Consumers and their values have changed; the way in which brands need to interact with them has changed; and research has changed. Some of these changes were in the works prior to the recession, but what is clear is that the downturn provided a huge impetus to their acceleration. Social media, in particular, have changed the way in which consumers interact with each other and the brands they use. This has tremendous implications for research itself. If we think about it, the value set of CMOs, their companies and their research directors are all changing fundamentally. This will mean that not only the types of research but the very definition of research itself will start to change. In the end, it is all about understanding people and how they affect our business decisions. How we go about doing that is less important than the fact that we continue to be the pre-eminent people who can do it.
Over the last 24 months, three publicly traded, North American companies (Menu Foods, Matteland Maple Leaf Foods) have provided researchers and practitioners with ample evidence that the most valuable crisis management and communications responses are not determined by the size of the crisis plan but by the effectiveness of the organization's leadership, mindset and organizational culture. Being prepared for a crisis is one thing but being able to react quickly in today's hypersensitive marketplace takes anticipation, readiness and a sense that operating in a crisis mode is now the new normal. The presenters review results from an eight-month study, conducted in partnership with McMaster University and Leger Marketing, where they were able to isolate the value of immediate crisis communications activities on customer loyalty in the case of Maple Leaf Foods.
This paper reviews key issues of the industry consolidation process which has reshaped the landscape, describe the failure rates observed and state the key dimensions that should be carefully considered in order to reduce these risks.
This paper shows the need for totally different thinking. There are three sectors of thinking: network thinking; future open thinking; and strategic thinking. Only the combination of these aspects of thinking can deal with the future in an efficient and economic way. This combination is necessary to make decisions in a complex and uncertain environment (navigating in a rough sea). Moreover, markets and customers are quickly changing and trends reveal that markets and demands will change increasingly quicker so that traditional decision making instruments will no longer work.Examples show how to handle various complex and uncertain decisive situations. One most difficult and challenging question is recognition of risks and crisis before competitors. An even more difficult question is how to find and use opportunities in the markets. These questions will be answered with an early warning system that will help to think in alternatives. One can 'fore think' opportunities and risks in the markets using a strategic early warning system. The systematic approach can be supported by the Future Scorecard, which is explained in detail in this paper.
Risk-taking is central to modern business, and the source of energy which drives wealth creation. Understanding and predicting risk therefore places market research squarely in the boardroom, instead of tinkering on the sidelines. The results of ongoing global studies on attitudes to risk, consumer priorities, global brands and globalisation, and investor/consumer behaviour are described. Market research needs to be about risk-reduction, risk-taking, and conscience, for the benefit of consumers, corporations and society as a whole, to ensure its significant place in risk management.
Market researchers should be comfortable with taking more risks and trying to elevate their position proactively. That's the major challenge currently posed to the industry,.
The quest for a cheap and reliable method for developing and launching successful new products is probably futile. Indeed this paper proposes that for a firm to develop profitably it is not strictly necessary to be able to predict how well its new publishing concepts will perform in the future, ie The Crystal Ball. What we need instead is to seek practical ways of limiting the scale of losses when a new product gets into difficulties, ie. Risk Management. In this way, a publisher can afford many more launches with a better chance that some will be successes big enough to outweigh the short-lived failures. The chief cause of runaway losses when a new magazine or newspaper finds itself falling short of sales targets is that senior managers a) have not planned for any other scenario but success in the prelaunch phase and b) have not installed or implemented systems for detecting problems early and taking rapid corrective action after the launch. The researchers have the unenviable task of attempting to contribute to management decisions at all stages before, during and after the launch. That they will allocate adequate budgets for quantitative as well as qualitative reader surveys, and for rapid, accurate retail audits before and after the launch. That they will aim for continuity and consistency in monitoring all aspects of each launch, including measures that may not be under the control of researchers eg advertising page yields, unsold copies, merchandising activity, etc. If such a policy is conscientiously pursued, techniques may be acquired over the years that have increasingly reliable predictive powers. We may, with persistence and luck, find that the organization has brought together a collection of skills, applied to an invaluable historical database, that deserves to be called - despite blemishes and occasional cloudiness - a Crystal Rail.
Probably 95% or more of all NPD in the durables sector is associated with product evolution and range extension. Once in a while, with luck, the NPD marketer gets the opportunity to substantially innovate a product category. The process isn't that different from managing an evolutionary development, but the risks involved tend to be much higher. No comforting files of historical data plotting the market development and the company's performance against that of its competitors. No carefully structured segmentation or price point analysis. Just an idea, and a belief that it can be turned into a commercial success. This paper outlines one such idea and how that idea was nurtured and finally brought to market with the help, or in spite of the many hurdles and procedures bound up with the product development process in a large company. The paper does not seek to preach any doctrine, merely to illustrate how one project was successfully completed.
Business Marketing decisions are said to be rational although the marketing input is generally non-rational, or worse, emotional. In this paper, a method of calculating the added value on business marketing decisions is discussed. The method is based on the Capital Asset Pricing Model, that is used to estimate the value of (a portfolio of) stocks. This method basically comes down to a relationship between the risk of a portfolio and the (minimum) return that is required. If the risk changes than the return changes. If a marketing decision has to be taken, a similar calculation can be made Take the marketing portfolio without the planned action and see what the return is, compared to the risks involved. Minimum risk is obtained at the point where your money is put on the bank (no marketing actions). This return is called the riskfree reward Now compare the marketing portfolio with the planned action and compare it with the above-mentioned risk-return relation. You will thus get a minimum return claim (as a percentage), which can be used as the discount factor in a normal net present value calculation. The resulting net present value is called the Strategic Added Value of the decision. Variations in risks come down to variations in the discount factor. Scenario's aim primarily at the valuations of risks, and not at the variation of cashflows. This, unfortunately, is advised too often. If the risk is known and the reward is high enough, the decision to go along with the marketing action depends on the risk awareness of the decision-maker. If he is risk-averse he most likely will not start the marketing activities, although the reward is high enough to take the risk. That's something for non-rational decision making. In this article, a simple net present value technique is discussed, followed by a more detailed description of the discount factor and the comparison with a standard scenario type of evaluation of strategic business marketing.