個案總覽

This exercise is meant to assess students' level of confidence around everyday business and general knowledge questions, for the purpose of identifying where they are overconfident and underconfident.

This case concerns the selection and scheduling of orders by a small industrial titanium fabricator that recently has been plagued by poor deliveries and a lack of capacity. At the time of the case, Ti-Tech must decide which of four orders to accept, with capacity making it impossible to accept all four. Each order represents a different mix of labor, revenues, and potential future work. The case forces the student to choose among the four orders, given limited capacity available, other business likely to come along, and the requirements of each order. The case is an updated version of Fabtek (A).

This case concerns the selection and scheduling of orders by a small industrial titanium fabricator that recently has been plagued by poor deliveries and a lack of capacity. At the time of the case, Ti-Tech must decide which of four orders to accept, with capacity making it impossible to accept all four. Each order represents a different mix of labor, revenues, and potential future work. The case forces the student to choose among the four orders, given limited capacity available, other businesses likely to come along, and the requirements of each order. The case is an updated version of an earlier supplement, Fabtek (B). It should be distributed in class after discussion of the (A) case.

An updated "Four Products" case. This 2008 version includes: sliced peanut butter, foldable bicycle tires, high-end wooden puzzles, and artificial dirt for thoroughbred race tracks. These four products form the basis to assess the drivers of new product adoption. In particular, one of the critical tasks in the marketing of new innovations in predicting demand and rates of diffusion for those products. And while one can speculate on the scope and rate of diffusion for any given product, it's helpful to compare and contrast diffusion across products. Doing so allows one to focus on the drivers or product characteristics that influence product diffusion, making one product a star and another a dog. Specifically, looking across products allows one to pick up on things that get lost in discussing a single product. Note that this case often gets used with HBS Note #505-075, "Note on Innovation Diffusion: Rogers' Five Factors," which either can be distributed along with the case or after the case has been taught.

Companies that introduce new innovations are the most likely to flourish, so they spend billions of dollars making better products. But studies show that new innovations fail at a staggering rate. While many blame these misses on lackluster products, the reality isn't so simple. The goods that consumers dismiss often do offer improvements over existing ones. So why don't people purchase them? And why do companies keep peddling products that buyers are likely to reject? The answer, says the author, can be found in the brain. New products force consumers to change their behavior, and that has a psychological cost. Many products fail because people irrationally overvalue the benefits of the goods they own over those they don't possess. Executives, meanwhile, overvalue their own innovations. This leads to a serious clash. Studies show, in fact, that there is a mismatch of nine to one between what innovators think consumers want and what consumers truly desire. Fortunately, companies can overcome this disconnect. To start, they can determine where their products fall in a matrix with four categories: easy sells, sure failures, long hauls, and smash hits. Each has a different ratio of product improvement to change required from the consumer. Once businesses know where their products fit into this grid, they can manage the resistance to change. For some innovations, major behavior change is a given. In those cases, companies can either wait for consumers to warm to the product, make the improvement so great that buyers get past their apprehension, or try to eliminate the incumbent product. Firms can also make products that are compatible with incumbent goods, seeking out those who are not yet users of the existing product or finding true believers.

One of the critical tasks in the marketing of new innovations is predicting demand and rates of diffusion for those products. Focuses on four innovative products from different domains. Although one can speculate on the scope and rate of diffusion for each of these products independently, it's helpful to compare and contrast diffusion across these products. Doing so allows one to focus on the "levers" or product characteristics that influence product diffusion, making one product a star and another a dog. Importantly, looking across products allows one to pick up on things that get lost in discussing a single product.

In November 2004, The Wall Street Journal reported that consumer electronics retailer Best Buy's new customer approach was to shun the "devils" among its customers. The "customer centricity" initiative, which was led by Best Buy's CEO Brad Anderson, was based on an analysis of the purchase histories of several customer groups. The central idea was to revamp stores according to the most lucrative types of customers they served--the "angels" among the company's customers. Encourages an assessment of Best Buy's strategy and, more generally, of the challenges and opportunities in managing customers for profits.

An abstract is not available for this product.

Spreadsheet supplement for case 506021.

Presents the basic principles of pricing, including value pricing, price sensitivity, and price customization/discrimination.

For years, companies have expanded their product lines in an attempt to better meet the needs of diverse customers. Typically, they do so by adding new flavors, package sizes, formulations, features, and options. As a result, whereas The Coca-Cola Company once sold a single formulation of cola, it now sells more than ten. It has long been believed that product variety is beneficial to consumers, and that a wider assortment will logically better-meet their varied preferences than a narrower assortment. However, the authors call this 'variety-is-good' belief into question, showing that in cases where 'choice deferral' is an option, adding a second attractive alternative to what had been a one-alternative consideration set increases the frequency of not making a choice. The results they present speak to the potential negative impact of product assortment on consumer choice - an effect they refer to as 'overchoice'. Four strategies are described that confront the negative effects of overchoice.

CEO Peter Walsh faces a classic innovator's dilemma. His company, Crescordia, produces high-quality metal plates, pins, and screws that orthopedic surgeons use to repair broken bones. In fact, because of the company's long-standing commitment to quality, some orthopedic surgeons use nothing but Crescordia hardware. And now these customers have begun to clamor for the next-generation technology: resorbable hardware. Resorbables offer clear advantages over the traditional hardware. Like dissolving sutures, resorbable plates and screws are made of biodegradable polymers. They hold up long enough to support a healing bone, then gradually and harmlessly disintegrate in the patient's body. The new products, however, are not yet reliable; they fail about 8% of the time. That's why Crescordia has delayed launching a line using the new technology. But time is running out. A few competitors have begun to sell resorbables, despite their imperfections, and these companies are picking up market share. Should Crescordia join the fray and risk tarnishing its brand? Or should the company sit tight until it can offer a perfect product? Commenting on this fictional case study in R0506A and R0506Z are Robert A. Lutz, vice-chairman of product development at General Motors; Clayton M. Christensen, the Robert and Jane Cizik Professor of Business Administration at Harvard Business School; Jason Wittes, a senior equity analyst covering medical supplies and devices at Leerink Swann; and Nick Galakatos, a general partner of MPM Capital.

CEO Peter Walsh faces a classic innovator's dilemma. His company, Crescordia, produces high-quality metal plates, pins, and screws that orthopedic surgeons use to repair broken bones. In fact, because of the company's long-standing commitment to quality, some orthopedic surgeons use nothing but Crescordia hardware. And now these customers have begun to clamor for the next-generation technology: resorbable hardware. Resorbables offer clear advantages over the traditional hardware. Like dissolving sutures, resorbable plates and screws are made of biodegradable polymers. They hold up long enough to support a healing bone, then gradually and harmlessly disintegrate in the patient's body. The new products, however, are not yet reliable; they fail about 8% of the time. That's why Crescordia has delayed launching a line using the new technology. But time is running out. A few competitors have begun to sell resorbables, despite their imperfections, and these companies are picking up market share. Should Crescordia join the fray and risk tarnishing its brand? Or should the company sit tight until it can offer a perfect product? Commenting on this fictional case study in R0506A and R0506Z are Robert A. Lutz, vice-chairman of product development at General Motors; Clayton M. Christensen, the Robert and Jane Cizik Professor of Business Administration at Harvard Business School; Jason Wittes, a senior equity analyst covering medical supplies and devices at Leerink Swann; and Nick Galakatos, a general partner of MPM Capital.

CEO Peter Walsh faces a classic innovator's dilemma. His company, Crescordia, produces high-quality metal plates, pins, and screws that orthopedic surgeons use to repair broken bones. In fact, because of the company's long-standing commitment to quality, some orthopedic surgeons use nothing but Crescordia hardware. And now these customers have begun to clamor for the next-generation technology: resorbable hardware. Resorbables offer clear advantages over the traditional hardware. Like dissolving sutures, resorbable plates and screws are made of biodegradable polymers. They hold up long enough to support a healing bone, then gradually and harmlessly disintegrate in the patient's body. The new products, however, are not yet reliable; they fail about 8% of the time. That's why Crescordia has delayed launching a line using the new technology. But time is running out. A few competitors have begun to sell resorbables, despite their imperfections, and these companies are picking up market share. Should Crescordia join the fray and risk tarnishing its brand? Or should the company sit tight until it can offer a perfect product? Commenting on this fictional case study in R0506A and R0506Z are Robert A. Lutz, vice-chairman of product development at General Motors; Clayton M. Christensen, the Robert and Jane Cizik Professor of Business Administration at Harvard Business School; Jason Wittes, a senior equity analyst covering medical supplies and devices at Leerink Swann; and Nick Galakatos, a general partner of MPM Capital.

Reviews Everett Rogers' Five Factors of product adoption. These factors help explain why some products diffuse rapidly and some slowly or not at all.

Cause marketing involves a "cause-linked" promotion of a commercial product, with some part of that product's revenues being donated to the nonprofit engaged in that cause. Traditionally, the needs of the for-profit firm have for the most part initiated and driven cause marketing, with less attention directed to the needs of the nonprofit organization or its role in creating value for the partnership. Offers a framework that considers the benefits and costs from both partners' perspectives, including monetary (first-order) as well as nonmonetary (second-order) considerations. Using this framework, the article proposes a decision process aimed at enhancing the value for both partners in the relationship.

Analysis of an interview with Red Auerbach, HBR No. 87201. Alan M. Webber, who conducted the interview, probed for the lessons that Auerbach has learned from a long and productive career coaching and managing the Boston Celtics, a professional basketball team in the National Basketball Association (NBA). The HBR article is used as a surrogate for a customer interview, providing the "raw data" for an analysis technique known as the trademarked Language Processing (LP) methodology, developed by professor Shoji Shiba of Tsukuba University and the member companies of the Cambridge, Massachusetts-based Center for Quality of Management. Includes color exhibits.

Looks at the consumer psychology of new product adoption. Identifies a key reason why consumers do not adopt innovations as quickly as developers think they should--an irrational resistance to behavioral change. Identifies strategies for firms to manage and overcome this resistance.

Microsoft is on the verge of launching its Smart Watch technology, which will allow specially designed watches to receive up-to-date information on sports, business, traffic, news, etc. After several years of effort and millions of dollars spent, the questions now revolve around launch strategy and likely consumer adoption. Is this the next big thing for Microsoft or is this a waste of money and resources? Complicating the matter is the fact that although Microsoft designed and will operate the technology to deliver information to these watches, the watches themselves will be sold and marketed by several prominent watch-making partners.

Cape Wind has proposed placing a 170-tower wind farm, with each tower more than 400-feet tall, in Nantucket Sound. Not surprisingly, public reaction is mixed. Some view the wind farm as clean, renewable energy. Others view it as an eyesore and a desecration of a valued public resource. Other attempts at wind farms in the United States have run into similar resistance. Although the public can agree that wind power is a good idea, no one wants a wind farm in their community. How can firms overcome this type of resistance to change?