Today our presentation will briefly go over the simulation, what our business strategy was, give you an overview about our products, talk about how we did based on finances, what some of our trials and tribulations were, and conclude with what we learned.-Each team will have 20 minutes to present with Q&A after- PPT (15 - 20 slides)- Design: professional slides (send eric slides to look at prior), simple backgrounds, minimal animation, bullet-points- Content: 3 sections
So we were all given the task to manage a sensor company. We were in charge of four business functions: R&D, marketing, production, and finance. Selling our products required us to make decisions in all four functions. There were 5 segmented markets: low end which sells on price, traditional which sells on ?, high end, etc, etc. In the beginning we had 3 rounds of practice and that’s where most of our current strategy for the simulation comes in. We learned that is important to oversee all functions together because they all need to work together to make a successful product. We learned that we had to be aggressive with our decisions. We also learned that external influences both from the customer’s demands and the competitors impacted how we made our decisions. It was better to be proactive to these environments than reactive.
Talk about the products and the strategy behind all of the products. What we tried to do when making those decisions. And then talk about how we accomplished our firm’s strategy by comparing the industry average’s market share for each product to our market share and how we were better for High, Performance, and Size.
So this is how we did. We did really well.
Talk about some of the improves we made. Go through the graph and highlight our changing stock prices.
Talk about some of the things that hurt our performance: high inventory left over (bad forecasting), how we didn’t budget for promotions/sales, what our r&d costs were like.
So after all of the simulations, capsim taught us these things. We learned that communication between our team members was crucial to making the right decision. It really helped when we all met and made joint decisions on how to proceed in each round rather than doing things individually. We also learned that coordination between various business units was important for our business to function. Marketing, R&D, finances, and production all worked together and all of the decisions made in one function impacted another function. Because of the exposure to all of these units, we also learned the different perspectives of these subjects. We’re all marketing majors but we learned about more about disciplines like supply chain and accounting. We learned about how a company needs to be aware of both external and internal influences. Our decisions were impacted by the consumer and changes from competitors, and we wanted to make the best decisions to benefit our shareholders. And lastly, we learned to think strategically. We had to be able to forecast product decisions and learned about long-term planning.
CHESTER, INC Sensor Company Cameron Fuller, Christina Kurow, Carmen Leung, Jennifer Noinaj, Miranda Rodriguez, Adam Swiatek, Jonathan Wong BA420 | April 26, 2010
Agenda 1. Simulation Overview 2. Business Strategy 3. Product Information 4. Financial Performance 5. Trials and Tribulations 6. Conclusions
Introduction Sensor company: Research & Development, Marketing, Production and Finance Segmented markets: Low End, Traditional, High End, Performance and Size 3 practice rounds Business functions intertwine with one another closely Aggressive strategy Consumer demand & competition: proactive vs reactive Overview 3
Business Strategy Our Positioning Technology leader Tech savvy consumers: innovative & first-movers Targeted Segmentation High technology niche differentiator High End Size Performance Premium pricing Technologically superior products Minimizing size, maximizing performance Strategy 4
Product Perceptual Map Products Low End Performance Traditional Size High End 5
Products Products Cake (traditional) Less emphasis Cedar (low) No big changes Cid (traditional) Phased out high end Coat (performance) Max perf criteria Cure (size) Max size criteria Cat (high) Newly introduced 6
Successful Decisions R&D decisions within the customer’s ideal criteria range Constant comparisons to competitors Added Cat into high end Portfolio diversification Investment in automation Trials 10
Unsuccessful Decisions Skimping out on advertising Wrong sales team adjustments Emergency loans Inconsistent investment in capacity Forecasting was poor – leftover inventory Product going outside perceptual map Trial & error Trials 11
Lessons Learned Communication within the team for decisions Coordination between the various business units Different perspectives on multiple disciplines Awareness of both the competitors and the stakeholders Strategic thinking Take-aways 12