Some of my Favorite B-school cases

It's summer time and a lot of folks think that profs and university instructors are resting in the sun. Well, that might be partly true, but we're also out there thinking about ideas and our upcoming courses we teach. A couple of days ago, one of my counterparts in Europe asked me what my go-to marketing cases are.  So, for the enjoyment of my educator colleagues, for my students who will likely be seeing some of these cases next term, and for my readers... here are some of my favorites (classics and new!)

#6  Apple Inc in 2015 (2015). Apple is mind-blowingly successful, we all know that.  This spanking brand new case provides a nice historical context on the brand but looks at the new realities for the brand.  What should the strategic new product plays be? There is a healthy debate to be had over where Tim Cook (and his different skills than Jobs) should take the brand.

#5  Land Rover North America, Inc. (1995). I've always liked Susan Fournier's work.  If you are a brand fan, then you'll probably know her work on brand relationships.  Here she writes an interesting case (with a lot of consumer behavior data) on Land Rover Discovery. There are super discussions to be had here on brand personality and managing brand equity across borders.

#4  Coca-Cola's New Vending Machine: Pricing to Capture Value or Not? (2000) Here's another oldie but a goodie. This 9 pager brings issues related to value, public relations and pricing through Coke's drink machine that changes price based on the temperature. You don't see many of these drink machines around- and this case lays out simple communication and pricing issues in an easy-to-digest format.

#3 Lufa Farms. (2013)  Lufa is a very interesting company founded by its CEO Mohammed Hage.
The company develops farms on commercial rooftops.  The case tackles how to scale and a capital intensive entrepreneurial company with a superior (fruit and vegetable) offering. I'm a little biased to this one too for a few reasons. 1) Lufa Farms is a Canadian company.  2) The CEO is a great guy (the team is nice too!).  3) Check the authors and you'll figure out bias #3.

#2  Disrupting the Meat Industry: Tissue Culture Beef. (2015) The subject matter of this case- meat grown in a lab- seems right out of a futuristic movie. But, readers of the case learn just how close the Sergey Brin backed company is making cultured beef a reality. I like this case so much because it gets such visceral reactions from so many case discussants.  The implications of the cultured beef are potentially majorly disruptive from  farming to supply chain to consumer but, the benefits  are numerous- from more environmentally friendly production to animal welfare. In addition to having great marketing debates, there are lots of "what does the future hold" discussions that also launch.   And how can you not love a case that starts off with this quote from Brin? "Some people think tissue culture meat is science fiction... I actually think that's a good thing. If what you're doing is not seen by some people as science fiction, then it's probably note transformative enough."

#1. Heineken NV: Global Branding and Advertising. (1995) This 13 page case (5 pages of actual case write up) by John Quelch is brilliant.  Although the case description is this:
"Heineken managers are evaluating the results of the research projects designed to identify the values of the Heineken brand and to translate these into effective advertising messages",
what I really like about the case is that it cuts to the heart of brand values- and what constitutes a "global brand", if there really is such a thing. The case being from 1995 isn't such a bad thing either.  Students can track the "values" via advertising in international markets over the last 20 years.

Tablet Wars – iPad vs Everyone Else

A while back I put out a call to some industry captains. These are folks who have rich experiences with brands and deep knowledge in a particular industry. I invited them to do some guest lectures. Today I am proud to post the tablet-thoughts of a tech-captain. Take it away Greg.
* * *
As someone who has been deeply involved with the high-tech industry and as an all-around avid gadget consumer, Bob asked me if I would write a guest blog about the burgeoning tablet “wars”. I'm happy to share my thoughts with you today.

Some background: At CES 2011 in Las Vegas, it seemed almost every company - and every brand- was announcing an iPad “killer”. The most serious threat to the iPad’s market share dominance was emerging from the Android 3.0 Honeycomb tablets such as the Motorola Xoom – a big winner at the show. Of course, there are others as well – the HP TouchPad, RIM’s Playbook and let’s try not to forget the Microsoft based tablets – but today we will focus Google’s Android platform.

Recently, the tone from the pundits has changed from touting the new tablets to a discussion on what they need to do in order to pose a more serious threat to the iPad. I’ve been struck by how these professional opinions often miss the key marketing components of the iPad’s success.

Communicating the Brand's Value Proposition
The Apple of today, perhaps better than any other company, knows how to create and communicate a value proposition. Take a look at the marketing of the iPad2 – everything from Steve Jobs’ keynote address, to the Apple website, to the TV commercials – clearly communicates what an iPad is and why you want one - See: http://www.apple.com/ca/ipad/#video

These reasons – a blend of emotional and cerebral – focus on:

• The beautiful and practical design
• The cool things you can do with it
• The ease with which you can do cool things

Marketing For and By Techno-Geeks
Next, let’s take a look at the Motorola Xoom’s Super Bowl ad:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FgOX9mb7V4o
This ad references the ground breaking 1984 ad that Apple used to launch the Macintosh. But how well does this commercial communicate the product’s value proposition? In general, I’d say it does a poor job. While it provides a glimpse of two features that the iPad does not have – 1) vector based maps (definitely a techno-geek feature); and 2) the cameras – the main message is that you should buy a Xoom because it will “empower you”. It’s not super clear what you will be empowered to do but apparently the loveliest of the drones will be impressed. I suppose the commercial is designed to appeal mostly to hardcore techno-geeks.
Let’s compare it with this TV commercial for the iPad2. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d9tXJ5UqXsg

This campaign is all about the cool things you can do with an iPad. If you didn’t know why you wanted an iPad, you probably now have a good idea.
Which brings me to CNET’s Top 5 ways that Android Tablets can beat the iPad (according IDC Research’s survey of app developers – do you already sense this is going to be problematic?) Click here.

#5 More Places to Buy Apps
I really don’t understand this one – how does the consumer benefit from having more places to buy apps? More apps - yes, better apps –sure... but, as far as I’m concern having more “places” to buy apps only serves to fragment and complicate the user’s experience. (More on fragmentation below).

#4 Honeycomb OS
This refers to Google’s latest operating system Android 3.0 (a.k.a. the Honeycomb OS). It’s designed specifically for tablets and offers the user greater flexibility to customize their workspace. There is definitely a segment of the market that wants more control over their devices – and the complexity that comes with it - but I think most people are interested in using their tablets to do cool things – like consuming or creating new media.

For example: You want to watch a movie. On the iPad you can rent or buy it from the iTunes store. Alternatively you can sign up for Netflix. It seems much more complicated with Android Tablets. Netflix is not offered because of the lack of copyright enforcement mechanisms and there is nothing that rivals Apple’s ecosystem of content from iTunes and apps from the App Store.

#3 More bells and whistles
This is where the pundits and the marketing of Android tablets miss the point. It’s not about bells & whistles per se, it’s about what you can do with those bell and whistles.

#2 Control Fragmentation
Ah yes, fragmentation... Android is more open, flexible and offers more freedom to developers and hardware manufacturers. The result is somewhat chaotic with multiple versions of the Android OS competing in the wild along with the possibility that the hardware manufacturer will add their own customized skin. It’s somewhat of a mess but yes, it could be tamed. However, it will never be able to match Apple’s well developed ecosystem where everything works together seamlessly and simply.

#1 Be Cheaper
It seems competing on price would offer the best potential to vanquish the iPad. If only someone would offer a similarly spec’d tablet at a lower price, perhaps it would make a real dent in Apple’s market share. However, it seems Apple has anticipated this strategy. While Apple has traditionally charged a premium for its products – a Macintosh usually costs 2 to 3 times more than a similar PC – it has decided to price the iPad very aggressively. Clearly, Apple’s intends to dominate this market through volume and the purchasing power that it bestows.


So far we’ve covered: Product, Promotion and Price – 3 of the 4 P’s of the marketing mix. What about Place? Well, where would you rather try, buy, and learn how to use a Tablet? Show of hands please:
1) Wal-Mart
2) Best Buy
3) Rogers Wireless
4) Apple Store

Given Apple’s advantage on all 4 Ps – a superior product with better promotion, at a very competitive price, through a more convenient distribution place – I believe Apple’s dominance in Tablets will continue and that it will be next to impossible for any competing tablets to outsell the iPad anytime soon.

Think I’m wrong? Feel free to let me know your thoughts – comments make a blog interesting ;-)