Sell and Distribution Marketing: of Structured Steel Industries - Case Study Example

Sell and Distribution Marketing By Student’s Name Code + Course Name Professor’s Name University Name City, State Date Introduction Structured Steel Industries or SSI is part of a larger steel fabricating company which takes stock steel and eventually manufactures products. On the other hand, SSI is only one of the miscellaneous or small steel fabricators who manufacture custom steel components. SSI therefore takes in the I-Beams and other products of steel and prepares or assembles them to be used at construction sites. The company cuts the steel to size, then drills holes for rivets and makes special beams, which are then used in specific customized constructions. SSI employs 45 production workers and welders which include one Plant Manager and 4 supervisors, ten employees in the Shipping Department, 3 Sales people, 2 Engineers and 3 Project Managers working with the Engineers and the Salespeople in the preparation of bids, 2 Secretaries, 1 controller and the Chief Executive Officer who is Charlie. Since most jobs at SSI are customized, there is a lot of communication among all areas of the organizations like for instance among the Architects, the Contractor and the SSI to ensure everything is done well and right. Charlie, SSI’s CEO got a call from Jack, the owner of Laredo Construction complaining that foreign steel had been slipped into their construction material against the company’s wish that only US steel was needed to build the complex at San Diego’s Naval Base. The issue was that instead of Laredo being supplied by only US steel, it was discovered that Structural Steel Industries or SSI whom Charlie was its Chief Executive Officer had supplied them with a mixture of both US and Mexican supplier against the specifications of the US Federal Government which only required domestic US steel. The Mexican steel comprised 40% of the total steel that had been supplied to Laredo Construction. This was actually a grave mistake, which could have made Jack to forfeit a performance bond had a Navy Inspector realized it (Hastings, 2011). Who is responsible for the mix-up? Given the above organizational hierarchy, the burning issue in this case is who is responsible for the mess of supplying a mixture of steel to Laredo Construction. Someone in the organization ought to be responsible for the mess and enhancements or improvements should be made so that this issue does not occur in future. Mary Longren, who owned up for being Laredo’s Project Manager together with Manuel (The Production Manager) and Mark (the Shipping Manager) ought to be responsible to the mix up of the steel. On the other hand, Angela, the Sales Manager handling Laredo’s account heaped blame on the people in the Manufacturing Department claiming that since they knew it was a federal job, they could not have mixed up he Mexican steel and the US steel. To be more specific, the project coordinator or manager who was working on Laredo’s case (Mary Longren) ought to be personally responsible for the mistake of mixing up the construction materials since she is responsible for the coordination of the logistical issues. For instance in Laredo’s case, Mary was supposed to deal with both the production and delivery arrangements and thus she could have been in a better position to ascertain if indeed the right materials had been packed and delivered to Laredo (Gupta, 2009). Who else? On the other hand, the Engineer of the company stand to be blamed because they are in charge of the product design and thus should be in a better position to ascertain the final product that is supposed to be supplied to the client. However, the truth of the matter is that despite the fact that the buck lies somewhere within the organization, the success or failure of any given organization is highly dependent on the overall or general teamwork exhibited by all the stakeholders. Working on orders or assignments within an organization should not be a preserve of a particular department but rather, it should be a collective responsibility of all people within such an organization (Dutta, 2011). SSI should have practices Relationship selling and partnering to ensure that Laredo Construction as its client, was fully satisfied by their services in order to ensure that they transact business once more in future through partnering. It was therefore vital for SSI through it Salespersons to adopt sales approaches which were consistent with marketing concepts as they transacted business with Laredo Construction. In addition to that, the company ought to have embraced the marketing concepts as they dealt with Laredo Construction which involved focusing on the customer’s needs and wants, having a wide integration in the organization and focusing on appropriate or relevant corporate goals to ensure the organization gets profits (Dent, 2011). SSI should thus have transacted business with Laredo construction in a manner, which was consistent with the marketing concepts. However, through its various employees, the company failed to not only identify but also meet the needs and wants of the customer as well. The whole employees in the organization (SSI) failed to ensure that the whole organization was capable of understanding the requirements or needs of Laredo Construction, which only required domestic U.S Steel. In addition, the company failed to focus on the company’s long-term corporate goal, which was to make profits (Lancaster, et al, 2010). Where the problem lies SSI’s sales and sales management operations are not well coordinated since most of the employees are not aware of their responsibilities and job descriptions. This is portrayed in the manner that the issue of Laredo Construction happened as many of the employees did not actual realize who was responsible for erroneously supplying a mixture of the construction material. The company’s sales operations can therefore be ascertained to be disorganized and uncoordinated due to how the issue of Laredo Construction was handled. The B2B relationship was underused in SSI’s dealing with Laredo Construction since the employees failed to work closely as a team in order to comprehend the client’s problems and therefore identify best or viable solutions. By indicating that the Navy Inspector had not realized that the steel were mixed, Jack expected SSI to maintain a high level of trust in order to create a long-term trust and focus (Brady, 2010). In order to perform well and succeed, SSI needs to use relationship marketing in order to develop a close link between it and its clients. This will ensure that the company is a good position to understand customer needs and therefore avoid the losses that may emerge because of misunderstanding between the parties that transact business. Initially, the field Sales force was responsible for provision of a vital link between a company and its clients through relaying important marketing information from the company to its clients and vice versa. In the SSI case, the 3 Sales people could also carry some blame because according to relationship marketing, the employees could have been responsible for knowing Laredo Construction’s specifics and advised the relevant employees on what exactly was to be supplied. This could have led to reduction of losses arising from poor communication channels in the company. The Business-to-Business strategy could be well applied by SSI in its business dealing with Laredo construction since despite the fact that Laredo was not the company’s biggest customer, it was essential to be handled well since it also spends large amounts in the business dealing (Rapp & Agnihotri, 2010). In order to avoid mistakes like the Laredo case in future, then SSI needs to adopt strategies and policies, which will ensure that all its clients are satisfied with their services. Despite the fact that difficult sales targets may lead to the encouragement of unethical practice like in Laredo’s case in which the construction materials were wrongly mixed, SSI should strive to ensure that all its business operations are both well organized and coordinated. This will ensure that there is a constant flow of correct information thus minimizing chances of making errors, which could have been avoided in the first place. As the Project Manager, Mary Longren was in a better position to understand all the bits and details regarding the assignment under her position and thus could have indicated to all the relevant people what was required together with all the necessary specifications (Blythe, 2009). Recommendations There needs to be a good flow of information in the entire SSI department so that errors are rectified within the organization before the products reach the final client. He firm should therefore strive hard to ensure that unethical practices emerging from any of the departments within the organization are managed out. In addition, SSI as a company should define the job description or responsibility of each employee to ensure that each one of them is at the right place, working on the right job and at the right time (Speh & Hutt, 2009). Moreover, to avoid mistakes as seen in the Laredo case, the company should also set down clear and appropriate rules of behaviour by defining the available forms of rewards and punishments about ethical or unethical behaviour and put them in writing (Kotabe, et al, 2009). In such a case, it will be easier for the management to point out the culprits in case of any problem or unethical behaviour and rule out the possibility of being unable to know where the buck lies like was the case of Laredo. For instance, the 3 sales people in SSI should know that their responsibilities include among others dealing with public regulation, unfair competition, misleading information and cooling off laws. All company employees should also be guided by the moral code of principles and codes, which govern people and societies in ascertaining what is wrong or right. All employee ethics should therefore go beyond the legal requirements and workers should never let their personal conducts to override their office ethics (Hufner, 2008). SSI’s Chief Executive Officer (Charlie) should ensure that all employees in the organization have close daily contact. This is because people who interact in a group are capable of yielding decisions at higher levels of understanding as opposed to an individual who is acting alone. The top leadership should thus ensure that the employees work as a team to avoid cases of role stress, which are the major cause of ethical dilemmas and issues. All the workers employed by SSI should thus get an opportunity where they all interact regardless of the department that they belong to (Tang, 2010). As for the workers who were informed by Mary that they were supposed to work on over time over the weekend to ensure the Laredo case is solved and they became reluctant, they should remember that how they interact with the customers and prospects, one is representing oneself and the company as a whole (The CIM, 2011). The workers conduct therefore greatly reflects strong signals regarding the kind of person they are and the kind of company that they work for. So their reluctance to obey Mary’s orders is a clear indicator that all is not well at SSI since how they behaved on the job greatly affects management, friends and their peers perception. In order to avoid such instances in future, SSI‘s top leadership should set the tone for the organizations ethical conduct. The company should also educate its salespeople on the need of not only concerning themselves as a team with ethical issues but also understanding and operating within the law (Rosenbloom, 2013). Conclusion The overall success of a company lies not only with the top leadership of such an organization but rather, it is a collective responsibility of each and everyone. Indeed, the failure of an organization also lies in the inability of the company’s stakeholders in working as a team to ensure that each and everything is working well. The ability of all an organization’s employees to work as a team in any given organization gives it an upper hand to avoid any grave mistakes that could have been avoided in the first place. It is therefore the responsibility of the top management or leadership to design policies or strategies, which ensure that the spirit of teamwork is achieved in their respective organizations. This will ensure that each employee is best place on the right work, at the right time and the right place to contribute immensely to success. Bibliography Blythe, J. 2009. Key Concepts in Marketing. New York: Sage. Bose, C. 2010. Modern Marketing-Principles & Practice. New York: PHI Learning Pvt. Ltd. Brady, D. 2010. Essentials of International marketing. New York: M.E Sharpe. Dent, J, 2011. Distribution Channels: Understanding and managing Channels to market. New York: Kogan Page Publishers. Dutta, B. 2011. Sales and Distribution Management. New York: I.K International Pvt. Ltd. Gupta, S. 2009. Sales and Distribution Management. New Delhi: Excel Books. Hastings, R. 2011. Channel Sales and Management Distribution. New York: Businessman. Hufner, T. 2008. Relationship Marketing in International Marketing/Sales Channels. New York: GRIN Verlag. Kotabe, M, et al. 2009. The SAGE Handbook of International Marketing. New York: SAGE. Lancaster, G, et al. 2010. Essentials of Marketing Management. New York: Routledge. Rapp, A., & Agnihotri, R. 2010. Effective Sales Force Automation and Customer Relationship Management. New York: Business Expert Press. Rosenbloom, B. 2013. Direct Selling Channels. New York: Routledge. Speh, T., & Hutt, M. 2009. Business Marketing Management: B2B:B2B. New York: Cengage Learning. Tang, F. 2010. Marketing Strategies of Chinese Companies. New York: Diplomica Verlag. The CIM. 2011. The Marketing Century: How marketing Drives Business and Shapes Society. New York: John Wiley & Sons. Read More