1-

How has Apple addressed products that have not been as successful and the iphones?

Thank you

question one is relating to the original post of marketing attached

2-

Hello everyone,

As we all know, different consumers have different needs, behave in different ways, and approach the consumer decision making process differently. Therefore, in order to satisfy these diverse needs and

behavior, organizations must provide different types of products for the different consumer groups (Su & Liu, 2017; Liu, Li, Mizerski & Soh, 2012). Consumers with similar needs, preferences, and behavior fall

into a segment of the market that the organization needs to pay special attention to in order to improve value, customer relationship, and customer loyalty (Martin, 2011). The basis of market segmentation is so the

organization can achieve competitive advantage and increased profitability.

I would say I am a very loyal Toyota customer since the very first car I owned was a Toyota Camry around 15 years ago. I have owned subsequent vehicles, and they have all been the Toyota brand,

including the current Toyota Tundra. My experience with the Toyota brand has been good over the years and I have developed a level of trust in it. I found the brand to be affordable, durable, easy to maintain, and

reliable, and I intend to continue to support this brand. Liu et al (2012) posit that brand loyalty is the degree of attachment a customer has for a brand, and it is closely linked to use experience. Lin & Wang (2006)

cited by Menidjel et al (2017) posit that trust is also a significant factor in determining customer loyalty and is highly correlated with customer satisfaction. According to Kandampully et al (2015) cited by

Menidjel, Benhabib & Bilgihan (2017), loyal customers exhibit brand attachment and commitment and are not attracted to competitors’ offerings. While I agree with the first part of the statement, I do not

necessarily agree with the second part. While I have an attachment to the Toyota brand, it does not mean I am not attracted to other brands. In fact, I am very much attracted to the Honda brand, but I am aware

that the Honda brand is more pricey than the Toyota brand, and so the Toyota brand fulfills my needs at this time.

According to Martin (2011) consumer market segmentation include the following:

– Geographical Segmentation – The market is divided by regions or location. Depending on the part of the world you are living, consumers usually have the same or similar needs and wants, and so companies

would aim to fulfill those particular needs depending on the demand.

– Demographical Segmentation – Organizations take into consideration the age, ethnicity, nationality, occupation, etc of consumers and choose which group to accommodate.

–Behavior Segmentation – Organizations collect data based on consumer behavior.

– Psychographic Segmentation – Organizations match brands with consumers’ personality, values, attitudes, interests, and lifestyles.

Toyota’s Strategies

Toyota Motor Corporation provide a wide variety of vehicles ranging from cars, to minivans, to trucks, crossovers and SUVs, and Hybrids, all in an effort to fill the needs of consumers across different

geographical regions. The company works to develop and manufacture innovative, safe, and high-quality products and services that create happiness and satisfaction in its consumers. Its aim is to build the right

car, in the right place, at the right time to sucit the lifestyles of their diverse customer base. Toyota’s success is embedded in its commitment to design, engineeer, and build cars according to the specific needs of

the regions in which they are sold, that is, in more than 170 countries and regions around the world. In order to remain competitive, Toyota invests regularly in improving and updating its production capabilities

and efficiency, according to the needs of its consumers, and is constantly looking for new ways to create more desirable and competitive products. They have even made low emission hybrid vehicles such as the

Yaris in keeping with environmental protection and climate change, as well as electrified vehicles which are used to generate power to persons in emergency situations in particularly in Chiba, Japan who

experience frequent power outages due to natural disasters. Toyota also appeals to customers emotions through its promotion of motorsports and corporate sports activities for people to enjoy themselves.

Now that I have a better understanding of how Toyota operates, I feel even more connected and loyal to the brand. I do see where my personality, values, interests, and lifestyle seems to be aligned with

theirs and I intend to follow them to see the improvements they will be making in the future to maintain customer satisfaction and loyalty to the brand.

References

Liu, F., Li, J., Mizerski, D., and Soh, H. (2012). Self-Congruity, Brand Attitude, and Brand Loyalty: A Study on Luxury Brands. European Journal of Marketing. Vol. 46, No. 7/8: 922- 937

Retrieved from https://0634hkgkj-mp03-y-https-search-proquest-com.prx-keiser.lirn.net/docview/1024774342/E0F27450FCDE491DPQ/4?accountid=35796

Martin, G. (2011). The Importance of Marketing Segmentation. American Journal of Business Education. Vol. 4, No. 6 https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1056632.pdf

Menidjel, C., Benhabib, A., and Bilgihan, A. (2017). Examining the Moderating Role of Personality Traits in the Relationship between Brand Trust and Brand Loyalty. Journal of Product & Brand Management.

Vol. 26, No. 6: 631 – 649 Retrieved from https://0634hkgkj-mp03-y-https-search-proquest-com.prx-keiser.lirn.net/docview/1944823122/E0F27450FCDE491DPQ/15?accountid=35796

Su, Q. and Liu, W. (2017). Market Segmentation and Pricing Strategies based on Product Platform. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics. Vol. 29, No. 1: 183 -199

Retrieved from https://0634gkf7k-mp03-y-https-search-proquest-com.prx-keiser.lirn.net/docview/1857271494/B2C6EE719F2E4D83PQ/3?accountid=35796

https://media.toyota.co.uk/wp-content/files_mf/1585834216ToyotaCompanyBackground.pdf

https://global.toyota/en/newsroom/corporate/33850973.html?_ga=2.29186300.1770495274.1605713683-2063007178.1605583243

https://global.toyota/en/sustainability/sdgs/

1 and 2 are marketing

—————————————————————–

3-

Critical thinking is a skill that most people do not possess simply because they do not see it as a real value. Evaluating, problem solving and decision-making are the various aspects of critical thinking that were considered in the ideas of trade-offs presented by the author.

When determining a tradeoff, the same critical thinking skills are used. Because you first have to identify and evaluate the problem. Critical thinking requires you to use your ability to reason. It is about being inactive learner rather than a passive recipient of information. Critical thinkers will identify, analyze, and solve problems systematically.

Analysis is essential in determining tradeoffs and making a better decision. Having the ability to connect pieces of information together to determine what the intended meaning of the information was meant to represent.

Evaluation is another step in the critical thinking that the author uses to approach tradeoffs. Evaluation occurs once we have understood and analyzed the objectives and all our alternative to achieve the objectives and the reasons offered to support it. Then we can appraise this information to decide which of your objective you will prioritize.

4 decision bottlenecks identified by Rogers and Benko

Decisions are the coin of the realm in business. Every success, every mishap, every opportunity seized or missed is the result of a decision that someone made or failed to make. At many companies, decisions routinely get stuck inside the organization like loose change.

But it’s more than loose change that’s at stake, of course; it’s the performance of the entire organization. Never mind what industry you’re in, how big and well known your company may be, or how clever your strategy is. If you can’t make the right decisions quickly and effectively, and execute those decisions consistently, your business will lose ground.

Indeed, making good decisions and making them happen quickly are the hallmarks of high-performing organizations. When we surveyed executives at 350 global companies about their organizational effectiveness, only 15% said that they have an organization that helps the business outperform competitors.

What sets those top performers apart is the quality, speed, and execution of their decision making. The most effective organizations score well on the major strategic decisions—which markets to enter or exit, which businesses to buy or sell, where to allocate capital and talent.

But they truly shine when it comes to the critical operating decisions requiring consistency and speed—how to drive product innovation, the best way to position brands, how to manage channel partners.

Even in companies respected for their decisiveness, however, there can be ambiguity over who is accountable for which decisions. As a result, the entire decision-making process can stall, usually at one of four bottlenecks: global versus local, center versus business unit, function versus function, and inside versus outside partners.

The first of these bottlenecks, global versus local decision making, can occur in nearly every major business process and function. Decisions about brand building and product development frequently get snared here, when companies wrestle over how much authority local businesses should have to tailor products for their markets. Marketing is another classic global versus local issue—should local markets have the power to determine pricing and advertising?

The second bottleneck, center versus business unit decision making, tends to afflict parent companies and their subsidiaries. Business units are on the front line, close to the customer; the center sees the big picture, sets broad goals, and keeps the organization focused on winning. Where should the decision-making power lie? Should a major capital investment, for example, depend on the approval of the business unit that will own it, or should headquarters make the final call?

Third bottleneck, Function versus function decision making is perhaps the most common bottleneck. Every manufacturer, for instance, faces a balancing act between product development and marketing during the design of a new product. Who should decide what? Cross-functional decisions too often result in ineffective compromise solutions, which frequently need to be revisited because the right people were not involved at the outset.

The fourth decision-making bottleneck, inside versus outside partners, has become familiar with the rise of outsourcing, joint ventures, strategic alliances, and franchising. In such arrangements, companies need to be absolutely clear about which decisions can be owned by the external partner (usually those about the execution of strategy) and which must continue to be made internally (decisions about the strategy itself). In the case of outsourcing, for instance, brand-name apparel and foot-wear marketers once assumed that overseas suppliers could be responsible for decisions about plant employees’ wages and working conditions. Big mistake.

Clearing the Bottlenecks

The most important step in unclogging decision-making bottlenecks is assigning clear roles and responsibilities. Good decision makers recognize which decisions really matter to performance. They think through who should recommend a particular path, who needs to agree, who should have input, who has ultimate responsibility for making the decision, and who is accountable for follow-through. They make the process routine. The result: better coordination and quicker response times.

Reference

Kahneman, D., & Charan, R. (2013). HBR’s 10 Must Reads on Making Smart Decisions (with featured article” Before You Make That Big Decision…” by Daniel Kahneman, Dan Lovallo, and Olivier Sibony). Harvard Business Press.

4-

Critical thinking is a skill that most people do not possess simply because they do not see it as a real value. Evaluating, problem solving and decision making are the various aspects of critical thinking that were considered in the ideas of trade-offs presented by the author.

When determining a tradeoff, the same critical thinking skills are used because you first have to identify and evaluate the problem. Critical thinking requires you to use your ability to reason. It is about being an active learner rather than being passive recipient of information.

The first of these bottlenecks, global versus local decision making, can occur in nearly every major business process and function. Most decisions about brand building and product development frequently get snared because companies wrestle over how much authority local businesses should have to tailor products for their markets.

The second bottleneck, center versus business unit decision making, trends to afflict parent companies and their subsidiaries. Business units are on the front line, close to the customer; the center sees the big picture, sets broad goals, and keeps the organization focused on winning.

Third bottleneck, Function versus function decision making is perhaps the most common bottleneck, Every manufacture, for instance, faces a balancing act between product development and marketing during the design of a new product.

The fourth decision-making bottleneck, inside versus outside partners, has become familiar with the rise of outsourcing, joint ventures, strategic alliances, and franchising.

The most important step in unclogging decision-making bottleneck is assigning clear roles and responsibilities. Good decision makers recognize which decisions really matter to performance. They think about who needs to agree, who should have input, who has the ultimate responsibility for making the decision, and who is accountable for follow-through. They make the process routine. the result: better coordination and quicker response times.

References

Critical thinking: Basic theory & instructional structures. (1999). Wye Mills, MD: Foundation for Critical Thinking.

Sanford, E., & Adelman, H. M. (1977). Management decisions: A behavioral approach. Cambridge (Mass.): Winthrop.

Sanford, E., & Adelman, H. M. (1977). Management decisions: A behavioral approach. Cambridge (Mass.): Winthrop.

3 and 4 are advanced decision making