Quiz Pemasaran Global [PDF]

Citation preview

Kasus 1 Apple versus Samsung: The Battle for Smartphone Supremacy Heats Up When Steve Jobs died in October 2011, the world lost one of the towering figures of the modern business era. Apple, the company Jobs cofounded, was a pioneer in the consumer electronics world; key product introductions included the Apple II (1977), the Macintosh (1984), the iPod and iTunes (2001), the Apple Store (2001), the iPhone (2007), and the iPad (2009). At the time of Jobs’s death, Apple was the most valuable tech company in the world. By September 2012, Apple stock had soared to record levels, briefly rising above $700 per share. In addition, Apple had amassed more than $100 billion in cash, most of it held abroad as foreign earnings. Meanwhile, once-dominant tech industry giants such as Nokia, Sony, Dell, and BlackBerry were struggling. Despite strong 2012 sales for the iPhone 5, however, industry observers began to wonder whether Apple’s hot streak of hit product introductions was starting to cool. Apple’s reputation was based on its proven ability to disrupt existing markets (e.g., the music and telecommunications industries) and create new markets with technical and design innovations. However, some viewed the 2012 launch of the iPhone 5 as an evolutionary step rather than a revolutionary breakthrough. In fact, many consumers opted to buy the slower, cheaper iPhone 4 or 4S rather than upgrade to the iPhone 5. Without Jobs, considered by many to be the heart and soul of the company, were Apple’s best days behind it? The Competitive Threat As growth in the key smartphone sector began to slow, Apple’s most formidable competitor was Samsung Electronics, a division of Korean industrial giant Samsung Group, whose products range from semiconductors to household appliances to smartphones. Samsung’s popular Galaxy series of phones are powered by Android, an operating system developed by Google. Some Galaxy models, including the Galaxy Note (also known as a “phablet”), have larger screens than the iPhone, a point of difference that has helped drive sales. The rivalry has been heated, with the two sides squaring off in court over alleged patent infringement. China and Europe are two of Samsung’s key markets; in 2012, Samsung launched the Galaxy S III in Europe. In 2013, Samsung staged a lavish event at Radio City Music Hall in New York to launch the Galaxy S4. Why the change? As J. K. Shin, the executive in charge of Samsung’s mobile business, noted, “We’re a global player in the smartphone market and a global company, and the U.S. is an important market for us . . . I’m not satisfied with our U.S. market share.” In many developing countries, there is strong demand for inexpensive mobile phones. Some Android-based models from Samsung and other companies sell for much less than the iPhone 5. For many years, Apple did not offer a lower-cost version of the iPhone. In the United States, wireless carriers such as Verizon and AT&T usually subsidize the price of the iPhone for consumers who sign a multiyear service contract. That’s why an American iPhone 5 sells for $199. By contrast, in other countries consumers pay the full, unsubsidized price of the iPhone but are not tied to a contract. Moreover, the iPhone 5 was the same in every world market. By contrast, Samsung makes several versions of the Galaxy S4—using different processors, for example—to suit the needs of different regions. Not surprisingly, smartphone makers are setting their sights on China, India, and other emerging markets. For example, Greater China, which includes China, Hong Kong, and Taiwan, is now Apple’s secondlargest market. While Apple currently commands almost a 50 percent share of the market for



phones selling for $480 and up, CEO Tim Cook is not satisfied. Distribution is critical, and Cook is aggressively expanding the number of outlets in China that sell iPhones. In 2013, Cook announced that China Mobile, the largest carrier in the region and the world’s largest carrier overall, would begin selling the iPhone. As growth in China and Europe slows, India, the number 3 smartphone market, is becoming increasingly important. Here, however, Apple lags far behind Samsung in terms of smartphone shipments. Samsung offers an Android phone for about $100; by contrast, Indian consumers pay $500 for an iPhone 4 and about $850 for the iPhone 5. Famously, Steve Jobs downplayed the importance of formal market research, saying that consumers don’t know what they want. By contrast, Samsung Electronics relies heavily on market research; 60,000 staff members work in dozens of research centers in China, Great Britain, India, Japan, the United States, and elsewhere. Samsung designers have backgrounds in such diverse disciplines as psychology, sociology, and engineering. Researchers track trends in fashion and interior design. Also, Samsung spends more on advertising and promotion than Apple. For example, Samsung has a major presence at the SXSW Interactive, Film, and Music conference held each March in Austin, Texas. In 2013, Samsung sponsored the TechSet Blogger Lounge and presented a concert showcase by Prince; Samsung users got preferred access to tickets. Although many SXSW attendees use iPhones and iPads, Apple had no visible corporate presence at the conference. The Post-Jobs Era Begins In the months following Jobs’s death, Cook made a number of key strategic decisions. For example, Cook authorized the introduction of the iPad mini, a product that Jobs had opposed. It quickly became a bestseller. In fall 2013, in conjunction with the launch of the iPhone 5s and iOS 7, a long-rumored lower-priced iPhone model was unveiled. The iPhone 5c featured a plastic case and was available in several colors; the price was about $100 lower than the new iPhone 5s. The 5c was designed to appeal especially to consumers in emerging markets who could not afford a top-of-the-line smartphone. China in particular represented a major opportunity; estimates of the market’s potential were tempered by the rapid emergence of lowcost handsets from Chinese manufacturers such as Xiaomi. As Cook noted in an interview with Bloomberg Businessweek, “We never had an objective to sell a low-cost phone. Our primary objective is to sell a great phone and a great experience, and we figured out a way to do it at a lower cost.” Cook made key personnel decisions as well. Scott Forstall, the executive in charge of iOS mobile software, was fired. In his place, Cook named chief designer Jonathan Ive and software executive Craig Federighi. Going forward, Ive, who had been Senior Vice President for Industrial Design, will be responsible for the “look and feel”—in other words, the user interface—for iPhone and iPad. When Cook, Ive, and Federighi appeared together on the cover of Bloomberg Businessweek in fall 2013, commentators noted that Steve Jobs would have never shared the spotlight in this manner. In another key appointment, Angela Ahrendts, the highly regarded CEO of Burberry PLC, was recruited to take over Apple’s retail operations. In 2014, Cook announced that Apple was acquiring Beats Electronics for $3 billion. The deal brought two more key personnel into the Apple fold, namely hip-hop star Dr. Dre and music mogul Jimmy Iovine. The two had founded Beats in 2006 to market premium headphones; by the time the deal was announced in May 2014 the duo had also launched an online music streaming service, Beats Radio. Both Dre and Iovine were added to the roster of Apple executives; it was expected that their close ties to the music industry would be an asset. Moreover, the deal reflected the growing



importance of wearable technology; many believed that “fashion electronics” products such as Beats’ $399 headphones were poised for explosive growth. Apple’s Marketing Communications Problem Finally, Cook and his team addressed the issue of Apple’s marketing communications. It was widely reported that Phil Schiller, Apple’s Senior Vice President for Global Marketing, was concerned that Apple’s advertising had lost its edge. Apple had a long-standing relationship with a single agency; Los Angeles-based Chiat/Day had created the legendary “1984” television spot that launched the original Macintosh. In the 1990s, the agency, now known as TBWA/ Chiat/Day, created the iconic “Think Different” campaign. However, a “Genius Bar” campaign timed to coincide with the 2012 Olympics was deemed a failure. In a subsequent email to TBWA, Schiller admitted that he was impressed by arch-rival Samsung’s 2013 Super Bowl ad; by contrast, he noted, Apple was “struggling to nail a compelling [creative] brief on iPhone.” The marketing issue was pushed to the forefront during the Academy Awards broadcast in spring 2014. Oscar host Ellen DeGeneres took a star-studded selfie (featuring Bradley Cooper, Jennifer Lawrence, and Brad Pitt, among others) with a Samsung Galaxy phone and posted it on Twitter. The post then made social media history after being retweeted more than 3.5 million times. It turns out that DeGeneres is an iPhone owner; however, Samsung had paid $20 million to sponsor the broadcast. Although there was some disagreement among industry insiders about the monetary value the publicity the stunt generated, most agreed that Samsung had gotten the better of Apple. Writing in Advertising Age, Mark Bergen summed up the situation bluntly when he noted, “Samsung is simply outinnovating its archrival when it comes to marketing.” Spurred into action, Cook and Schiller authorized the formation of an in-house advertising agency at Apple. The company is hiring top talent from some of the ad industry’s best agencies to staff it. The in-house team has been tasked with creating new ads; the team will compete against TBWA/Media Arts Lab, as TBWA is now known, in a process known as a “creative shootout.” Schiller has also beefed up Apple’s roster of agencies that specialize in digital marketing. CEO Tim Cook Asserts Himself By early 2014, it was clear that CEO Tim Cook was stepping out of the shadow of his legendary predecessor. In a move designed to make Apple’s common stock more affordable to investors, Cook authorized a seven-for-one stock split. Simply put, if an investor held 50 shares of the stock at a price of, say $500 per share before the split, after the split the investor would have 350 shares of stockpriced at $71.43 per share. By mid-2014, word began circulating that Apple was preparing to launch several key new products. In September, CEO Cook and his team introduced the iPhone 6 and iPhone 6 Plus; both featured larger screens than earlier iPhones. Apple Pay, a key feature of the new devices, promised to usher in a new era of secure mobile payments. Cook also announced that a new wearable device, the Apple Watch, would be introduced early in 2015. 1. Apakah Anda memiliki smartphone? Jika ya, merek apa yang Anda beli, dan mengapa? 2. Pada 2013, Apple memperkenalkan iPhone 5c untuk menarik konsumen yang tidak mau atau tidak mampu membayar premi untuk perangkat Apple. Harganya sekitar $ 100 lebih murah dari 5s top-of-the-line.



3. Apakah ini keputusan penetapan harga yang tepat? Menurut Anda, apakah Apple dapat terus tumbuh dengan mengembangkan produk terobosan yang menciptakan pasar baru, seperti yang terjadi pada iPod, iPhone, dan iPad?



Kasus 2 IKEA KEA has been called “one of the most extraordinary success stories in the history of postwar European business.” However, the first few years of the twenty-first century were difficult for IKEA, the $31 billion global furniture powerhouse based in Sweden. The euro’s strength dampened financial results, as did an economic downturn in Central Europe. The company faces increasing competition from hypermarkets, “do-it-yourself” retailers such as Walmart, and supermarkets that are expanding into home furnishings. During his tenure as CEO from 1999 to 2009, Anders Dahlvig stressed three areas for improvement: product assortment, customer service, and product availability. With stores in 40 countries, the company’s success reflects founder Ingvar Kamprad’s “social ambition” of selling a wide range of stylish, functional home furnishings at prices so low that the majority of people could afford to buy them. IKEA currently has eleven stores in China; the Xu Hui store in Shanghai is one of the Swedish company’s top performers by revenues. In keeping with IKEA’s standardized global retail concept, the Chinese stores are spacious and clean. All locations feature restaurants where visitors can enjoy Swedish meatballs and other meal items. In some cases, the restaurants have also become a favorite meeting place for dating clubs that allow older Chinese to socialize. The store exteriors are painted bright blue and yellow, Sweden’s national colors. Shoppers view furniture on the main floor in scores of realistic-looking settings arranged throughout the cavernous showrooms. writing down the names of desired items, shoppers can pick up their furniture on the lower level. There, they find “flat packs” containing the furniture in kit form; one of the cornerstones of IKEA’s low-cost strategy is having customers take their purchases home in their own vehicles and assemble the furniture themselves. The lower level of a typical IKEA store also contains a restaurant, a grocery store called the Swede Shop, a supervised play area for children, and a baby care room. IKEA’s unconventional approach to the furniture business has enabled it to rack up impressive growth in an industry in which overall sales have been flat. Sourcing furniture from a network of more than 1,600 suppliers in 55 countries helps the company maintain its lowcost, high-quality position. During the 1990s, IKEA expanded into Central and Eastern Europe. Because consumers in those regions have relatively little purchasing power, the stores offer a smaller selection of goods; some furniture is designed specifically for the cramped living styles typical in former Soviet bloc countries. Throughout Europe, IKEA benefits from the perception that Sweden is a source of high-quality products and efficient service. Currently, Germany and the United Kingdom (UK) are IKEA’s top two markets. The UK represents IKEA’s fastest-growing market in Europe. Although Brits initially viewed the company’s less-is-more approach as cold and “too Scandinavian,” they were eventually won over. IKEA currently has 18 stores in the UK, and plans call for opening more in this decade. As Allan Young, creative director of London’s St. Luke’s advertising agency, noted, “IKEA is anticonventional. It does what it shouldn’t do. That’s the overall theme for all IKEA ads: liberation from tradition.”



In 2005, IKEA opened two stores near Tokyo; more stores are on the way as the company expands in Asia. IKEA’s first attempt to develop the Japanese market in the mid-1970s resulted in failure. Why? As Tommy Kullberg, former chief executive of IKEA Japan, explained, “In 1974, the Japanese market from a retail point of view was closed. Also, from the Japanese point of view, I do not think they were ready for IKEA, with our way of doing things, with flat packages and asking the consumers to put things together and so on.” However, demographic and economic trends are much different today. After years of recession, consumers are seeking alternatives to paying high prices for quality goods. Also, IKEA’s core customer segment—post–baby boomers in their thirties—grew nearly 10 percent between 2000 and 2010. In Japan, IKEA will offer home delivery and an assembly service option. The coming years will bring big changes at IKEA. In 2013, Peter Agnefjäll became the company’s new chief executive. He plans to continue the company’s sustainability initiatives, including the possibility of leasing kitchens to consumers. As Steve Howard, chief sustainability officer, said, “We want a smarter consumption, and maybe people are less attached to ownership.” However, some observers question IKEA’s sustainability bona fides, noting that its lowpriced furniture contributes to a “throw it away” mentality when a piece breaks. Howard responds to such criticism by noting that “People have needs to be met—they need wardrobes, sofas, kitchens. The most important thing is to meet those needs in the most sustainable way possible.” For example, in France, one factory sources half its wood from recycled IKEA products that are ground up and repurposed as bookshelves, tables, and other new products. 1. Apakah IKEA digambarkan sebagai perusahaan global atau perusahaan transnasional? 2. Dalam kerangka kerja etnosentris / polisentris / regiosentris / geosentris (EPRG), orientasi manajemen manakah yang terbukti di IKEA? 3. Apa kaitannya dengan strategi umum Porter, IKEA mengejar strategi "fokus biaya"?



Kasus 3 Unilever After Cescau was elevated to the top job, Unilever’s board streamlined the company’s management structure. Now there is a single chief executive; previously, there had been one in Rotterdam and one in London. Cescau asserted that, with a single chief executive, the need for consensus was replaced by speed at making decisions. As noted, many of those decisions concerned “doing good.” However, some observers were skeptical of Cescau’s determination to operationalize a responsible business philosophy. Cescau recalled, “The company was not doing well. There was an article saying that I was draping myself in a flag of corporate social responsibility to excuse poor performance. I was so angry with that.” Cescau’s commitment was put to the test in 2008, his final year as CEO. Greenpeace launched an advertising campaign alleging that Unilever’s purchases of Indonesian palm oil were contributing to rain forest destruction. Palm oil, a key ingredient in Dove soap, Magnum ice cream bars, and Vaseline lotion, comes from oil palm trees that grow in Indonesia and Malaysia. Unilever is the world’s biggest palm oil customer, buying about 1.4 million tons each year. Rising world prices for the commodity prompted Indonesian farmers to cut down large swaths of oldgrowth rain forest and plant fast-growing oil palms. Specifically, Greenpeace identified the operations of Sinar Mas, an Indonesian company that is a major palm oil supplier, as contributing to deforestation. The media strategy for the Greenpeace campaign included



newspaper ads in London and a video on YouTube. Fliers parodied Unilever’s Campaign for Real Beauty; for example, they showed pictures of orangutans juxtaposed with the headline “Gorgeous or gone?” John Sauven, executive director of Greenpeace, explained why his organization had targeted Unilever: “Everyone has heard of those brands. They are the public face of the company”. Unilever has been targeted by activist groups concerned about sustainability issues. For example, palm oil is a key ingredient in several of Unilever’s brands; however, orangutan habitat in Indonesia has been cleared to make room for oil palm plantations. Greenpeace and other NGOs have staged protests; here, an activist dressed as an orangutan is shown outside Unilever House in London. Unilever has pledged that, by 2020, all its palm oil will come from sustainable sources. Cescau responded by calling for a moratorium on rain forest destruction by Indonesian oil producers. The Unilever chief also pledged that his company would buy palm oil only from producers who could prove that the rain forest had not been sacrificed in the production process. The move allied Unilever with the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO), an organization that certifies palm oil producers. A Unilever spokesperson also indicated that the proposed change in Unilever’s palm oil sourcing strategy had been in the works for months. Nevertheless, Greenpeace and other NGOs claimed victory. Unilever brought its message to the public with a print ad campaign featuring the headline “What you buy in the supermarket can change the world.” The body copy outlined Unilever’s pledge that “by 2015 all our palm oil will come from sustainable sources.” The ads ended with the tagline “Small actions, big difference.” By 2011, however, only about 2 percent of Unilever’s palm oil purchases were coming from traceable sources. Even so, as chief procurement officer Marc Engel said, “I’m not aware of anyone else who has made that commitment, particularly on our scale.” In an effort to achieve its goals, Unilever began buying GreenPalm certificates, which are sold by growers certified by the RSPO. “Doing well” is also part of the leadership equation at Unilever. Cescau understood the importance of improving Unilever’s profitability. To this end, he continued a restructuring drive that was initiated by his predecessor, cochairman Niall FitzGerald. Specific actions included reducing Unilever’s bureaucracy by removing several management layers. Cescau also reduced the top management head count from 25 people to 7 and narrowed the vertical distance between management and marketing. In addition, the company shed hundreds of brands and closed dozens of factories in France, Germany, and elsewhere. In Cescau’s view, the new, leaner structure would translate into a more rapid response to changing market trends and consumer preferences and ensure quicker rollouts of new products. Cescau also bet heavily on emerging markets to jump-start sales growth. Rising incomes mean that many people purchase consumer packaged goods for the first time. One scenario: As increasing numbers of people in developing countries buy their first washing machines, they will need to buy laundry detergent. To capitalize on such trends, Cescau shifted budgetary resources out of mature markets such as Europe; those funds were then used to support research in India and other emerging markets. Brand managers were instructed to innovate by taking a “clean slate” approach to developing new products for emerging markets. As Steph Carter, packaging director for deodorant brands, noted, “Traditionally, we would have taken existing products and then tried to fathom how to adapt them for the developing world. Our thinking has changed.” The Polman Era Begins Paul Polman took over as CEO in January 2009; a former Nestlé executive, he is the first outsider to lead Unilever in its 80-year history. In his first months on the job, Polman initiated



a shift in Unilever’s core strategy. In the past, the company generated sales growth by increasing prices. Noting that this was the wrong strategy for recessionary times, Polman said the new priority would be to increase sales volumes. The change entailed some risk: Holding the line on prices could put pressure on margins, given the trend of rising costs for the agricultural commodities that are key ingredients in Unilever’s products. Polman was also keenly aware that many budgetconscious shoppers were choosing less expensive, private-label supermarket products instead of well-known name brands. Polman vowed to improve product quality across the board and to boost marketing and advertising spending. To support the increased investment, he accelerated some of the cost-cutting measures that his predecessor had initiated. For example, the timetable for planned factory closures and job cuts was moved up; Polman also froze executive salaries and changed the bonus policy. He established 30-day action plans for managers of brands with flagging sales. He also replaced about one-third of Unilever’s top 100 executives, including the chief marketing officer. When it comes to demonstrating Unilever’s commitment to its customers, Polman sends clear signals to his employees. He spends about 50 percent of his time on the road, with regular stops in Asia, Latin America, and, of course, Europe. In a recent interview, he noted that he meets with consumers in every country that he visits. Polman believes strongly that the leader must set an example from the top of the organization. That passion is evident in a flurry of marketing activities orchestrated by Polman. One is the quick pace of new-product rollouts, especially in emerging markets. For example, Unilever’s home care unit was the first to market with liquid laundry detergent in China; it also introduced a dishwashing liquid in Turkey in less than 30 days. In addition, innovation has become a key element for shoring up the value proposition of Unilever’s brands, with existing brands such as Surf laundry detergent getting an upgrade in the African market. Driving growth in the personal-care category is another priority for Polman. By itself, the global deodorant segment represents an estimated $17 billion in annual sales. To tap into that market, the Dove brand has been extended to men’s products. Dove for Men has been rolled out in dozens of countries. Meanwhile, Dove’s product managers devised a new strategy for persuading women to switch deodorant brands. Dove Ultimate Go Sleeveless resulted from company research designed to discover insights about consumer attitudes toward underarms. What the researchers learned is that 93 percent of women think their armpits are not attractive. Dove Ultimate Go Sleeveless is formulated with moisturizers that, the company claims, will result in nicer-looking underarms after just a few days’ use. The ice cream and beverage unit is also on the move. Unilever’s Magnum brand premium ice cream bars are the world’s top-selling ice cream novelty. Although Magnum enjoys great popularity in Europe, it was not introduced in the United States until 2011. Häagen-Dazs and Mars were already entrenched in the market; undaunted, the Magnum marketing team is confident its brand will stand out. One manager explained that an important part of the brand’s equity is the loud cracking sound heard when someone bites through Magnum’s thick chocolate shell. It must be helping: In the first year, Magnum rang up $100 million in sales in the United States. Renewing the Commitment to Sustainability Even as he oversees these and other marketing activities, Polman is making sure that former CEO Cescau’s commitment to corporate social responsibility is maintained. Summarizing his views on sustainability and environmental impact, Polman said:



[T]he road to well-being doesn’t go via reduced consumption.It has to be done via more responsible consumption. . . . So that’s why we’re taking such a stand on moving the world to sustainable palm oil. That’s why we work with small-hold farmers, to be sure that people who don’t have sufficient nutrition right now have a chance to have a better life. In 2012, Unilever announced plans to build a $100 million palm oil processing plant in Indonesia. Having a company-controlled plant near the source should make the task of tracing oil to sustainable sources easier. It is currently common practice at processing plants to combine oil from different sources—both sustainable and not—in the same vat. That makes it difficult to trace any individual batch of oil to its origins. Marc Engel, the procurement officer, draws an analogy between palm oil processing and crude oil processing used to make gasoline. “When you actually want to know where the gas in your car is coming from—from which oil well—it’s very hard to see,” he says. To hedge its bets, Unilever has also invested in Solazyme, a California-based company that produces oil from algae. What kind of potential does this technology hold? “We’ve made all kinds of food products,” says Solazyme CEO and cofounder Jonathan Wolfson. “We’ve used the oil for frying. We’ve made mayonnaises, ice creams. And they work, taste good and are functional.” 1. Jika perusahaan seperti Unilever harus melakukan trade-off antara menjadi warga korporat yang baik dan menghasilkan keuntungan, mana yang harus menjadi prioritas yang lebih tinggi? 2. Menilai tanggapan Cescau terhadap protes minyak sawit Greenpeace. Apakah itu pantas? Jenis hubungan apa yang harus dikembangkan Unilever dengan Greenpeace dan LSM lain di masa depan? 3. Menurut Anda, apakah struktur manajemen yang efisien dan penekanan pada pasar negara berkembang akan memungkinkan CEO Polman saat ini memimpin Unilever untuk meningkatkan kinerja?