report s claimed that CocaColas act of launching New Coke was actually a deliberate marketing ploy to make people develop a stronger liking of original Coke after they tasted a low quality version of the drink. Coca-Cola used cane sugar and com syrup for the sweet taste of New Coke. During early 1985, Coca-Cola ran short of cane sugar stocks, but had sufficient stocks of com syrup.Cane sugar was sweeter and more expensive than com syrup. When New Coke was introduced in the market, people did not like its sweet taste. Such customer response helped Coca-Cola, and only corn syrup was used while manufacturing Coke Classic. People were so eager to see the original Coke come back that they did not notice the difference between the sweetness of cane sugar and that of corn syrup because they were very similar. Coca-Cola thus saved millions of dollars by using corn syrup rather than cane sugar in its soft drinks. Another report said that the company never believed that New Coke would be accepted by the consumers.They deliberately introduced it with an inferior taste When people got a taste which they disliked they would demand for the original taste and when the original taste was introduced they would purchase it in large quantities. This would help Coca-Cola to regain a part of its lost market share from Pepsi. MIT-SOB PGDM- 31st Batch (Sem-I) Though these media reports remain unconfirmed, there was jubilation among the Coke lovers around the world after the introduction of Coke Classic Coca-Cola received between 18,000 to 30,000 calls of thanks from every corner of the world.One of them said that it was like an old friend had returned home after a long time. The New Coke fiasco did not result into losses for Coca-Cola. The sales of Classic Coke went up to 10 times as that of New Coke soon after its launch. Coca-Colas stock price jumped from $61,875 to $84,500, a 35% increase. By early 1986, the stock hit an all-time high of $110 (Refer Exhibit II) in 12 years, between 197 4 and 1986. At the end of the whole episode, Goizueta was happy man since it resulted in building shareholders value.He said, But the most significant result of New Coke by far, was that it sent an incredibly powerful signal a signal that we really were ready to do whatever was necessary to build value for the owners of our business. Goizueta was rewarded with $1. 7 million in salary and bonuses and almost $5 million additional bonus for the increase in stock price. Questions for Discussion: 1. The launch of New Coke turned out to be a nightmare for Coca-Cola. Discuss the marketing implications of introducing New Coke. Was it necessary to re formulate New Coke? . Market researchers had expected Coca-Cola to conduct focus group testing of a new product first and then use individual interviews to verify the results of the focus groups. What other types of research methods would have been helpful to the company in providing consumer insights? Discuss. 3. Though some analysts felt that the launch of New Coke was a blunder, others thought it was a deliberate marketing ploy. Is the failure of New Coke really a marketing blunder? Give your opinion and substantiate it. MIT-SOB PGDM- 31st Batch (Sem-I)

Healthcare Information systems

Healthcare Information systems Overview of healthcare information Technologies Lack of relevant system-wide healthcare Information technology causes significant expenses that come in the form of the increased number of the workforce and wasted time. Research suggests that lack of appropriate IT platforms to deliver healthcare service contributes to over 10% increase in healthcare costs.Advertising We will write a custom essay sample on Healthcare Information systems specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More Therefore, IT systems are inextricably connected to healthcare costs for healthcare institutions, which trickle down to the population. Increased healthcare costs have prompted healthcare institutions to adopt cost-saving IT systems to optimize their returns while ensuring the delivery of quality service (Rodrigues, 2009). There are many IT applications from which healthcare institutions can choose to improve the quality of service and reduce costs of delivering healthca re services. However, every institution must be able to select an IT base that is relevant and appropriate to its condition. Improving the Quality of Medication Information technology has the potential to improve the quality of healthcare services. Studies show that most healthcare providers believe that adopting clinical IT systems improve the extent to which they can deliver quality patient care. IT systems can solve some of the problems posed by fragmented IT systems. Computerized Physician Order Entry (CPOE) has become of the key clinical IT systems that have gained significant application in most clinical and medical institutions (Rodrigues, 2009). Research shows that the application of CPOE reduces the frequency of repeat tests. The quality of healthcare service is connected with the number of repeat tests that a patient undergoes before a successful diagnosis is achieved. Surveys conducted on patients reveals that patients rated physicians based on the number of unsuccessful diagnosis or tests for their illness. The use of CPOE reduces turnaround times for laboratory, pharmacy and radiography request applications made. Some medical studies have suggested that using CPOE reduces the error frequency during medical surgeries. According to a survey conducted by Bates et al. (1998), the application of CPOE systems had the ability to reduce medication errors by 55%. Out of 11 studies that aimed at estimating the accuracy of medication using CPOE, four studies showed that CPOE achieved to reduce errors, and improved the quality of medication and patient safety. Studies show that the introduction of CPOE as an IT platform is a nonfinancial incentive for healthcare professionals. Surveys conducted in hospitals using CPOE shows that healthcare professionals are motivated to deliver quality service compared to hospitals that did not implement these technologies. It is significant to note that the professionals’ perception of quality service is inextricably linked to availability of alternative IT tools (Bates Gawande, 2003).Advertising Looking for essay on it? Let's see if we can help you! Get your first paper with 15% OFF Learn More Recent studies have surveyed the value of using CPOE in ambulatory procedures. These studies suggest that a worldwide application of CPOE can improve quality healthcare among patients while saving their money. Reduction of drug events is a key focus by many physicians (Bates Gawande, 2003). Given this need, many clinicians have indicated that CPOE helps to reduce adverse drug events and other related medication errors because it offers cost effective medications, drug prescriptions, and laboratory tests (Bates Gawande, 2003). Reducing the cost of healthcare The use of Electronic Health Record (EHR) reduces the costs of handling medical records and increases the level of access. Studies show that the costs of collecting, storing, and retrieving medical records can have significan t cost implication on institutional costs. One of the main problems facing healthcare professionals is the lack of access to centralized information sharing platforms. Research has shown that the use of EHR has the potential of providing better documentation of patient histories (Bates Gawande, 2003). The extent to which professionals can share medical information with ease enables physicians to use medical histories, which reduces the costs of beginning new diagnosis and medication (Scalet, 2003). Evidence suggests that reduced transcription and medical management expenses are linked with the physicians’ use of electronic health records. According Bates Gawande (2003), financial returns depend on the extent to which a medical organization adapts to effective use of EHR. The paths toward a cost-effective healthcare system stem from getting the critical mass of physicians choosing to use electronic health record systems. Some studies suggest that the use of electronic health records can save up to $20,000 per healthcare professional. The adoption of electronic medical record (EMR) is a centerpiece in reducing the costs of providing healthcare services (Memorial Care, 2010). The use of traditional manila folders is believed to cost many hospitals millions of money due to loss or inaccessibility of critical patient and administrative records. EMR transmits important medical records in real-time and helps medical practitioners to have access to information in a timely manner. This avoids waste of time, which reduces costs of searching and retrieving medical histories (Memorial Care, 2010). Lack of systemized record management increases clinicians time and workload, which exerts pressure and workload.Advertising We will write a custom essay sample on Healthcare Information systems specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More Studies content that it can cost a medical organization over $20,000 per clinician due to error s caused by increased workload and service time. Therefore, implementing electronic medical records has the potential of reducing workloads and extra working hours, which has a significant impact on the quality and cost of providing medical services to patients (Bates Gawande, 2003). References Bates, D. W., Gawande, A. A. (2003). Improving safety with information technology. New England Journal of Medicine 348(25), 2526-2534. Memorial Care. (2010). How electronic medical records reduce costs and improve patient outcomes. Retrieved from https://www.memorialcare.org/about/pressroom/media/how-electronic-medical-records-reduce-costs-and-improve-patient-outcomes-2010 Rodrigues, J. (2009). Health Information Systems: Concepts, Methodologies, Tools and Applications. New York, NY: Idea Group Inc (IGI). Scalet, S. 2003. Saving money, saving lives. CIO Magazine. Retrieved from https://www.cio.com/

Acting and Acting Styles Assignment Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 250 words

Acting and Acting Styles - Assignment Example This provides the viewer with face to face interaction with the actor (Gibbs, 2013). The most common acting styles in film industry are naturalistic and stylized acting. Naturalistic actors are mandated to be in oneness with the character’s dress, mannerism and upbringing. He must have un-distinguishable character. Stylized acting depends on an approach that is more conspicuous to put across the director’s point. They produce comic effect through characteristic hyperbolism through dramatizing (Anderson, 2009). The significant placement of actor is known as blocking. In this style the actors are positioned in a way that can shore the dominance of a character over the other. It also depicts the grandness family and other relationships possible. This is used in the film to show the supremacy of the God Father (Coppola, 1972). The special effect acting style of Rear Projection is often used to give an illusion of a film scene on a location. It involves a combination of present foreground action and pre-filmed background footage. It is common in driving scenes. The un-realistic looking technique of this style is evident in the Romantic comedy by Hudson (Reed,

Gender, Race, and Philosophy Research Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 250 words

Gender, Race, and Philosophy - Research Paper Example The main traditional, philosophical discourse had been that women were lesser human beings than men. But after feminist philosophers had demonstrated that women too had the capacity to do virtually anything men could do during the second half of the 20th century, predominantly male societies have over the history gradually given women more options in individual and social life (Solomon, & Higgins, 2013). It is then arguable that de Beauvoir’s The Second Sex has had tremendous impacts on womens rights and gender roles by allowing women more authority over their reproductive, educational, career and suffrage rights among others. Apart from de Beauvoir, Schick and Vaugh (2008) said, Mahatma Gandhi was one of the most prominent 20th century figures in India who is credited for acknowledging women’s efforts as imperative to every society. Gandhi had a soft spot for women. He perceived them as complementing men’s contribution in the growth of society. Gandhi castigated stereotyping women as weak and lesser by refusing child marriage and obsession for dowry as well as seclusion (purdah). He, however, believed that proper gender roles demanded that a woman meets the interests of her husband, family and society, in that