Strategic Marketing Plan for Apple - Case Study Example

Strategic Marketing Plan for Apple Executive Summary Apple Inc. was founded over 35 year by Steve Jobs and specializes in mobile phone and computer technology proliferations. The major products are Apple TV, iPhones, and iPods. It has experienced major changes in the computer and information industry. The product life cycle comprise introduction, growth, maturity and decline stages. Most of its products are in the growth stage. The company is upbeat in going for new markets and taking a new position through allocating resources to its traditional sets (computers) and its newer products. It employs creative market entry strategies like flanking and leapfrog. The company is a follower after Toshiba and Samsung. By understanding its position in the product life cycle Apple asserts a unique retail strategy that informs the firm’s product decisions. Apple also uses the collaborative organizational structure to like functions and communication among employees. The mobile telephony and internet markets provide applications to many of the listed stages (Gronroos, 2004). Apple marketing researchers use the internet for research to cut costs and save time. It capitalizes on emerging and new trends hence sustaining its competitive advantage and market share (Boxall, & Purcell, 2007). The Computer giant is committed to safeguarding the environment, employee safety, health and, global communities and customers. The company practices involve compliance to business ethics and social responsibility. Apple sales since 2006 have been on the rise. Table of Contents Strategic Marketing Plan for Apple 0 Executive Summary 0 Table of Contents 1 Introduction 2 Product life cycle of Apple 2 New market entry 4 Pioneer or follower strategies 6 Growth strategies 8 Shake-out, mature and declining strategies 10 Shake-out 10 Maturity stage 11 A declining industry 12 Organizational structure of Apple 14 Marketing Metrics and Marketing Audit 16 Marketing Audit 18 Marketing environmental audit 18 Ethical Audit of Apple 19 Introduction Apple Inc. founded in 1977 in California, US is one of the globally most recognizable and successful companies. With over 35 year of existence, it has experienced major changes in the computer and information industry. Perhaps it has a great future as a computer giant in a rapidly dynamic world. The company is upbeat in going for new markets and taking a new position through allocating resources to its traditional sets (computers) and its newer products; Apple TV, iPhones, and iPods so as to improve and maintain its market position. By understanding its position in the product life cycle Apple asserts a unique retail strategy that informs the firm’s product decisions. It can capitalize on emerging and new trends hence sustaining its competitive advantage and market share (Boxall, & Purcell, 2007). The Computer giant is committed to safeguarding the environment, employee safety, health and, global communities and customers. It recognizes that learning its internal and external environments can take the business to the next level of performance, increased market share and competitive advantage. Product life cycle of Apple The Apple product life cycles shows that iPad and iPhone are set to fly high in the next few years. The iPod took about five years to hit the 30 million units per year mark. The iPhone took four years while iPad made it in the second year after launch. Apple product Life Cycles are rapid and higher than expected (Birchall, 2009). For Apple, it has taken over four years in the growth stage evidenced from the range of products currently in the lineup. These are the iPad and the iPhone that are projected to hit more than hundred million units per year mark in 2013 and 2014. The Apple growth story continues despite the popularity of the Androids. Sales of iPod peaked in 2008 when it was below 55 million units and soared to about 45 million units in 2009. The iPhone sales were under 70 million units followed closely by iPad (Boxall, & Purcell, 2007). The exciting growth phase of Apple between 2009 and 2012 saw revenues rise to over $100 billion in 2011. Generally Apple product life cycle is supposed to have four definite stages; introduction (embryonic), growth, maturity and decline which can be plotted with volumes against time. The introduction (embryonic) phase is associated with high costs, slow sales volumes, and no or little competition. At this point, customers will need stimulation to act (Boxall, & Purcell, 2007). The product is cash extensive, limited in profits and substantial marketing costs. Principal customers are early adopters and tend to be innovators. Apple is currently in the growth phase where volumes have increased and unit costs reduced. Over greater volume, advertising is amortized, market awareness is extended to the ‘early majority’ after product familiarity with ‘early adopters’. What may seem to fall are price levels due to more competitors entering the market increasing the level of competition (Isenberg, 2006). The product remains cash extensive though profits increase due to rise in working capital or marketing investment. The maturity stage is evidenced by lowered costs with increased volumes. The alternative products start to date the original product offering since the market is more competitive (Menn, & Bradshaw, 2010). The product starts to generate cash and remains profitable. The ‘late majority’ joins the early adopters, innovators, and early majority. The decline or saturation phase is characterized by decline in sales volumes, constant profits margins and cash generative product. The luddites and laggards still experience difficulty in entering the market (Guest et al, 2003). The product life cycle of Apple is as shown in the graphs below; Source: Apple Bulletin 2012 New market entry Repositioning: Repositioning Apple is not an easy undertaking. The company repositions along a product line based on the understanding competitor reaction to change and dynamics in the current market. Making decisions may be difficult if a change is unprecedented and volatile due to insufficient information available. Understanding the weaknesses and strengths of Apple helps in establishing when to reposition or occurrence of the changes. Apple was able to achieve success and change its financial situation when it switched its focus to its successors and iPod (Lewis, 2010). This scenario was also reinforced by creation of a product that is in demand and complete dedication of stakeholders. This helped company to survive a repositioning strategy. It is known that when companies grow, market conditions change and product lines expand, owners of business struggle with an organizational brand image no longer reflecting their mission or vision. Beginning with a a very specific product like iPod or a in a niche market such as consultants, or with, and building the entire Apple identity around it, the business will serve a unique, larger or more integrated customer base. Repositioning is appropriate in case the company name is right but wrong in message or image. Apple simply removed the word “Computers” and took up the line as “think different.” The company ceased to position their brand as a “computer company” but instead called it a “cool digital lifestyle provider”. This makes sense since Apple brand name is well established and thus not misleading. This is not essentially an identity issue as it is with the reputation and image. Apple did not require a change in their name despite expanding beyond its initial core computer product line (Lamb, 2004). New product line for Apple: iPod came into existence in 2001 followed by iPhone 2007 and late iPad in 2010. At present, Apple is preparing a completely new product line. In anticipation it is to release new Mac line-up different from present products. They have redefined the iMac which since 2004 has remained a stable form factor (Bruce, & Duane, 2010). IMac G5 was the initially a Mac introduced with first holistic flat panel. The most logical but wild iMac redefinition was its hardware redesign merging touch computing. Current consumers are craving for direct touch screen interaction readying the market for a jump. Users of iPad from musicians, architects, doctors to executives are quick to learn the language and desire a more powerful and larger product (Po Li, 2003). The next generation iMac will could be Apple's new product entirely embracing the touch interface features. Pioneer or follower strategies In any case Apple can become a follower by default by simply being challenged to a new product- market by a quicker competitor like Toshiba or Samsung. Though it was capable of being a first mover, the observations above shows merit in letting other firms pioneer into a product-market (Spellings, 2009). The pioneer shoulders the early risks but the followers observe their mistakes and shortcomings. A preference misjudge by the pioneer, mass-market segment purchase criteria or trying to fulfill requirements of two or more segments at ago deems vulnerable to the follower to introduce precisely positioned products. Pioneers can be successfully encircled by followers if they tailor their offerings to each distinct segment (Lymbersky, 2008). In the case where the pioneer’s early products contain design flaws or technical limitations, these weaknesses can become the strengths of the follower. Despite technically satisfactory products from the pioneer, the follower gains advantage on product enhancements. Apple was able to capture a considerable share of the world’s mobile phone market through iPhone’s sleek design, functionality, and innovative software from well-established competitors such as Motorola and Nokia (Lymbersky, 2008). If marketing mistakes are made by the pioneer while introducing a new entry, opportunities are opened for late entrants. For instance, the pioneer can fail to achieve sufficient distribution, too little expenditure on introductory advertising, or use fruitless promotional appeals in product benefits communication. These mistakes are observed by followers in marketing program design that overcomes and successfully competes head-on with the pioneer. Even in product levels with substantial positive network effects, marketing mistakes renders the pioneer vulnerable to problems from later entrants (Lymbersky, 2008). For instance, the operating system of Microsoft’s Windows was not the first market user-friendly system. However, Microsoft aggressively priced and promoted Windows by partnering with Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEMs). They encouraged them to install on their machines Windows while engaging in cooperative agreements and extensive licensing with several software developers. Through these actions, Windows harnessed a sizeable market share of the operating systems as a result generating great positive network effects for Windows (Gronroos, 2004). Followers can perhaps introduce products from superior industries identified through quick technological advances and second- generation expertise hence gaining an advantage over the pioneer (Lymbersky, 2008). The pioneer can face challenges of reacting quickly to technological advances if heavily aligned to the initial technology. Thus, Apple anticipates its new diagmatic video technology a leap advantage in the iPad market where key competitors like Toshiba will have difficulties matching. A pioneer with limited marketing programs or resources for production or fails to invest adequate resources to its new entry, makes it easier for followers able and willing to outspend few enduring constraints to pioneer experience (Po Li, 2003). Growth strategies Flank strategy:  This is suitable where a market can be dissected into two or more larger segments. The leader or key competitors should be holding a solid position in the primary segment. There should be no existing brand that entirely satisfies the customer’s needs in at least one other segment. Hence, a challenger is able to capture a huge share of the entire market by deliberating basically on one sizeable untapped segment (Po Li, 2003). This entail creating services tailored or product features meeting the preferences and needs of the target customers alongside suitable pricing and promotional policies that builds on selective demand. Apple Company penetrated the Australian phone market by concentrating on the low-price segment, where offerings by the local manufacturers were scarce (Mulcaster, 2009). Mobile phone makers were at first unconcerned by this flanking action. The competitors failed since Apple had aggressively pursued a segment they deemed to be unprofitable and small. In some instances, a flourishing flank attack may not involve specific product features (Po Li, 2003). Alternatively, a challenger can meet the unique requirements of an untapped segment through specially designed distribution channels or customer services. For instance, Apple’s iTunes music store holds the recorded music market by about five percent globally. They offer a legal and convenient way for Web-savvy customers to download and locate songs for their individual music libraries. Leapfrog Strategy: A challenger has the opportunity of attracting replacement or repeat purchases from current customers of a competitor where it is potential to offer a product that is attractive and differentiated from the offerings of a competitor. The success odds could be greater where the challenger offers more superior product with a more sophisticated design or advanced technology (Donnelly, 2002). This essentially is the leapfrog strategy. It attempts to attain a sizeable advantage over current competition through introduction of new generation products that offers or surpasses enviable customer benefits than current brands. For instance, the introduction of reasonably priced iPad Apple mini by Apple manufacturers largely took over the iPad market and a large market share of digital camera photography equipment (Camp, 2009). This strategy may inhibit quick retaliation by traditional competitors since they are firms attain some success based on a single technology or committing substantial resources to equipment and plant devoted to an existing product (Wheelright, & Clark, 2002). There is reluctance to switch to a new product due to involvement of large investments or fear to upset existing customers. A leapfrog strategy may not be suitable for many challengers. They must have superior technology compared to established competitors to be successful. Besides, the process and product engineering capabilities should be to convert that technology into a desirable product (Hamel, & Prahalad, 2009). In addition, they must possess the marketing resources that convinces and promote its new products to customers so far glued to earlier technology. The new products need to offer adequate benefits to validate the costs of switching. Shake-out, mature and declining strategies Shake-out In the shakeout stage, there is increased share in the event of fierce competition. Investment is great in share-increasing strategies which come at cost to weak competitors (Lamb, 2004). During the harvest stage, weak companies need to exit the industry. What came earlier than anticipated is the shake-out of the ten-year old industry of personal computer. Competitive advantage: Apple was able to lower its prices up to twenty eight percent and successfully took over the low-end market with its cheap line of Apple iPads. The occasion made other computer manufacturers to follow suit with price cuts. Toshiba and Samsung brought to the market its iPad line purposed at executives and tourists. Prices from vendors like Compaq and IBM resembles those of the no- name clones (Lamb, 2004). Current consumers are shifting to high-end brands from the low-end clones. The raging price war continues hence strengthening strong players and reducing susceptible manufacturers to ashes. Market share: In the United States, Apple and IBM dominate the market with an estimated thirty two percent market share while Packard Bell, Compaq, Dell, Everex, AST, and NEC, commands about thirty percent. The rest is taken up by obscure clone makers (Lamb, 2004).  Maturity stage They maintain and hold so as to defend business model. Here, dominant firms desire to reap the reward of earlier investments. Their investments are based on the competition levels which are a source of competitive advantage. As mature industries evolve, they become consolidated owing to fierce competition experienced in the shakeout stage. The business level strategy depends on how established firms can reduce strength of competition collectively (Lamb, 2004). Also, interdependent firms move to safeguard the profitability of the industry. Increased Penetration: Apple can increase the size of users by shifting the existing non-users in one bigger market segment. A relative homogeneous market containing a few large segments is relatively low in penetration. Apple competitors may be holding relatively small market shares (Hamel, & Prahalad, 2009). Apple is a market share leader in iPad products owing to presence of promotional resources that stimulate the marketing competencies and primary demand capable of producing line extensions or product modifications. Extended Use: Increased use of iPad mini products by the average customer increases the frequency of adopting more varied and new ways to utilize the product. Toshiba or Samsung should hold relatively small market shares. This is evidenced by low frequency of utility in one or more key segments during high penetration or homogeneous market having few large segments (Hamel, & Prahalad, 2009). Finally, the Apple marketing resources and competencies to promote and develop new uses profits and investments in the mature stage vary from moderate to low levels. A declining industry Here, the market demand is falling or has leveled off while the total market size begins to shrink. Industry profits tend to fall when competition intensifies. Reasons for decline severity are associated with social trends, demographic shifts and technological change (Deming, 2002). When Apple competition is greatly intense, it could be due to; high fixed costs, high exit barriers, and product perception as a commodity. The associated strategies are; Harvesting Strategy: Apple enjoys rising margins and short-term cash flows even during slow market share decline (Gronroos, 2004). Future market decline occur at a steady but slow pace. Few strong competitors or future rivalry not probable to be intense since it leads the share position of loyal customers Niche Strategy: Here, Apple focuses on reinforcing position in a few or one relatively significant segments. The overall market demand decline quickly while one or more segments remains slow. Stronger competitors like Toshiba and Motorola seen in mass market and not in target segment (Corner, & Keats, 2004). There is limited competitive advantage overall resources or target segment. New economy markets The new economy markets lay emphasis on consumer experience process where customers are provided with information regarding their needs by sellers and vice versa. Customer insight surveys create avenues for meeting goods or services. It provides information on Apple product flows to customers as it encourages buying and other transactions. The mobile telephony and internet markets provide applications to many of the listed stages (Gronroos, 2004). Apple marketing researchers use the internet for research to cut costs and save time. The Web is preferable due to representativeness of the current makeup of the Web audience, randomness and self-selection biases. New-economy applications are for brand building and product promotion. Apple Web marketers comprise; paid-inclusion model where marketer pays a fee for its URL to come up and search engine optimization (SEO) that improves Web site’s ranking. Mobile and internet advertising tools have increased in popularity owing to ease of measurement. New-economy applications for conducting Apple transactions are influenced by dynamic pricing (Levinson, 2004). Though a controversial system, it measures the customer’s propensity to purchase, means and prices. New-economy applications for digital Apple products delivery is facilitated by increased variety of goods delivered digitally and digitized. New-economy applications for support and customer service is for Apple to become the real driver and profitably sustain existing customers by making customer service an effective and responsive ingredient (Tang, 2013). Providing customer interactive mobile phones enhance customer service. Apple should focus on benefits of customer services first instead of mere cost cutting. Finally, Coproduction where Apple consider the burdens it can lift from the customer determines the customers that performs while assessing benefits and costs. Organizational structure of Apple After Steve Jobs, the founder, Apple has taken a more collaborative approach in its organizational structure. The management encourages Apple's hardware and software teams to collaborate, a scenario that was not available under Jobs (Gene, 2012). The new collaborative approach enables Apple to deliberate unlike in the past causing delays. This collaborative approach is interesting on how it works. The organizational chart below demonstrates that Apple was central to one guy calling the shots. Product decisions are easier though sometimes slow. Apple challenges originated from every idea and decision going and originating from Steve Jobs. The founder was intensely focused on one item neglecting other important company products (Schneider et al, 2003). Theoretically, the new organizational structure is quick decision making in various divisions. However, collaboration has its challenges in that big delays are experienced when everyone is attempting to reach consensus on a decision. The figure below shows Apple’s collaborative organizational structure. Source: Apple report 2011 Figure 1: Apple organizational structure The essence of such structure is to differentiate the product creation functions from the administrative and management functions of the company (Barney, 2001). There is no product business ownership since the marketing function for instance, comprise product marketing by product line with no business ownership roles. In essence, the product marketing function handles product positioning, promotions, and pricing. Every function is partially responsible for product horizontal nature. The chart also lacks brand leaders. Brand management is a critical function in consumer-facing firms and brands-oriented firms dimension their companies and revolve around brand managers (Barney, 2001). The founder had a direct responsibility in brand management but today it requires a direct manager. Marketing Metrics and Marketing Audit Apple is facing some stiff competitive pressure especially from from Samsung’s Galaxy S4 flagship smartphone. It can only weather the storm if it releases the next-generation iPhone 5S. The iPhone sales in North America are resilient regardless of added pressure faced from competitors. Galaxy S4 sells well in North America with total sales up 15% from where the Galaxy S III’s sales were in 2011 (Mossberg, 2012). Samsung goes on to dominate the North American Android market while overall market share of Apple remains unchanged. The sales analysis for year 2005 to 2008 is as shown in the figure below; Source: Apple bulletin 2011 Sales by Product: Mac laptops and desktops generated $5.430 billion in Apple's FY 2011 sales during the First Quarter. This was a twenty two percent rise from the same quarter, the previous year. Laptops generated about $3.699 billion of the total sales (Crothers, 2012). IPod sales were $3.425 billion with a one percent increase. IPhone accessories, services and sales generated about $10.468 billion in sales representing a eighty eight percent increase (Mossberg, 2012). IPad services, accessories, sales were $4.608 billion in sales over the quarter on record. Source: Apple sales of iPhones and iPods Sales by Region: The First Quarter sales in North American represented about $9.218 billion in Apple's FY 2011. This shows a fifty one percent on the same quarter, the previous year. Europe accounted for $7.256 billion in sales over the quarter representing a forty four percent increase. Japan accounted for $1.433 billion in sales which was an eighty three percent increase. Asia-Pacific represented $4.987 billion in sales marking a one hundred and seventy five percent increase (Levinson, 2004). The retail sales totaled $3.847 billion in the quarter representing a ninety five percent increase. Marketing Audit Marketing environmental audit Political factors: Apple experiences numerous tactical, strategic, and operational merits since the US is a party to several multilateral and bilateral trade organizations. These agreements reduce barriers on; investment, market, labour, and suppliers (Markides, 2009). Nevertheless, Technology trade agreements with Australia create similar competitor opportunities for. This creates disadvantages of cost efficiency for Apple when large competitors Microsoft invests in large asset and capital reserves. Economical Conditions: There is an immense monopolistic for consumer electronics market in the US. The low entry barriers compound the rivalry between Apple and other large players like IBM, HP, Microsoft, Lenovo, Google, and Dell. The entry of small scale companies into the market increasing the level of competition. Processor manufacturers are few. Specifically, Apple market success is drawn from processor manufacturers like AMD, Cyrix and Intel (Markides, 2009). The Apple market success has strong buyer power from the US middle class households. Social-Cultural Conditions: Australia and the US have multiple ethnicities and socio-cultural experience of rapidly changing lifestyles pushing consumer electronics manufacturers like Apple in constant review of products designs (Gronroos, 2004). Technological Conditions: Australian and the US consumer electronics market face rapid technological changes. Integrated circuits and other crucial electronic components have become faster, efficient, and cheaper. This improves the new consumer electronics quality but disrupts the existing product sales (Corner, & Keats, 2004). For example, changes in software and hardware components from by leading manufacturers like Microsoft and Intel affects Apple in adjusting its product development efforts. Producing energy efficient, environmentally friendly products means that Apple reviews regularly its manufacturing processes and product development. Ethical Audit of Apple Apple has ensured employees, customers, management and suppliers portray proper conduct in all circumstances. Its success is based on high-quality products and creating innovative services. They demonstrate integrity in each business interaction (Koehn, 2002). In every two years Apple carries ethical audit to its suppliers and employees governed by respect, honesty, compliance, and confidentiality. Apple produced a draft of a code of conduct for the business applying to all local and international operations. The website contains more specific policies on director conflict of interest, corporate governance, reporting guidelines on questionable conduct. Additionally, a Business Conduct Helpline is provided for Apple employees are used to report misconduct to Apple’s Finance and Audit Committee. Majority of Apple’s product components are made in nation having lower labor costs (Kunkel, 2007). The possibility for misconduct is high owing to less direct oversight and varied labor standards. In ensuring compliance, Apple since 2010 makes all its suppliers to sign the “Supplier Code of Conduct” and performing factory audits (Walsh, 2007). Apple can refuse to engage with suppliers who fail to comply with its standards like 56 suppliers discontinued out of the 229 suppliers in 2011. Apple releases yearly Apple Supplier Responsibility Report to reiterate commitment on supplier conduct. This stakes ensures supplier expectations, audit conclusions and corrective actions to companies’ violations labor and legal laws. Conclusion Apple Company has the potential of taking new markets and taking a new position through allocating resources to its traditional sets (computers) and its newer products (Apple TV, iPhones, and iPods) so as to improve and maintain its market position (Crothers, 2012). By understanding its position in the product life cycle Apple asserts a unique retail strategy that informs the firm’s product decisions. The organization does not show consistency in financial performance (Elcock, 2006). So adding a new direct report to the chart makes little sense over a creation role or a specific product ownership. It can capitalize on emerging and new trends hence sustaining its competitive advantage and market share (Crothers, 2012). The Computer giant is committed to safeguarding the environment, employee safety, health and, global communities and customers (Schuck, 2005). It recognizes that learning its internal and external environments can take the business to the next level of performance, increased market share and competitive advantage. References Barney, J. (2001). Firm Resources and Sustainable Competitive Advantage”, Journal Management, vol 17, no 1. Bruce R. B. & Duane, I (2010). Entrepreneurship: Successfully Launching New Ventures, 3rd ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Birchall, J. (2009). Value Trend Tests Brand Loyalty, Financial Times, New York. Boxall, P., & Purcell, J. (2007). Strategic management and human resources: the pursuit of productivity, flexibility, and legitimacy. Pinnington. Macklin & Campbell. Camp, R. (2009). Benchmarking: The search for industry best practices that lead to superior performance, American Society for Quality Control, Quality Press, Milwaukee, Wisconsin. Corner, P. K. & Keats, B. (2004). Integrating organizational and individual information processing perspectives on choice, Organizational Science, vol. 3. Crothers, B. (2012). iPad Mini set to eclipse Retina iPad. CNET. CBS Interactive.  Deming, W.E. (2002). Quality, Productivity, and Competitive Position, MIT Center for Advanced Engineering, Cambridge Mass. Donnelly, J. H. (2002). Preface to Marketing Management, 9th ed., by J. Paul Peter New York: McGraw-Hill Professional. Elcock, H. (2006). Strategic Management, in Farnham, D. and S. Horton eds.), Managing the New Public Services, 2nd Edition, New York: Macmillan,, p. 56. Gene R. B. ( 2012). iPad Mini & iPad 4 Debut in Australia Looks Overwhelming. Ubergizmo.  Gronroos, C. (2004). From marketing mix to relationship marketing: towards a paradigm shift in marketing, Management Decision, Vol. 32, No. 2, pp 4–32. Guest, D. E., Michie, J., Conway, N., & Sheehan, M. (2003). Human Resource Management and Corporate Performance in the UK, British Journal of Industrial Relations, 41(2): 291–314. Hamel, G. & Prahalad, C.K. (2009). Strategic Intent, Harvard Business Review, Dublin. Isenberg, D. (2006). Strategic Opportunism: Managing under uncertainty, Harvard Graduate School of Business, Working paper 9-786-020, Boston. Koehn, D. (2002). Ethical Issues in Human Resources. In N. E. Bowie (Ed.), The Blackwell guide to business ethics (pp. 225–243). Oxford: Blackwell  Kunkel, P. (2007). Apple Design: The Work of the Apple Industrial Design Group. AM Press Lamb, R. B. (2004). Competitive strategic management, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice- Hall. Levinson, J.C. (2004). Guerrilla Marketing, Secrets for making big profits from your small business, Houghton Muffin Co. New York. Lewis, D. ( 2010). iPad Pre-order Update- March 12. Electrobuzz.  Lymbersky, C. (2008). Market Entry Strategies, p. 364; Management Laboratory Press, Hamburg Markides, C. (2009). A dynamic view of strategy. Sloan Management Review, vol 40, spring, pp55–63. Menn, J., & Bradshaw, T. ( 2010). Apple in control of iPad’s Europe launch. Financial Times. New York. Mossberg, W. (2012). New iPad: a Million More Pixels Than HDTV. The Wall Street Journal. Dow Jones & Company. Mulcaster, W.R. (2009). Three Strategic Frameworks, Business Strategy Series, Vol 10, No 1, pp 68-75. Po Li, (2003). Reviving Traditions in Research on International Market Entry, JAI Press. Schneider, B., Hanges, P., Smith, D., & Salvaggio, A. (2003). Which Comes First: Employee Attitudes or Organizational Financial and Market Performance?, Journal of Applied Psychology, 88: 836–51. Schuck, G. (2005). Intelligent Workers: A new pedagogy for the high tech workplace, Organizational Dynamics, Autumn. Spellings, R. (2009). Mass Marketing Is Dead. Make Way for Personal Marketing, The Direct Marketing Voice, London. Tang, D. (2013). The Complete Guide to Product Adoption: from Product Life Cycle to Customer Decision Journey. Flevy.  Walsh, A. J. (2007). HRM and the ethics of commodified work in a market economy. Pinnington, Macklin & Campbell 2007, pp. 102–118 Wheelright, S. & Clark K. (2002). In Revolutionizing Product Development , p. 40-41;  Read More