brm project brief group 6 final

7/29/2019 BRM Project Brief Group 6 Final

1/14

Section A:Group 6

BRM Project


2/14

Presentation outline

Introduction and managerial problem

Research problem and research questions

Focus Group Discussions

Survey methodology and questionnaire design In depth Interviews

Experimental Design

Expected contributions from the study

References

Group 6, Section A, SJMSOM IITBombay

2


3/14

Introduction and problem definition

Scarce products more appealing? ----iPhone Influence of perceived scarcity on the subjective desirability of

objects

Scarcity due to supply vs. scarcity due to demand

Impatience: a parallel force

Managerial Decision Problem : Market introduction strategy (pricing,advertisement & capacity) of an innovative product underconsideration of leveraging the scarcity and loss of potentialcustomers.


3


4/14

Research Design & Questions

Research problem: To understand the buyingbehavior of Innovative product subject tovaried waiting times and monetaryinvolvement in a competitive market.

Questions to understand behavior under

Waiting times

Monetary involvement

Scarcity

Competitive market scenario


4


5/14

Qualitative research Focus groups: Smart Phone aspirers (Management, Btech Students &

Professionals )

Primary insights about the Innovative electronic product, attributes, prices, perceived scarcity, waiting timesbuying behavior etc. which will be the guidelines for the experimental design for better control ofexperimental conditions.

As the experimental design has an inherent dominance of group behavior, the FGD is useful for better design. [1] [8]

To understand the role of product aesthetics, technical features and brand loyalty for the design and systematiccommunication of hypothetical brand involved in the experimental design. [5]

To get key insights into the pricing, token amount and the tentative extra price tag for the existing innovative product

so as to use effectively during the experimentation

The tentative waiting times under different scenarios and reason for why they are perceived so?

Group 6, Section A, SJMSOM IIT

Bombay

5


6/14

Group 6, Section A, SJMSOM IIT Bombay6

iPhone. Samsung Galaxy S2 close second

iphone 4S at the price of Nokia 1100 ;)Aspirational Mobile Phone?

Internet, games , battery life, social media, aesthetics.Product Features

Majority: 1-5%

Responses varying from 0-20%

Extra amount willing to spend to getan smart phone early?

Mean 5-10%

Responses varying from 0-100%

Booking amount willing to pay for the

product?

General tendency is to switch to another productWaiting time due to over demand?

People are willing to wait for their aspired productWaiting time due to supply chainproblems

Methodology:FGDs of two classes:

1. Current I Phone users: one conducted.

2. Potential users with awareness (our population is tech savvy youngsters) two FGDs.

Video recording and parallel note taking for better capture of key points. Moderated byone person and supported by one in some cases

Focus Group : Smart Phone aspirers, points discussed & Insights


7/14

Focus Group : iPhone users (For Exploratory & Experimental design purposes)

iPhone - 4, 3G,3GS,2Mobile Phone Model

Aesthetics, easy of use, battery life, hardware.Product Features

Wait for the productExtra money spent to get an iPhone early

zero- purchased from outside India.Booking amount paid ?

3-6 monthsWaiting time for getting the iphone

HTC, Samsung S2iPhone is not available, What is the best alternative ?

Wait for Apple iPhoneIn case iPhone of one brand is not immediatelyavailable, but the similar competing brand haslower/no waiting time!!!

Most of the users perceive it as status symbolIs iphone, a status symbol?

Group 6, Section A, SJMSOM IIT

Bombay

7


8/14

To understand the general response of individual behavior to the key variablesalready listed and discussed in the previous literature. [2] [3] [4]

This was used to primarily validate various parameters involved in the potentialadoption ofInnovative products.

Survey: iPhone waiting time


8

Methodology:5 objective MCQ questions and 1 qualitative open question.

Simple and engaging language used for keeping questionnaires attractive

and engaging. [8]

Jumbled options to reduce the response around mean and errors.[9]

Brand names not mentioned to reduce Bias and brand loyalty factor.Thematic situation selected and three key variables focused to get the

quantitative inputs.

I. Cause of perceived scarcity [6]

II. Waiting time for brand X (in multiples of two)

III. Waiting time for brand Y (in multiples of two)[7]

Total 12 cases and separate questionnaire for each.Sampling frame: ASC Data base for random selection of classes and

faculty members

E.g. class of AE 420 and HS 200 with appx. enrollment of 70 and 230

students respectively. 8 faculties from AE, ME and HS selected

randomly.

Not very precise method!! Better than convenience!! Time and cost


9/14

Insights from Survey


2 weeks1-5% of Sellingprice

less than 5% foradvancebooking.

Waiting time ismore relevantthan popularity

ReactionBookingAmount

Waitingtime

Extra Priceimmediate

delivery

Not Ready towait

1-5% of Sellingprice

less than 5% foradvancebooking.

Popularity ismore relevantthan waitingtime

ReactionBookingAmount

Waitingtime

Extra Priceimmediate

delivery

Supply Chain ConstraintsDemand Constraints


10/14

In depth interviews Academicians: 2 professors from marketing and operations prospect.

Industry people: manufacturing and marketing department experts

industry experts.

Q1 What is the definition of innovative product?

Q2 As an company expertise/academician how do you operationalize theconcept of innovative electronic product?

Q3 Do you use any mathematical/ quantitative model for capacity, pricing& advertisement budget decisions? If yes, what are key parameters themodel asks?

Q4 If no, why? B. Would you briefly describe the prescriptive tools or somehands on techniques that you use in innovative product decision making?

Q5. Are the results reliable in the past , if no, in which parameters more elaborateparameters are required?


10

Telephonic interviews for convenience, two appointments already

fixed!!
http://localhost/var/www/apps/conversion/tmp/scratch_4/in%20depth.docxhttp://localhost/var/www/apps/conversion/tmp/scratch_4/in%20depth.docx


11/14

Quantitative Research Experimental design

Online product sales design: virtual passage of time and customer engagementtechnique

Parameters

Technological features

Aesthetics

Monetary involvement

Waiting time

Population: Tech Savvy Youngsters

Sampling frame : ASC database etc

Sampling: Stratified

Analysis of Secondary data for following scenario

Honda Activa Vs Hero Honda Pleasure sales


11


12/14

Contributions from proposed

study


Empirical data support for the proposed merger ofscarcity and impatience into a single function.

Key insights into the buyer behavior and themanagerial prospective for the purchase of innovativeelectronic product

Capacity decisions and perceived scarcity and itseffect on waiting time through questionnaires.

Insights into Consumer and managerial prospectivefor scarcity and capacity decisions through FGD and

interviews. Experimental verification of scarcity impatience

coupling and the role of monetary involvement.


13/14

References


1. HAIRE M. ,PROJECTIVE TECHNIQUES IN MARKETING RESEARCH , Journal ofmarketing, Vol XIV, pp 649-456.

2. Theo M.M. Verhallen, Scarcity and preference: An experiment on unavailability and productevaluation, Journal of Economic Psychology 15 (1994) 315-331.

3. Fromkin, H.L., The effects of experimentally aroused feelings of indistinctiveness uponvaluation of scarce and novel experiences. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 6,(1970) 521-529.

4. Szybillo, G.J., A situational influence on the relationship of a consumer attribute to new-

product attractiveness. Journal of Applied Psychology(1975) 60, 652-655.

5. Are scarce products always more attractive? The interaction of different types of scarcitysignals with product suitability for conspicuous consumption Heribert Geirl & Verena Huettl,International Journal of Research in Marketing, Volume 27, Issue 3,2010, Pages 225-235

6. ] Diffusion of Products with Limited Supply and Known Expiration Date, SANJEEVSWAMI, PANKAJ J. KHAIRNAR Marketing Letters 14:1, 3346, 2003

7. Flow through latch and edge triggered flip flop hybrid elements and its applications, Partovi,

H.; Burd, R, Solid-State Circuits Conference, Digest of Technical Papers. 42nd ISSCC.,IEEE International, page 138-139. , 1996

8. Business research methods, Alan Bryman, Emma Bell, third edition, chapter 9, 10.

9. BRM class handouts for questionnaire design and methodology

10. Focus Group Members ( Group1: Hardik Chauhan, Aniket, Himansh,ankit,dharmesh)


14/14

Thank You


14

brm project brief group 6 final

Documents