Debate component: The whole point of having a debate about a controversial
topic is that there is a plurality of points of view on the subject. Thus, you are
expected to present your point of view by supporting it with reliable sources, and
recognize its strengths but also its limitations; as well as to remain open to other
perspectives. No solution/approach is correct all the time, as it depends on
circumstances. It will therefore be important to qualify your comments: your
statement (or a classmate's statement) may be true in a certain context, but not true
in another. Being able to articulate this context is key.
Mini-case study component: Be sure to use relevant concepts and/or techniques
from the assigned readings (and properly cite the source) when answering the case
question. You are demonstrating that you can apply the new knowledge you have
acquired to a practical situation.
1. Take-Aways of the week: What are your two personal Take-Aways (TAs) about
this week's material? (for each TA, be sure to answer the What? Why? and How?
questions mentioned above)
Take-Away 1
What – My first take-away of the week was the goal formation. Goal formation allows
the business to focus on specific objectives and then manage to them, this introduces
the concept of Manage By Objective or MBO (Kotler & Keller, 2016, p. 52). The
objectives must be based on 4 criteria:
1. Must be arranged from most to least important
2. Must be quantifiable whenever possible
3. Goal must be realistic
4. Objective must be consistent
This method also works to balance between sales maximization and profit growth, as
they both cannot be achieved at the same time.
Why – This take-away is important because of how it fits with other goal setting
methods and formations that I have used. Previously I have used the SMART Goal
Method. Goals must be:
Specific
Measurable
Achievable
Realistic
Time Based (SMART Goals, n.d.)
Goal formation with MBO winnows down the SMART goals and allows for better
strategic planning and forward momentum as all of the objectives are consistent. This
is key in being able to have a clear and forward moving strategic plan.
How – I plan to utilize this in both my supervision of my team, particularly the utilizing
consistent objectives. I currently have implemented a common goal amongst
everyone’s evaluations. Additionally, I plan to use this when implementing new
changes to current processes. This will allow the projects that I manage to have a
much more focused approach and will also allow me to be more data driven.
Take-Away 2
What – My second take-away from this week was understanding that customer loyalty
does not equal profit. Companies can actually face a loss when it comes to customer
loyalty. This can be based on either the costs associated with retaining a customer,
such as providing a personalized sales team or customized website (Reinartz and
Kumar, 2014).
Why – This concept was fascinating to me because of how it seems to defy common
logic. I think that most of us were of the same mindset that loyalty really does equal
profit. We are taught to focus on our long-term clients, as the purchases that they make
over the course of their lifetime will be greater than those that may only make one or
two purchases. Reinartz and Kumar really highlighted that this is not true, but that we
also need to re-evaluate how we are utilizing data to measure this and how we are
capturing the data (2014).
How – This article really highlighted that it is all about perspective. We get mired in the
details and do not always take the opportunity to look at the big picture. I plan on
incorporating these concepts in the client satisfaction data that we collect. I think this is
even more important as my agency serves individuals with Intellectual and
Developmental Disabilities and the tools that we use are more geared toward neuro-
typical individuals. While there has been some movement on how this information as
looked, such as by agencies like the National Core Indicators, we need to truly look at
how we are focusing on data and what the data focuses on. I am pleased to see that
they have worked to move from looking at the systematic care of individuals and have
shifted to an emphasis on life experiences of people being supported (Indicators, n.d.).
2. Marketing Debate: Is "Personalized Marketing" the future of marketing or too
creepy to become mainstream?
Personalized marketing, isn’t the future of marketing, it’s been here awhile and
unfortunately, it is here to stay. In the 2013 article Social Networks, Personalized
Advertising and Privacy Controls, Tucker found that personalized marketing was ever
present at that time, and that the more personalized information that was used to target
the individual, the more effective that ad was. While I can see how the more tailored the
ad is , the more appeal it can potentially have, I find the constant barrage of ads,
especially those found on social media platforms to be inherently creepy. This move
into more and more personalization has made me evaluate the permission that I give
applications, websites and social media. An example of this was when my wife and I
where having a conversation over Facebook messenger and had joked about needing a
pregnancy test. The next day while visiting various sites online, she was targeted with
ads for pregnancy tests and related pregnancy items, such as pre-natal vitamins. None
of these were items that a mid-30s lesbian couple would need. So while personalized
marketing is here, I wish it would go.
3. Mini-case study: Read the Marketing Excellence case study about Intel on
pages 59-60 in the textbook. Answer these questions: Evaluate Intel’s recent
marketing efforts as the industry moved out of the PC era. What are Intel’s greatest
risks and strengths during this changing time?
Intel has the following risks and strengths, based on their expansion into the Mobile
Chipset (microprocessor) Market.
Risks Strengths
Late Entry to the Market Brand Recognition
Development Delays Market Share
Increased Competition Highly Innovative
To highlight some of the risks:
Intel is a late comer to the microprocessor market, entering the market in 2012
(Crothers, 2011). They were facing steep competition from Texas Instruments and
Qualcomm. Qualcomm had been in the microprocessor game, with their production of
the Snapdragon chipset since 2007 (Crothers, 2009). This late entry has also caused
development delays and increased competition.
To highlight some of the strengths:
Intel focused on their brand awareness through various marketing campaigns
throughout their company history to make sure that Intel was a household name (Kolter
and Keller, 2016, p. 59). Because processors were not something that was seen, brand
recognition and partnering with other technology firms strengthen their market position.
References
Barwise, P., & Meehan, S. (2005). Simply better. Marketing Research, 17(2), 9–14.
Boudet, J., Gregg, B., Wong, J., & Schuler, G. (n.d.). What shoppers really want from
personalized marketing. Retrieved July 23, 2020, from
[Link]
shoppers-really-want-from-personalized-marketing
Crothers, B. (2011, July 01). Intel maps out tablet plans through 2014. Retrieved July
24, 2020, from [Link]
Crothers, B. (2009, February 04). Toshiba handheld hits 1GHz with 'Snapdragon'.
Retrieved July 24, 2020, from [Link]
with-snapdragon/
Indicators. (n.d.). Retrieved July 24, 2020, from
[Link]
Jones, T. O., & Sasser Jr., W. E. (1995). Why Satisfied Customers Defect. Harvard
Business Review, 73(6), 88–91.
Kotler, P., & Keller, K. L. (2016). Marketing Management (15th ed.). Boston: Pearson
Reinartz, W., & Kumar, V. (2014, August 01). The Mismanagement of Customer
Loyalty. Retrieved July 23, 2020, from [Link]
mismanagement-of-customer-loyalty
SMART Goals: – How to Make Your Goals Achievable. (n.d.). Retrieved July 24, 2020,
from [Link]
Tucker, C. E. (2013). Social Networks, Personalized Advertising, and Privacy Controls.
Journal of Marketing Research, 51(5), 546-562.