https://hbr.org/2015/01/what-is-a-business-model WHAT IS A BUINESS MODEL? In The New, New Thing, Michael Lewis refers to the phrase business model as “a term of art.”  And like art itself, it’s one of those things many people feel they can recognize when they see it (especially a particularly clever or terrible one) but can’t quite define. That’s less surprising than it seems because how people define the term really depends on how they’re using it. Lewis, for example, offers up the simplest of definitions — “All it really meant was how you planned to make money” — to make a simple point about the dot.com bubble, obvious now, but fairly prescient when he was writing at its height, in the fall of 1999.  The term, he says dismissively, was “central to the Internet boom; it glorified all manner of half-baked plans … The “business model” for Microsoft, for instance, was to sell software for 120 bucks a pop that cost fifty cents to manufacture … The business model of most Internet companies was to attract huge crowds of people to a Web site, and then sell others the chance to advertise products to the crowds. It was still not clear that the model made sense.” Well, maybe not then. A look through HBR’s archives shows the many ways business thinkers use the concept and how that can skew the definitions. Lewis himself echoes many people’s impression of how Peter Drucker defined the term — “assumptions about what a company gets paid for” — which is part of Drucker’s “theory of the business.” That’s a concept Drucker introduced in a 1994 HBR article that in fact never mentions the term business model. Drucker’s theory of the business was a set of assumptions about what a business will and won’t do, closer to Michael Porter’s definition of strategy. In addition to what a company is paid for, “these assumptions are about markets. They are about identifying customers and competitors, their values and behavior. They are about technology and its dynamics, about a company’s strengths and weaknesses.” Drucker is more interested in the assumptions than the money here because he’s introduced the theory of the business concept to explain how smart companies fail to keep Citing as a sterling example one of the most strategically nimble companies of all time — IBM — he explains that sooner or later, some assumption you have about what’s critical to your company will turn out to be no longer true. In IBM’s case, having made the shift from tabulating machine company to hardware leaser to a vendor of mainframe, minicomputer, and even PC hardware, Big Blue finally runs adrift on its assumption that it’s essentially in the hardware business, Drucker says (though subsequent history shows that IBM manages eventually to free itself even of that assumption and make money through services for quite some time). Joan Magretta, too, cites Drucker when she defines what a business model is in “Why Business Models Matter,” partly as a corrective to Lewis. Writing in 2002, the de ...

1. https://hbr.org/2015/01/what-is-a-business-model
WHAT IS A BUINESS MODEL?
In The New, New Thing, Michael Lewis refers to the
phrase business model as “a term of art.” And like art itself,
it’s one of those things many people feel they can recognize
when they see it (especially a particularly clever or terrible one)
but can’t quite define.
That’s less surprising than it seems because how people define
the term really depends on how they’re using it.
Lewis, for example, offers up the simplest of definitions — “All
it really meant was how you planned to make money” — to
make a simple point about the dot.com bubble, obvious now, but
fairly prescient when he was writing at its height, in the fall of
1999. The term, he says dismissively, was “central to the
Internet boom; it glorified all manner of half-baked plans …
The “business model” for Microsoft, for instance, was to sell
software for 120 bucks a pop that cost fifty cents to
manufacture … The business model of most Internet companies
was to attract huge crowds of people to a Web site, and then sell
others the chance to advertise products to the crowds. It was
still not clear that the model made sense.” Well, maybe not
then.
A look through HBR’s archives shows the many ways business
thinkers use the concept and how that can skew the definitions.
Lewis himself echoes many people’s impression of how Peter
Drucker defined the term — “assumptions about what a
company gets paid for” — which is part of Drucker’s “theory of
the business.”
That’s a concept Drucker introduced in a 1994 HBR article that
in fact never mentions the term business model. Drucker’s
theory of the business was a set of assumptions about what a
business will and won’t do, closer to Michael Porter’s definition
of strategy. In addition to what a company is paid for, “these
assumptions are about markets. They are about identifying

2. customers and competitors, their values and behavior. They are
about technology and its dynamics, about a company’s strengths
and weaknesses.”
Drucker is more interested in the assumptions than the money
here because he’s introduced the theory of the business concept
to explain how smart companies fail to keep
Citing as a sterling example one of the most strategically
nimble companies of all time — IBM — he explains that sooner
or later, some assumption you have about what’s critical to your
company will turn out to be no longer true. In IBM’s case,
having made the shift from tabulating machine company to
hardware leaser to a vendor of mainframe, minicomputer, and
even PC hardware, Big Blue finally runs adrift on its
assumption that it’s essentially in the hardware business,
Drucker says (though subsequent history shows that IBM
manages eventually to free itself even of that assumption and
make money through services for quite some time).
Joan Magretta, too, cites Drucker when she defines what a
business model is in “Why Business Models Matter,” partly as a
corrective to Lewis. Writing in 2002, the depths of the dot.com
bust, she says that business models are “at heart, stories —
stories that explain how enterprises work. A good business
model answers Peter Drucker’s age-old questions, ‘Who is the
customer? And what does the customer value?’ It also answers
the fundamental questions every manager must ask: How do we
make money in this business? What is the underlying economic
logic that explains how we can deliver value to customers at an
appropriate cost?”
Magretta, like Drucker, is focused more on the assumptions than
on the money, pointing out that the term business model first
came into widespread use with the advent of the personal
computer and the spreadsheet, which let various components be
tested and, well, modeled. Before that, successful business
models “were created more by accident than by design or
foresight, and became clear only after the fact. By enabling
companies to tie their marketplace insights much more tightly to

3. the resulting economics — to link their assumptions about how
people would behave to the numbers of a pro forma P&L —
spreadsheets made it possible to model businesses before they
were launched.”
Since her focus is on business modeling, she finds it useful to
further define a business model in terms of the value chain.
A business model, she says, has two parts: “Part one includes
all the activities associated with making something: designing
it, purchasing raw materials, manufacturing, and so on. Part two
includes all the activities associated with selling something:
finding and reaching customers, transacting a sale, distributing
the product, or delivering the service. A new business model
may turn on designing a new product for an unmet need or on a
process innovation. That is it may be new in either end.”
Firmly in the “a business model is really a set of assumptions or
hypotheses” camp is Alex Osterwalder, who has developed what
is arguably the most comprehensive template on which to
construct those hypotheses. His nine-part “business model
canvas” is essentially an organized way to lay out your
assumptions about not only the key resources and key activities
of your value chain, but also your value proposition, customer
relationships, channels, customer segments, cost structures, and
revenue streams — to see if you’ve missed anything important
and to compare your model to others.
Once you begin to compare one model with another, you’re
entering the realms of strategy, with which business models are
often confused. In “Why Business Models Matter,” Magretta
goes back to first principles to make a simple and useful
distinction, pointing out that a business model is a description
of how your business runs, but a competitive strategy explains
how you will do better than your rivals. That could be by
offering a better business model — but it can also be by
offering the same business model to a different market.
Introducing a better business model into an existing market is
the definition of a disruptive innovation. To help strategists
understand how that works Clay Christensen presented a

4. particular take on the matter in “In Reinventing Your Business
Model” designed to make it easier to work out how a new
entrant’s business model might disrupt yours. This
approach begins by focusing on the customer value proposition
— what Christensen calls the customer’s “job-to-be-done.” It
then identifies those aspects of the profit formula, the
processes, and the resources that make the rival offering not
only better, but harder to copy or respond to — a different
distribution system, perhaps (the iTunes store); or faster
inventory turns (Kmart); or maybe a different manufacturing
approach (steel minimills).
Many writers have suggested signs that could indicate that your
current business model is running out of gas. The first
symptom, Rita McGrath says in “When Your Business Model is
In Trouble,” is when innovations to your current offerings
create smaller and smaller improvements (and Christensen
would agree). You should also be worried, she says, when your
own people have trouble thinking up new improvements at all or
your customers are increasingly finding new alternatives.
Knowing you need one and creating one are, of course, two
vastly different things. Any number of articles focus more
specifically on ways managers can get beyond their current
business model to conceive of a new one. In “Four Paths to
Business Model Innovation,” Karan Giotra and Serguei
Netessine look at ways to think about creating a new model by
altering your current business model in four broad categories:
by changing the mix of products or services, postponing
decisions, changing the people who make the decisions, and
changing incentives in the value chain.
In “How to Design a Winning Business Model,” Ramon
Cassadesus-Masanell and Joan Ricart focus on the choices
managers must make when determining the processes needed to
deliver the offering, dividing them broadly into policy
choices (such as using union or nonunion workers; locating
plants in rural areas, encouraging employees to fly coach
class), asset choices (manufacturing plants, satellite

5. communication systems); and governance choices (who has the
rights to make the other two categories of decisions).
If all of this has left your head swimming, then Mark Johnson,
who went on in his book Seizing the White Space to fill in the
details of the idea presented in “Reinventing Your Business
Model,” offers up perhaps the most useful starting point —
this list of analogies, adapted from that book:
Wang 5
Professor: Dr. Paul J. Bailo
Course: INTG1-GC 2120 006
Date: September 11, 2019
Ecommerce Reconsidered: You Might Need a Shopping Cart
After All
Summary
The author discusses how technology has resulted in changes in
what is offered at the markets as well as how the products have
sold. The capacity to market services and goods online has
resulted in an intense influence on the general economy in the
United States and other nations around the world. However,
despite the increase in online trading, most publishing
corporations fail to have the ability to acquire orders and
implement payment dealings virtually from their webs.
Therefore, to the individuals outside the company, the absence
of e-commerce appears to be absurd since improved ecommerce
has been involved with positive influence on the marketing
outcomes (Brenneman 34). However, individuals with a better
understanding of the publication’s distribution scheme and the
printer’s monetary realities acknowledge the presence for some
essential reasons to why publishers fail to make ecommerce
supremacy, and thus, understand why most publication
companies still can't implement ecommerce even with the

6. current technological advancements.
What to agree with
From the reading, it is agreeable that there is a need for review
within the publishing industry’s marketing design. It is time for
most of the publishers that initially resolved on not acquiring or
developing ecommerce capability to reconsider their
resolutions. With the increasing technological advancements
and also the rapid growth of the need and demands of
customers, the publishers should reexamine their sales model
and the judgement of ecommerce. Because the complexity and
cost of executing online transaction competence have been
decreased considerably due to various dynamics: Vendor-Hosted
Ecom, Prevailing Infrastructure and Easier Disbursements.
The software-as-a-service (SaaS) can now deliver an
accommodated ecommerce capacity to publishers economically
and efficiently. (Brenneman 34). The publishers do not need to
worry about how to establish the branded storefronts by
themselves anymore. In addition, nowadays ecommerce sites
usually cooperated with payment gateway that could connect the
shopping website to the banking payment systems together
directly. Customer have more convenient and more secure
payment options. Along with the technique progress and
develop, it is good for both the customers and the publishers.
What not to agree with
According to the case study, we could learn that the author
thought the failure to execute online storefronts within
publication companies due to reasons like the money pit and the
usual channels being enough is contrary to the reader’s
expectations. I could not agree with that online storefronts
would not yield significant additional revenue. Or online sales
might disrupt existing distribution relationships through channel
conflicts, threatening existing revenue. And also, I do not agree
with evolving consumer behavior equals greater revenue
potential.

7. Were the channels sufficient? Although Amazon could be
considered as the most appropriately market place to serve
consumers or librarians might prefer to buy through a third-
party channel, there were still a huge potential market place for
publishers to expand. With the popularity of smart phones and
development of Internet technology, the leader of publisher
organizations should have predicted ecommerce would be is
trend of the times. Books are not like other goods, there is a
great possibility that consumers would like to buy books from
the professional publication organizations rather than a
comprehensive retail website, such as Amazon.
Evolving consumer behavior might influence the revenue
potential, but it is not 100% that could increase the revenue
potential. Because there are too many factors can affect
consumer, some change of their behavior may not have the
relationship with the revenue or inversely proportional.
Change
Theleaders should take a broad and long-term view of the
industry from macroscopically will think. For example, they
thought the usual channels were enough, however, they should
grasp the ecommerce trendy to educate their customer to accept
and adopt the new shopping method. From the marketing
perspective, sometimes we need to create the needs of
customers rather than just satisfy their needs. Think ahead of
the time is always a good way to get market shares.
In addition, the ecommerce sites of publication organizations
need to follow the trend of technological. Nowadays,
ecommerce sites are is more like an intelligent system. It isnot
only a station to shopping, but also can help customer to
manage their shopping history and check the order status. So
constantly upgrading the service and the systems of ecommerce
sites is a critical way to increase the satisfaction of user
experience.

8. Works cited
Brenneman, Andrew. You Might Need a Shopping Cart After
All; Ecommerce Reconsidered, (2015): pp 33-34.
https://hbr.org/2015/01/what-is-a-business-model
WHAT IS A BUINESS MODEL?
In The New, New Thing, Michael Lewis refers to the
phrase business model as “a term of art.” And like art itself,
it’s one of those things many people feel they can recognize
when they see it (especially a particularly clever or terrible one)
but can’t quite define.
That’s less surprising than it seems because how people define
the term really depends on how they’re using it.
Lewis, for example, offers up the simplest of definitions — “All
it really meant was how you planned to make money” — to
make a simple point about the dot.com bubble, obvious now, but
fairly prescient when he was writing at its height, in the fall of
1999. The term, he says dismissively, was “central to the
Internet boom; it glorified all manner of half-baked plans …
The “business model” for Microsoft, for instance, was to sell
software for 120 bucks a pop that cost fifty cents to
manufacture … The business model of most Internet companies
was to attract huge crowds of people to a Web site, and then sell
others the chance to advertise products to the crowds. It was
still not clear that the model made sense.” Well, maybe not
then.
A look through HBR’s archives shows the many ways business
thinkers use the concept and how that can skew the definitions.
Lewis himself echoes many people’s impression of how Peter
Drucker defined the term — “assumptions about what a
company gets paid for” — which is part of Drucker’s “theory of
the business.”
That’s a concept Drucker introduced in a 1994 HBR article that
in fact never mentions the term business model. Drucker’s

9. theory of the business was a set of assumptions about what a
business will and won’t do, closer to Michael Porter’s definition
of strategy. In addition to what a company is paid for, “these
assumptions are about markets. They are about identifying
customers and competitors, their values and behavior. They are
about technology and its dynamics, about a company’s strengths
and weaknesses.”
Drucker is more interested in the assumptions than the money
here because he’s introduced the theory of the business concept
to explain how smart companies fail to keep
Citing as a sterling example one of the most strategically
nimble companies of all time — IBM — he explains that sooner
or later, some assumption you have about what’s critical to your
company will turn out to be no longer true. In IBM’s case,
having made the shift from tabulating machine company to
hardware leaser to a vendor of mainframe, minicomputer, and
even PC hardware, Big Blue finally runs adrift on its
assumption that it’s essentially in the hardware business,
Drucker says (though subsequent history shows that IBM
manages eventually to free itself even of that assumption and
make money through services for quite some time).
Joan Magretta, too, cites Drucker when she defines what a
business model is in “Why Business Models Matter,” partly as a
corrective to Lewis. Writing in 2002, the depths of the dot.com
bust, she says that business models are “at heart, stories —
stories that explain how enterprises work. A good business
model answers Peter Drucker’s age-old questions, ‘Who is the
customer? And what does the customer value?’ It also answers
the fundamental questions every manager must ask: How do we
make money in this business? What is the underlying economic
logic that explains how we can deliver value to customers at an
appropriate cost?”
Magretta, like Drucker, is focused more on the assumptions than
on the money, pointing out that the term business model first
came into widespread use with the advent of the personal
computer and the spreadsheet, which let various components be

10. tested and, well, modeled. Before that, successful business
models “were created more by accident than by design or
foresight, and became clear only after the fact. By enabling
companies to tie their marketplace insights much more tightly to
the resulting economics — to link their assumptions about how
people would behave to the numbers of a pro forma P&L —
spreadsheets made it possible to model businesses before they
were launched.”
Since her focus is on business modeling, she finds it useful to
further define a business model in terms of the value chain.
A business model, she says, has two parts: “Part one includes
all the activities associated with making something: designing
it, purchasing raw materials, manufacturing, and so on. Part two
includes all the activities associated with selling something:
finding and reaching customers, transacting a sale, distributing
the product, or delivering the service. A new business model
may turn on designing a new product for an unmet need or on a
process innovation. That is it may be new in either end.”
Firmly in the “a business model is really a set of assumptions or
hypotheses” camp is Alex Osterwalder, who has developed what
is arguably the most comprehensive template on which to
construct those hypotheses. His nine-part “business model
canvas” is essentially an organized way to lay out your
assumptions about not only the key resources and key activities
of your value chain, but also your value proposition, customer
relationships, channels, customer segments, cost structures, and
revenue streams — to see if you’ve missed anything important
and to compare your model to others.
Once you begin to compare one model with another, you’re
entering the realms of strategy, with which business models are
often confused. In “Why Business Models Matter,” Magretta
goes back to first principles to make a simple and useful
distinction, pointing out that a business model is a description
of how your business runs, but a competitive strategy explains
how you will do better than your rivals. That could be by
offering a better business model — but it can also be by

11. offering the same business model to a different market.
Introducing a better business model into an existing market is
the definition of a disruptive innovation. To help strategists
understand how that works Clay Christensen presented a
particular take on the matter in “In Reinventing Your Business
Model” designed to make it easier to work out how a new
entrant’s business model might disrupt yours. This
approach begins by focusing on the customer value proposition
— what Christensen calls the customer’s “job-to-be-done.” It
then identifies those aspects of the profit formula, the
processes, and the resources that make the rival offering not
only better, but harder to copy or respond to — a different
distribution system, perhaps (the iTunes store); or faster
inventory turns (Kmart); or maybe a different manufacturing
approach (steel minimills).
Many writers have suggested signs that could indicate that your
current business model is running out of gas. The first
symptom, Rita McGrath says in “When Your Business Model is
In Trouble,” is when innovations to your current offerings
create smaller and smaller improvements (and Christensen
would agree). You should also be worried, she says, when your
own people have trouble thinking up new improvements at all or
your customers are increasingly finding new alternatives.
Knowing you need one and creating one are, of course, two
vastly different things. Any number of articles focus more
specifically on ways managers can get beyond their current
business model to conceive of a new one. In “Four Paths to
Business Model Innovation,” Karan Giotra and Serguei
Netessine look at ways to think about creating a new model by
altering your current business model in four broad categories:
by changing the mix of products or services, postponing
decisions, changing the people who make the decisions, and
changing incentives in the value chain.
In “How to Design a Winning Business Model,” Ramon
Cassadesus-Masanell and Joan Ricart focus on the choices
managers must make when determining the processes needed to

12. deliver the offering, dividing them broadly into policy
choices (such as using union or nonunion workers; locating
plants in rural areas, encouraging employees to fly coach
class), asset choices (manufacturing plants, satellite
communication systems); and governance choices (who has the
rights to make the other two categories of decisions).
If all of this has left your head swimming, then Mark Johnson,
who went on in his book Seizing the White Space to fill in the
details of the idea presented in “Reinventing Your Business
Model,” offers up perhaps the most useful starting point —
this list of analogies, adapted from that book:
Name:
Professor:
Course:
Date: September 11, 2019
Digital Strategies of Consumer Involvement and Innovation
Dynamics: A Cross-Sector Explorative Study
Summary
The author in this study explores the effectiveness of the
digital technology and advanced web tool on the business-
customer relationship. The advancement in technology and
introduction of different web tools has played a significant role
in enhancing the relationship between the customer and the
organizations because with the help of digital technology
knowledge from the customer side is easily utilized by most of
the organization. The traditional production process has been
converted because the digitalization has made possible the
utilization of both external and internal knowledge in the
production process (Paolocci 24). The firms whose production
process is still dependent on the internal information and lacks
the involvement of the consumer in producing the products
makes their products less attractive because in modern world

13. customer demands the product based on their knowledge and
need and for this purpose social media websites are playing an
important role in connecting the customers to the brands.
Social media enables the organizations to communicate
effectively with their target groups and gather the information
related to their need and perception regarding the design,
quality, features and production process of the product. This has
made many organizations in attaining the successful position in
the market by producing the successful products involving both
the requirements of the customers and also the organization that
made the product more effective and successful.
There are different dimensions analyzed by this study that
are perceived as the important component of making the
customer-business relationship healthy and successful and it
includes relationship, engagement, value co-creation and
openness (Paolocci 29). All the components are entirely
dependent on the effective communication among the customer
and the brand that results in successful association,
commitments, value creation and openness.
What do you agree with?
The concept from the study that web has totally altered the
relationship between the customer and the business is agreeable
(Paolocci 22). The communication level and techniques have
been altered that has become more efficient and is quite helpful
in creating the healthy relationship among the customer and the
brand. The adoption of the smart phones and tablets to the
digital billboards and attractive television ads, both consumers
and brands are trying to hold and utilize the non-stop supply of
new technology. This results in the continue change in the way
through which customers communicate and interact with the
brands and it is perceived that this change in the relationship
will be constant with the advancement in the technology and
marketing techniques based on the advanced technology.
Social media is the main platform that has altered the
relationship between the customers and brands as it has
provided open opportunity to both customers and brands to

14. communicate openly and effectively for the most advanced
production and innovation and to some level it has also
increased the level of risk of the brands.
What not to agree with?
According to the author Consumer Packaged Goods (CPG)
are still largely dependent on the traditional techniques like
feedback channel, suggestion channel and more traditional
market driven channel. Consumer packaged goods sector is
more inclined towards the latest marketing techniques rather
than traditional and many companies in CGS sector has
experienced the marketing shift and their center of attention is
more a retail outlet designing the service models and marketing
techniques that directly connects them to their consumers.
Almost every sector of the economy is adopting the
advanced technological techniques and CPG customers are
highly dependent on the advanced research before getting the
product and also helping the respective organizations in
development of a high quality and effective product with the
more organic products. Web has enabled the customers to get
the things online and this makes the customers to do a proper
research before getting the product and share their experience
and demand that helps the company is production of the high
quality products based on the customers demand.
What would you change and Why?
Managers of the respective must work hard in creating and
maintaining the one-to-one relationship with the respective
customers by focusing on and fulfilling their demands because
customers are an important asset of the company and the
advancement in technology, immense usage of social media and
increased competition in the market has also increased the risk
and challenges for the brands. The increased use of social media
is both useful and risky at the same time for the brands because
it has enabled the customers to gather information from other
customers regarding the products and a positive feedback can
play a significant role in the success of the company and a
negative feedback can be risky for the company because of the

15. increased competition.
In the modern world it is quite impossible to ignore the
impact of the digitalization on both the company and customer
life as both utilizes it and it has also became the major source
of communication among the customers and organizations.
Effective communication can lead to formation of quality
product and service because it enables both the company and
customer to understand the wants and needs of each other and
with mutual understanding and multi-dimensions of knowledge
they successfully produce the good and service that is
competitively advantageous and of high quality.
Reference
Paolocci, Eleonora. Digital Strategies of Consumer Involvement
and Innovation Dynamics: A Cross-Sector Explorative Study,
(2014): pp 21-39.

16. Name:
Professor:
Course:
Date: September 11, 2019
Digital Strategies of Consumer Involvement and Innovation
Dynamics: A Cross-Sector Explorative Study
Summary
The author in this study explores the effectiveness of the
digital technology and advanced web tool on the business-
customer relationship. The advancement in technology and
introduction of different web tools has played a significant role
in enhancing the relationship between the customer and the
organizations because with the help of digital technology
knowledge from the customer side is easily utilized by most of
the organization. The traditional production process has been
converted because the digitalization has made possible the
utilization of both external and internal knowledge in the
production process (Paolocci 24). The firms whose production
process is still dependent on the internal information and lacks
the involvement of the consumer in producing the products
makes their products less attractive because in modern world
customer demands the product based on their knowledge and
need and for this purpose social media websites are playing an
important role in connecting the customers to the brands.
Social media enables the organizations to communicate
effectively with their target groups and gather the information
related to their need and perception regarding the design,
quality, features and production process of the product. This has
made many organizations in attaining the successful position in
the market by producing the successful products involving both
the requirements of the customers and also the organization that
made the product more effective and successful.

17. There are different dimensions analyzed by this study that
are perceived as the important component of making the
customer-business relationship healthy and successful and it
includes relationship, engagement, value co-creation and
openness (Paolocci 29). All the components are entirely
dependent on the effective communication among the customer
and the brand that results in successful association,
commitments, value creation and openness.
What do you agree with?
The concept from the study that web has totally altered the
relationship between the customer and the business is agreeable
(Paolocci 22). The communication level and techniques have
been altered that has become more efficient and is quite helpful
in creating the healthy relationship among the customer and the
brand. The adoption of the smart phones and tablets to the
digital billboards and attractive television ads, both consumers
and brands are trying to hold and utilize the non-stop supply of
new technology. This results in the continue change in the way
through which customers communicate and interact with the
brands and it is perceived that this change in the relationship
will be constant with the advancement in the technology and
marketing techniques based on the advanced technology.
Social media is the main platform that has altered the
relationship between the customers and brands as it has
provided open opportunity to both customers and brands to
communicate openly and effectively for the most advanced
production and innovation and to some level it has also
increased the level of risk of the brands.
What not to agree with?
According to the author Consumer Packaged Goods (CPG)
are still largely dependent on the traditional techniques like
feedback channel, suggestion channel and more traditional
market driven channel. Consumer packaged goods sector is
more inclined towards the latest marketing techniques rather
than traditional and many companies in CGS sector has
experienced the marketing shift and their center of attention is

18. more a retail outlet designing the service models and marketing
techniques that directly connects them to their consumers.
Almost every sector of the economy is adopting the
advanced technological techniques and CPG customers are
highly dependent on the advanced research before getting the
product and also helping the respective organizations in
development of a high quality and effective product with the
more organic products. Web has enabled the customers to get
the things online and this makes the customers to do a proper
research before getting the product and share their experience
and demand that helps the company is production of the high
quality products based on the customers demand.
What would you change and Why?
Managers of the respective must work hard in creating and
maintaining the one-to-one relationship with the respective
customers by focusing on and fulfilling their demands because
customers are an important asset of the company and the
advancement in technology, immense usage of social media and
increased competition in the market has also increased the risk
and challenges for the brands. The increased use of social media
is both useful and risky at the same time for the brands because
it has enabled the customers to gather information from other
customers regarding the products and a positive feedback can
play a significant role in the success of the company and a
negative feedback can be risky for the company because of the
increased competition.
In the modern world it is quite impossible to ignore the
impact of the digitalization on both the company and customer
life as both utilizes it and it has also became the major source
of communication among the customers and organizations.
Effective communication can lead to formation of quality
product and service because it enables both the company and
customer to understand the wants and needs of each other and
with mutual understanding and multi-dimensions of knowledge
they successfully produce the good and service that is
competitively advantageous and of high quality.

19. Reference
Paolocci, Eleonora. Digital Strategies of Consumer Involvement
and Innovation Dynamics: A Cross-Sector Explorative Study,
(2014): pp 21-39.
Wang 5
Professor: Dr. Paul J. Bailo
Course: INTG1-GC 2120 006
Date: September 11, 2019
Ecommerce Reconsidered: You Might Need a Shopping Cart
After All

20. Summary
The author discusses how technology has resulted in changes in
what is offered at the markets as well as how the products have
sold. The capacity to market services and goods online has
resulted in an intense influence on the general economy in the
United States and other nations around the world. However,
despite the increase in online trading, most publishing
corporations fail to have the ability to acquire orders and
implement payment dealings virtually from their webs.
Therefore, to the individuals outside the company, the absence
of e-commerce appears to be absurd since improved ecommerce
has been involved with positive influence on the marketing
outcomes (Brenneman 34). However, individuals with a better
understanding of the publication’s distribution scheme and the
printer’s monetary realities acknowledge the presence for some
essential reasons to why publishers fail to make ecommerce
supremacy, and thus, understand why most publication
companies still can't implement ecommerce even with the
current technological advancements.
What to agree with
From the reading, it is agreeable that there is a need for review
within the publishing industry’s marketing design. It is time for
most of the publishers that initially resolved on not acquiring or
developing ecommerce capability to reconsider their
resolutions. With the increasing technological advancements
and also the rapid growth of the need and demands of
customers, the publishers should reexamine their sales model
and the judgement of ecommerce. Because the complexity and
cost of executing online transaction competence have been
decreased considerably due to various dynamics: Vendor-Hosted
Ecom, Prevailing Infrastructure and Easier Disbursements.
The software-as-a-service (SaaS) can now deliver an
accommodated ecommerce capacity to publishers economically
and efficiently. (Brenneman 34). The publishers do not need to
worry about how to establish the branded storefronts by

21. themselves anymore. In addition, nowadays ecommerce sites
usually cooperated with payment gateway that could connect the
shopping website to the banking payment systems together
directly. Customer have more convenient and more secure
payment options. Along with the technique progress and
develop, it is good for both the customers and the publishers.
What not to agree with
According to the case study, we could learn that the author
thought the failure to execute online storefronts within
publication companies due to reasons like the money pit and the
usual channels being enough is contrary to the reader’s
expectations. I could not agree with that online storefronts
would not yield significant additional revenue. Or online sales
might disrupt existing distribution relationships through channel
conflicts, threatening existing revenue. And also, I do not agree
with evolving consumer behavior equals greater revenue
potential.
Were the channels sufficient? Although Amazon could be
considered as the most appropriately market place to serve
consumers or librarians might prefer to buy through a third-
party channel, there were still a huge potential market place for
publishers to expand. With the popularity of smart phones and
development of Internet technology, the leader of publisher
organizations should have predicted ecommerce would be is
trend of the times. Books are not like other goods, there is a
great possibility that consumers would like to buy books from
the professional publication organizations rather than a
comprehensive retail website, such as Amazon.
Evolving consumer behavior might influence the revenue
potential, but it is not 100% that could increase the revenue
potential. Because there are too many factors can affect
consumer, some change of their behavior may not have the
relationship with the revenue or inversely proportional.
Change

22. Theleaders should take a broad and long-term view of the
industry from macroscopically will think. For example, they
thought the usual channels were enough, however, they should
grasp the ecommerce trendy to educate their customer to accept
and adopt the new shopping method. From the marketing
perspective, sometimes we need to create the needs of
customers rather than just satisfy their needs. Think ahead of
the time is always a good way to get market shares.
In addition, the ecommerce sites of publication organizations
need to follow the trend of technological. Nowadays,
ecommerce sites are is more like an intelligent system. It isnot
only a station to shopping, but also can help customer to
manage their shopping history and check the order status. So
constantly upgrading the service and the systems of ecommerce
sites is a critical way to increase the satisfaction of user
experience.
Works cited
Brenneman, Andrew. You Might Need a Shopping Cart After
All; Ecommerce Reconsidered, (2015): pp 33-34.