An Outline Marketing Plan for the Next Year for Atlantic Quench - Report Example

AN OUTLINE MARKETING PLAN FOR THE NEXT YEAR FOR ATLANTIC QUENCH Lecturer: The marketing plan was prepared with the aim of setting marketing goals for Atlantic Quench in the coming year. Four major market oriented objectives that focus on growth have been identified for the company. The objectives were set with specific emphasis on the current internal and external analysis of the company. Internally, Atlantic Quench is considered a mid-range competitor which has several other competitors at the high-range to beat in competition. Externally also, a number of threats to competition such as bargaining power of buyers and threat of new entrants were identified. For the company to ride above all these challenges and achieve its objectives, it is important that the company will focus on its new product development. Once this is done, the company will have the luxury of creating new market segment to expand its market volume. Contents Abstract 2 Chapter 1 Introduction 5 Chapter 2 Current marketing situation 5 2.1 Internal analysis 5 2.1.1 Market description 5 2.1.2 Product review 6 2.1.3 Competitive review 7 2.1.4 Distribution review 8 2.2 Macro Environment Analysis 8 2.2.1 Bargaining power of buyers 8 2.2.2 Bargaining power of suppliers 9 2.2.3 Threat of new entrants 9 2.2.4 Threat of substitute products 10 2.2.5 Intensity of competitive rivalry 10 Chapter 3 Threats and Opportunities analysis 11 3.1 Strengths 11 3.2 Weaknesses 11 3.3 Opportunities 11 3.4 Threats 11 Chapter 4 Objectives and issues 12 4.1 Objectives 12 4.2 Issues 12 Chapter 5 Marketing strategy 13 5.1 Positioning 13 5.2 Product strategy 13 5.3 Pricing strategy 14 5.4 Distribution strategy 15 5.5 Marketing Communication strategy 15 5.6 Marketing research 16 5.7 Marketing Organization 17 Chapter 6 Marketing implementation 18 Chapter 7 Budget 19 Chapter 8 Control 20 References 21 List of Tables Table 1: Market share and value of the UK soft drink industry 6 Table 2: Financial position of competitors (2013) 7 Table 3: Marketing implementation chart 18 Table 4: Marketing Budget 19 List of Figures Figure 1: Fruit juices, energy and juice drink market volume in UK 7 Figure 2: Ansoff Matrix 14 Figure 3: Marketing research outline 17 Figure 4: Projected return on capital 20 Chapter 1 Introduction With over 80 years of experience as fruit drink producer, Atlantic Quench has strived over the years to maintain its market share and reputation as a competitive brand. To do this effectively, there are several factors and strategies that need to be put together. This is because Kotler and Keller (2009) noted that corporate business competitiveness is a holistic responsibility that requires several interconnected duties to achieve. Adding to this, Adcock, Halborg and Ross (2001) highlighted the important place of marketing in these interconnected duties, claiming that marketing acts as the forum through which all internal and external efforts being made for the growth of the company is carried to the public. In the light of this, this report is prepared as an outline marketing plan for the next year for Atlantic Quench. As a marketing plan, it contains way in which the company can base on its current marketing situation and competitive position to structure itself for growth. Chapter 2 Current marketing situation 2.1 Internal analysis 2.1.1 Market description Atlantic Quench finds itself within the overall soft drink industry. Within this market, there are several segments that come together to fit what each company is doing. As far as Atlantic Quench is concerned, the company can be said to belong to the fruit juices, energy and juice drinks segment. Comparing the said segment to the overall soft drink industry, Key Note (2014) notes that the segment is a an excellent performing one because even though it does not control over 50% of industry market share, it controls a very high percentage than any other single segment. In the table below, the market value of the segment and its percentage share as against the larger soft drinks industry is presented. Table 1: Market share and value of the UK soft drink industry Segment 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Fruit juices, energy and juice drinks (£m) 4,392 4,764 5,169 5,378 5,529 All soft drinks (£m) 13,010 13,770 14,475 14,955 15,530 Fruit juices, energy and juice drinks as a % of all soft drinks 33.8 34.6 35.7 36.0 35.6 Source: Key Note (2014) 2.1.2 Product review Narrowing the review to products under the fruit juices, energy and juice drinks segment, there are three major lines of products that can be identified as the name suggests. These are fruit juice, under which products having 100% fruit composition are considered; juice drinks, which contain less than 100% fruit composition; and energy drinks. Within the three product sectors, the fruit juice sector is controlled by ambient and chilled products, of which ambient juices have 45% market share and chilled juices have 55% market share (Key Note, 2014). Within the juice drink sector which also includes sports drinks, products with high fruit content of 25% to 99% are said to lead the market with 64% market share (Key Note, 2014). The value and volume sales of energy drinks have also been noted to experience massive increases when compared to other soft drinks (Key Note, 2014). Of the three sectors, the graph below represents their market volume from 2009. Figure 1: Fruit juices, energy and juice drink market volume in UK Source: Key Note (2014) 2.1.3 Competitive review In the table below, an overview is given about some of the major competitors in the industry and their financial position. Table 2: Financial position of competitors (2013) Company Sale (£000) Pre-tax profit (£000) Return on capital (%) Net worth (£000) AG Barr plc 237,595 31,822 19.8 56,288 Boost Drinks ltd 23,59 1,074 33.5 2,801 Britvic Soft Drinks ltd 864,157 233,863 40.52 409,170 Cawingredients ltd 44,328 3,626 17.10 15,114 Coca-Cola Enterprises 1,794,602 258,660 50.36 477,518 Cott Beverages ltd 298,505 10,542 4.00 188,672 Source: Key Note (2014) Among the competitors, it can be seen that there are the large companies which are Coca Cola and Britvic Soft Drinks, the medium, which are AG Barr and Cott Beverages, and the small, which are Boost Drinks and Cawingridients. Kerin (2012) noted that whereas the large companies have emphasized on promotion, the medium ones focus on distribution as a way of catching up with the large, whiles the small ones use low prices as a competitive advantage. 2.1.4 Distribution review Distribution is an important component of marketing which ensures that finished products reach final consumers in tie and in the quantity they desire (Trout, 2009). In the fruit drink sector where Atlantic Quench finds itself, distribution has largely followed a business to consumer (B2C) model where manufacturers target consumers as part of their distribution plans. Because of this, it is common to see most companies use intensive distribution where the producers stock their products in majority of outlets (Kotler and Keller, 2012). Exclusive distribution is virtually not seen but selective distribution is also used among larger companies in the industry (Dev and Schultz, 2005). With such selective distribution, the companies make use of intermediaries who carry the products to consumers (Ries and Trout, 2011). 2.2 Macro Environment Analysis 2.2.1 Bargaining power of buyers The levels of bargaining power of buyers within the fruit drink sector and the soft drink industry as a whole has been noted to be one of the highest among any other sector (Goldstein and Lee, 2005). This situation has largely been attributed to the number of suppliers within the industry. As observed under the demand and supply theory, whenever there are more suppliers than demand, prices are forced to go down (Kotler and Gary, 2012). This is because buyers become highly selective with suppliers whose prices are low. This situation, coupled with the ready availability of fruit drinks has given buyers a better urge to always have control over prices. For Atlantic Quench to control this in the coming year, it is important to focus on value addition, which has been noted to be a strategy used to suppress the bargaining power of buyers (Dacko, 2008). 2.2.2 Bargaining power of suppliers The bargaining power of suppliers is said to be influenced by several factors, including the number of suppliers available within an industry and to individual producers (Acker, 1998). This is so because when there are fewer suppliers serving the entire industry or serving a particular producer, the suppliers have the bargaining power to increase prices of their services (Christensen, 2007). In the case of Atlantic Quench, the role played by the company’s group of farmers have ensured that the threat of bargaining power of suppliers have been minimised entirely. This is because instead of relying on the suppliers working at the industry level, the company depends on its own supplies from the farmers. This is a situation that the company can take advantage of by expanding its internal supplies so that it can begin supplying raw materials to other competitors as a way of increasing company revenue. 2.2.3 Threat of new entrants Due to the perfect market structure of the industry, there are new entrants coming in every now and then. Krapfel, Ali Jr, and LaBahn (2005) however admonished the need to focus on the competitiveness of the new entrants to determine the extent of threat they pose to existing companies such as Atlantic Quench. In the case of Atlantic Quench, the company’s major competitive advantage against new entrants is its 80 year of constant market presence. This gives the company a brand equity with which it competes. Aiken, Bacharach and French (2000) however warned that even though companies may have brand equity, it is possible that new entrants will use their capital position to pose a threat, especially when these new entrants focus directly on promotion. With this said the need for Atlantic Quench to also focus on promotion will be emphasised. 2.2.4 Threat of substitute products The nature of segmentation and sections within the soft drink industry alone increases the extent of threat of substitute products that can be created for companies. This is because as seen already, there are several sectors under the industry, each of which seems to offer a different line of product from the other. Particularly for Atlantic Quench which focuses on fruit drinks in the forms of fruit juices and juice drinks, the company’s major substitute products are energy drinks, chocolate drinks and sports drinks. As seen in table 1, when put together, these substitute products have higher volume than what Atlantic Quench deals in. This means that there is higher threat of substitute products for Atlantic Quench. To deal with this threat, it is important for the company to look into diversifying its product lines (Kenny and Barron, 2006). 2.2.5 Intensity of competitive rivalry Atlantic Quench cannot be said to have an advantage when it comes to the intensity of competitive rivalry faced by the company. This is because as a company that is generally in the middle level of competitive market size, the company has all competitors of larger size and those of medium size to compete with. Meanwhile, a good number of these competitors are known to be already engaged in diversified trading, which increases their operating capital. As a result, these other competitors have always taken the lead when it comes to publicity and promotion. To deal with this situation, the need for Atlantic Quench to emphasise on capital generating marketing is advised (Amabile, 1988). With such capital in hand, the company can freely invest in publicity and promotion as a way of consolidating their already impressive brand equity. Chapter 3 Threats and Opportunities analysis 3.1 Strengths 1. High profit margins dues to low cost of raw materials and supply 2. Standby supplier service from farmers leading to low bargaining power of suppliers 3. Brand equity which makes the company preferable over most new entrants 3.2 Weaknesses 1. Lack of differentiation in the products of the company, making it difficult to have a strategic position 2. Inability of the company to diversify its product type successfully in over 80 years of operation 3. High internal spending which limits the gains from the in-house supply 3.3 Opportunities 1. Limitation on the importation of finished fruit drinks helps local companies to remain competitive among themselves 2. The use of technology has generally come to make intensity with production easier, creating the avenue to reduce overall cost of production 3. Demand for healthier products means that Atlantic Quench can take the opportunity to create a differentiation 3.4 Threats 1. Larger companies continue to diversify their business, increasing their operating capital 2. Short lifespan of raw materials 3. International entry is allowed virtually under green field investment, which is expensive to undertake Chapter 4 Objectives and issues 4.1 Objectives Based on the internal and external analysis of the company as performed above, it is important to form objectives for the company that are based on its identified competitive position. The idea behind the set objectives is to ensure that Atlantic Quench is able to maximise its strengths by taking advantage of its opportunities, whiles minimising its weaknesses by avoiding its threats. Four major objectives into the given year are thus identified below 1. To increase the company’s market share in the fruit drinks sector of the soft drink industry by 17% 2. To increase its sales revenue by 20% 3. To reduce its internal spending by 15% 4. To improve internally generally fund from supplies to other companies 4.2 Issues In order for the company to achieve the objectives outlined above, there are very important issues that it needs to address as part of its business operations. In the first place, there is the issue of diversification of the company’s products. As seen from the company’s case, there was a new product development attempted by the company. Dosi (1988) stressed on the ability of such new product development models to widen the market segment of companies. For Atlantic Quench to attain the 17% market share, it is expected that serious attention will be given to the new product development which was started so that an entirely new market segment can be created for the new product to be developed (Jerald, Collins and Hull, 2008). The issue of value addition can also help the company realise the objective of increasing sales revenue by 20%. This is because such value addition can ensure that the company can charge higher prices for its products due to the differentiation to be created (Becker, 2012). Also, internal spending can be reduced by implementing lean production as a way of addressing the issue of waste within the company (Conner, 2011). Finally, it is important to empower the farmers by raising their stake in the company so that they can produce more to supply the company and other competitors with raw fruits. Chapter 5 Marketing strategy 5.1 Positioning Mohr and Downs (2006) noted that companies use positioning to identify either problems or opportunities within the larger market and develop solution based approaches to tackling them. In the light of this, three major positioning theories are used, which are functional positions, symbolic positions and experiential positions (Shram and Becker, 2004). Based on the current internal and external analysis of Atlantic Quench, it is strongly recommended that into the future, the company uses symbolic positions as a means of widening its existing competitive advantage. This will means that the company will be looking at self-image enhancement, ego identification, belongingness and social meaningfulness, as well as affective fulfilment (Wesley and Levinthal, 2010). The rationale for this suggestion is that the fruit drink industry can hardly be differentiated based on products. In the light of this, if companies want any form of value addition, it is worth it that this is focused on symbolic positioning, which focuses on brand (Scott and Cashen, 2002). 5.2 Product strategy One best theory that has been used in the development of product strategy is the Ansoff matrix. The rationale behind the use of the Ansoff matrix in developing product strategy is that Eisenhardt and Jeffrey (2000) noted the theory to be useful in portraying alternative corporate growth strategies. What this implies is that through the matrix, companies are able to determine where they are currently positioned and based on it to come up with a new growth strategy that guarantee better growth. As depicted in the figure below, by the use of the Ansoff matrix, Atlantic Quench will be further motivated to focus on diversification and the growth of its new product development in attracting new markets. Whiles doing this, a market penetration model will also be developed for existing markets. With new products created and new markets introduced for the new products through diversification, the company will be better placed to achieve its objectives on growth (Frost, 2001). Figure 2: Ansoff Matrix 5.3 Pricing strategy To develop a pricing strategy for Atlantic Quench’s products for the coming year, the use Bowman’s strategy clock is recommended. This is because the Bowman’s strategy clock helps companies to compare the nature of their products and base on that to determine price of the products (Weinkauf, Hoegl and Gemuenden, 2004). More specifically, the company is admonished to choose a pricing strategy that places both production and prices in moderation. With this said the hybrid competitive position is recommended for use. Under this Atlantic Quench will be expected to charge moderate prices whiles engaging in moderate differentiation (Hoff, 2004). As it has been emphasised from the beginning, it will be difficult for the company’s differentiation to be focused on the products. This is because there are production standards in the UK which makes almost all companies have the same level of product value addition. It is therefore expected that the moderate differentiation will be focused on such other aspects of the products as packaging, label and brand differentiation as a whole. 5.4 Distribution strategy The distribution strategy for the company can best be defined in its distribution channel (Wood, 2011). Already, there is heavy reliance on business to consumer (B2C) distribution in the soft drink industry. This is because the ordinary consumer seems to form a larger customer base for the companies than businesses (Trout and Rivkin, 2006). This notwithstanding, it is recommended that within the B2C distribution, the company employs a channel mix, which will comprise the use of a mix of different channels. The channel mix is expected to comprise three distribution models which are direct sales-force, agents and online retailing. Whiles the direct sales-force will be focusing on larger customers, the agents will be looking at smaller and individual customers (Seiler, 2008). The online retailing on the other hand is expected to be a reservation based distribution that serves the needs of organised consumers (Moore, 2001). 5.5 Marketing Communication strategy Marketing communication strategies are very important for companies to create brand awareness (Hitt, Hoskisson, Johnson and Moesel, 2006). Already, it has been emphasised that Atlantic Quench needs a lot of attention and focus for its product promotion. It is therefore expected that through marketing communication strategies, the company will be better placed to promote its brand to consumers. Indeed one area that the company is expected to highlight on in its marketing communication is the health value of its fruit drinks. To do this, a strategy that aims at projecting customer benefits is recommended (Kahneman and Tversky, 2009). In the fruit drinks sector, industry players often get the notion that consumers are aware of the customer benefits associated with products. They therefore devote less resource to such publicity. Should Atlantic Quench take up the initiative, it would mean it will be having an upper hand over its core competitors in terms of promotion (Geroski, Machin and van Reenen, 2013). 5.6 Marketing research Marketing research is very important in gathering information about products and services that create value (Kahn and Manopichetwattana, 2009). This is often confused with market research but in market research, the emphasis is on the market by way of its size and trends (Juga, 1999). For Atlantic Quench, its marketing research is expected to cover wider area than information on the market so that it will be possible for the company to learn more about what it needs to do about its products in order to create value. This is expected to entail an overall marketing research process that will be broken down into the forms of processes outlined in the chart below. Figure 3: Marketing research outline 5.7 Marketing Organization The whole idea of executing the marketing plan for Atlantic Quench is not something that can be achieved in isolation from the remaining parts of the company. It is therefore expected that there will be a whole marketing organisation that aims at modelling how the company will structure its responsibilities and marketing activities (Russell, 1990). In line with the needs of modern business processing which take a centre stage on the use of technology, it is recommended that the marketing organisation for the company will make use of the marketing logic enterprise structure which breaks the organisation into units and assigns roles to the units based on their unique qualities (Sarin and Mahajan, 2001). Chapter 6 Marketing implementation The implementation phase of the strategic marketing process is one of the most important when it comes to the need for companies to realise their marketing goals for the year (Schneider, Hanges, Smith and Salvaggio, 2003). In the case of Atlantic Quench, four major issues are focused on as part of the marketing implementation. This includes what needs to be done, when actions need to be taken, who needs to take action, as how much the marketing actions will cost. In the table below, a marketing implementation chart is prepared to depict how the four issues will be carried out through the achievement of the four objectives earlier set in the plan. Table 3: Marketing implementation chart Objective Action to take When to take action Who to take action How much action will cost (£000) Increase market share by 17% Promote new product development Already in place Marketing team 42,000 Increase sales revenue by 20% Create brand differentiation By the end of 2014 Sales team 30,000 Reduce internal spending by 15% Implement lean production Start immediately Production team - Become a raw material supplier Increase stake of each farmer in company By the start of 2015 Farmers 15,000 Chapter 7 Budget The marketing plan outlined in the report is expected to be executed by the use of the marketing budget given below. Table 4: Marketing Budget Expenditure Mix 2014 2015 2016 2017 Personnel Manufacturing Costs 1,500,000 1,200,000 1,000,000 Salaries 140,000 160,000 180,000 Allowances 50,000 70,000 90,000 Other expenses 134,000 114,750 84,000 Total 1,824,000 1,544,750 1,354,000 Research Marketing Research 55,000 57,000 50,100 Market research 3,000 4,000 4,000 Total 58,000 61,000 54,100 Marketing Media 327,442 300,000 350,000 Web 25,207 22,267 20,796 Roadshows 25,000 25,000 30,000 Events 34,000 34,000 40,000 Print 10,000 10,000 10,000 Social Networking 15,000 10,000 10,000 Total 436,649 401,267 460,796 Grand Total 2,318,649 2,007,017 1,868,896 Earning Mix Booking units 15,834 15,000 18,000 Growth rate 20% 20% 20% Value per booking 35,000 33,000 31,000 Gross revenue 4,842,000 5,050,000 6,600,000 Profits 2,523,351 3,042,983 4,731,104 Chapter 8 Control As the company invests millions of pounds into the marketing for the coming year, it is important that there will be a control to monitor the extent of profitability associated with the investment (Tsai and Sumantra, 1998). To do this and do it well, there will be the use of an investment control measure, which is return on investment (ROI). This is a risk measure that works by taking a percentage of net profit against how much is invested as expenditure (Utterback, 2011). The ROI is very important to use because it will help the company keep an eye on both expenditure and returns. This is because most companies have been accused of having very minimal return on capital because they spend more than they earn or spend higher percentage of what they earn to what they spend (Utterback and Abernathy, 2005). Once this is done, the following return on capital will be expected. Figure 4: Projected return on capital References Acker D. A. (1998). Developing Business Strategies. New York: John Wiley and Sons Adcock, D, Halborg A. and Ross C. (2001). "Introduction". Marketing: principles and practice (4th ed.). Xavier thomas. Aiken, M., Bacharach S. B. and French J. L. (2000), "Organizational Structure, Work Processes, and Proposal Making in Administrative Bureaucracies," Academy of Management Journal, 20, 631-52. Amabile, T. M. (1988), “A Model of Creativity and Innovation in Organizations,” in Research in Organizational Behavior Volume 10, Barry M. Staw and L.L. Cummings (Eds). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press, 123-167. Becker, B. J. (2012), “Models of Science Achievement: Forces Affecting Male and Female Performance in School Science,” In TD Cook (Ed.), Meta-Analysis for Explanation: A Casebook. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation, 209-281. Christensen, C. M. (2007), The innovators dilemma: when new technologies cause great firms to fail, Boston, Massachusetts, USA: Harvard Business School Press Conner, K. R. (2011), “A Historical Comparison of Resource-Based Theory and Five Schools of Thought Within Industrial Organizational Economics: Do We Have a New Theory of the Firm?,” Journal of Management, 17(1), 121-154. Dacko, S. G. (2008). The advanced dictionary of marketing. pp. 377–378. Dev, C. S. and Schultz D. E. (2005). "In the Mix: A Customer-Focused Approach Can Bring the Current Marketing Mix into the 21st Century". Marketing Management 14 (1). Dosi, G. (1988), “Sources, Procedures, and Microeconomic Effects of Innovation,” Journal of Economic Literature, 26(September), 1120-1171. Eisenhardt, K. M. and Jeffrey A. M. (2000), “Dynamic Capabilities: What are They?,” Strategic Management Journal, 21, 1105-1121. Frost, T. S. (2001), "The Geographic Sources of Foreign Subsidiaries Innovations,"Strategic Management Journal, 22, 101-23. Geroski, P., Machin S. and van Reenen J. (2013), “The Profitability of Innovating Firms,” RAND Journal of Economics, 24(2), 198-211. Goldstein, D. and Lee, Y. (2005). "The rise of right-time marketing". The Journal of Database Marketing & Customer Strategy Management 12 (3): 212–225. Hitt, M. A., Hoskisson R. E., Johnson R. A., and Moesel D. D. (2006), "The Market for Corporate Control and Firm Innovation," Academy of Management Journal, 39 (October), 1048-119. Hoff, R.D. (2004), “Building an Idea Factory,” BusinessWeek, October 11, 194-200. Jerald, P. D., Collins H. and Hull F. M. (2008), "Organizational and Technological Predictors of Change in Automaticity," Academy of Management Journal, 31 (September), 512-43. Juga, J. (1999), “Generic Capabilities: Combining Positional and Resource-Based Views for Strategic Advantage,” Journal of Strategic Marketing, 7, 3-18. Kahn, A. M. and Manopichetwattana V. (2009), "Innovative and Noninnovative Small Firm: Types and Characteristics," Management Science, 35 (May), 597-606. Kahneman, D. and Tversky A. (2009), “Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decisions Under Risk,” Econometrica, 47, 263-291. Kenny, R.M. and Barron D.A. (2006), “The Moderator-Mediator Variable Distinction in Social Psychological Research: Conceptual, Strategic, and Statistical Considerations,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6),1173-1182. Kerin, R. A. (2012). Marketing: The Core. McGaw-Hill Ryerson. Key Note (2014). Fruit Juices, Energy & Juice Drinks. London: University of Cambridge. Kotler, A. and Gary P. (2012). Principles of Marketing. pearson education. Kotler, P. and Keller K. L. (2009). "1". A Framework for Marketing Management (4th ed.). Pearson Prentice Hall. Kotler, P. and Keller, L. K. (2012). Marketing Management 14e. Pearson Education Limited Krapfel R., Ali, A., Jr, and LaBahn D. (2005), "Product Innovativeness and Entry Strategy: Impact on Cycle Time and Break-Even Time," Journal of Product Innovation Management, 12, 54-69. Levi, K. (2007) "Differentiate or Diminish: The Art and Necessity of Business Positioning", Mohr, G. W. and Downs L. B. (2006), "Conceptual Issues in the Study of Innovation," Administrative Science Quarterly, 21 (December), 700-14. Moore, G. (2001) Crossing the Chasm, HarperCollins Publishers, 1991. Ries, A. and Trout, J. (2011) Positioning, The battle for your mind, Warner Books - McGraw-Hill Inc., New York, 1981, ISBN 0-446-34794-9 Russell, R. (1990), “Innovation in Organizations: Toward an Integrated Model,” Review of Business, 12(2), 19-25. Sarin, S. and Mahajan V. (2001), “The Effect of Reward Structure on the Performance of Cross-Functional Product Development Teams,” Journal of Marketing, 65(2), 35-53. Schneider, B., Hanges P. J., Smith D. B. and Salvaggio A. N. (2003), “Which Comes First: Employee Attitudes or Organizational Financial and Market Performance?,” Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 836-851. Scott G. W. and Cashen L. H. (2002), "A Multidimensional Examination of Slack and its Impact on Innovation," Journal of Managerial Issues, 14 (Spring), 68-84. Seiler G. R. (2008). “Customer-oriented marketing: A cure for confusion.” Management Review; Vol. 77 Issue 6, pp. 50, Shram, B. J., and Becker C.M. (2004), “Examining Explanatory Models Through Research Synthesis,” In H Cooper, LV Hedges (Eds.), The Handbook of Research Synthesis. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation, 357-381. Trout, J. and Rivkin, S. (2006) The New Positioning : The latest on the worlds #1 business strategy, McGraw Hill, New York, 1996, ISBN 0-07-065291-0 Trout, J., (2009) ""Positioning" is a game people play in today’s me-too market place", Industrial Marketing, Vol.54, No.6, (June 1969), pp. 51–55. Tsai, W. and Sumantra G. (1998), “Social Capital and Value Creation: The Role of Intrafirm Networks,” Academy of Management Journal, 41(4), 464-476. Utterback, J. M. (2011), "The Process of Technological Innovation Within the Firm," Academy of Management Journal, 14, 75-88. Utterback, J. M. and Abernathy W. J. (2005), "A Dynamic Model of Process and Product Innovation," Omega, 3, 639-56. Weinkauf, M., Hoegl K.and Gemuenden H. G. (2004), “Interteam Coordination, Project Commitment, and Teamwork in Multiteam R&D Projects: A Longitudinal Study,” Organization Science, 15(1), 38-55. Wesley C. and Levinthal D. (2010), “Absorptive Capacity: A New Perspective on Learning and Innovation,” Administrative Science Quarterly, 35, 128-152. Wood M. B (2011). The marketing plan handbook. Liverpool: Pearson Education. Read More