The University of Texas at Dallas Global Leadership Executive MBA Program. International Marketing Management (IMS 6310) April 20 June 7, 2009

Transcription

1 The University of Texas at Dallas Global Leadership Executive MBA Program International Marketing Management (IMS 6310) April 20 June 7, 2009 Instructors Dr. Johny K Johansson Blackboard Phone : (202) Fax: (202) Course Manager Dr. Anne Ferrante Blackboard Phone : (972) Fax: (972) Course Objectives This course deals with the application of advanced marketing management concepts and tools in global markets. The perspective is that of a marketing decision maker whose firm has established presence in several foreign markets. The course downplays the issues of country choice and foreign entry covered in Multinational Firm. The focus is on local marketing in different country markets and coordinated management of marketing across existing country markets. The aim of the course is to help develop students ability to solve marketing problems and at the same time handle the complex coordination problems and subtle cultural issues facing the global marketer. It extends existing marketing principles and tools to the global arena. It offers a comprehensive and robust framework within which a number of practical foreign market problems can be analyzed and solved. To build the framework, the course draws on the concepts introduced in Global Economy, and the organizational issues explored in Multinational Firm. The course will allow students to apply and extend the acquired know-how to analyze dynamic marketing situations. Learning Outcomes Students will be able to solve marketing problems and at the same time handle the complex coordination problems and subtle cultural issues facing the global marketer. Students will learn how to extend existing marketing principles and tools to the global arena

2 Students will learn how to build a comprehensive and robust framework within which a number of practical foreign market problems can be analyzed and solved. Resources Text: Global Marketing: Foreign Entry, Local Marketing, Global Management, 5th ed. Johansson, Johny K., McGraw-Hill/Irwin, Cases: Cleopatra : in textbook (pp ) Dell in China : PDF Illycaffe (A) and (B) : in textbook (pp ) Samsung : PDF Lenovo : PDF Power Point Slides: Power point slides, which follow the textbook, are posted on the GLEMBA program website. Supplemental slides may also be included. Audio Lectures: Audio lectures accompany the Power Point slides and are intended to create a framework for reading and case analysis. Evaluation and Grading Rubric For grading, specific course assignments will be weighted as follows: Cleopatra --- individually written case 20% Dell in China --- team written case and Web Conference 15% Illycaffe (A) and (B) --- individually written case 20% Samsung --- team written case and Web Conference 15% Lenovo --- final exam case 30% 100% Individual Assignments (Cleopatra, Illycaffe, and Lenovo) 70% Evaluation of written assignments and project papers will be based on thoughtful, analytical, well-constructed responses demonstrating knowledge of the topic by citing examples of the key concepts present in the readings or cases. A ---Excellent: Understanding of all key issues; no important analytical errors or omissions; concise, very well written and organized, makes appropriate use of charts and tables.

3 B---Good: Understanding of most issues; only a few important issues not discussed; few analytical errors; well-written and well-organized, makes appropriate use of charts and tables. C---Adequate: Understanding of many issues, but not all important aspects covered; various analytical errors; excessive case recitation unsupported by analysis; poorly written or organized, makes inappropriate use of charts and table Web Conference and Presentation Evaluation (Dell and Samsung) 30% Evaluation of Web Conference preparation and presentation (PowerPoint slides) will be based on clear, concise presentation of answers to questions assigned to teams. Responses should demonstrate knowledge of the topic, key concepts and references to text, readings or other sources. During the discussion each team is expected to add value by questioning, exploring or challenging at least one other team s presentation. A --- Excellent analysis and presentation --- Clear and concise answer to the question and provides one or more key concepts or evidence from the text, readings or other outside sources to support presentation. Immediately and effectively responds to questions, provide on specific answers and defend points made if challenged by other team members. Presentation slides are clear, concise and well-organized. During Web Conference, team members ask questions or provide evidence that adds value to the other team s presentation or topic. B---Good analysis and presentation: Clearly answers the question and provides at least one key concept or supporting evidence from the text or readings to support presentation. Responds to questions with an answer, which clarify or defend points made by others. Presentation slides address key information and are generally organized to support presentation. Team members ask questions or provide evidence that adds some value to the other team s presentation or topic. C---Adequate: Answers the question, but provides no key concepts or evidence from the text, readings or other outside sources to support presentation. Presentation slides do not wholly support the presentation. Team members respond to questions generally and provide adequate answers, which may or may not add clarity or defend points made by others. Members do not ask questions or provide evidence that adds value to the other team s presentation or topic. Discussion Forum Participation Students are expected to post responses that reflect content knowledge, analytical skills and add value to the discussion topic. Grades for discussions forum participation will be based on quality of response. A: Excellent contribution --- Clear and helpful in furthering of the discussion B: Good contributions --- Generally addresses key points and issues C: Acceptable contribution --- Not clear, some error or misunderstanding

4 Assignment: The reading material is interspersed by cases to provide realism in the learning and application of principles. The assignments are case based. Each case has a set of questions which are listed below on the syllabus, as well as posted in the Assignments subfolder on Blackboard. Case questions are prepared for either written or oral discussion or both and may be either an individual or team assignment. Format for Written Assignments Written assignments should be Word documents (no html formats) that are: Double-spaced, 12 pt. Arial or Times New Roman font Citations properly formatted in MLA style Clearly identified by author or team o For an individual assignment, the student name needs to be on the first page of the document AND as part of the document name.i.e. JonesAOL.doc when it is submitted. o For a team assignment, the team number and names of team participants on the first page AND the team number as part of the document name i.e. Team2Neilson.doc when it is posted o There is no need for a separate cover pages Submission Assignments should be posted on Blackboard (Bb) within the course area by the due date: Team assignments are posted File Exchange under your team s Group Pages Individual assignments are submitted to the Digital Drop Box under Tools tab. Be sure to use the SEND command to submit to the Drop Box. Do not use ADD command to post. Late Assignments If you need to miss an assignment deadline, you must pre-notify the instructor and course manager before the deadline. You should provide the reason for missing the deadline and an alternative date for submitting the assignment. The instructor and course manager must approve the extension and the new deadline. If you do not prenotify the instructor, the instructor may determine the appropriate grade deduction for the assignment. Evaluations: Peer Evaluation Unless otherwise specified by the instructor, students need to complete a peer evaluation for each team assignment; the peer evaluation is an electronic document

5 whose link is located on Blackboard (Bb) in the course area under the Information button. Students allocate 100 points among the team members to reflect the level of contribution made by each team member on a specific assignment. Course Evaluation The completion of a course evaluation is a course requirement. Students need to complete a course evaluation form which is an electronic document whose link is located on Blackboard (Bb) in the course area under the Information button. Students who do not submit a course evaluation by the due date will receive an incomplete grade for the course. UTD Policy on Cheating: Students are expected to be above reproach in all scholastic activities. Students who engage in scholastic dishonesty are subject to disciplinary penalties, including the possibility of failure in the course and dismissal from the university. "Scholastic dishonesty includes but is not limited to cheating, plagiarism, collusion, the submission for credit of any work or materials that are attributable in whole or in part to another person, taking an examination for another person, any act designed to give unfair advantage to a student or the attempt to commit such acts." Regents' Rules and Regulations, Part One, Chapter VI, Section 3, Subsection 3.2, Subdivision Professors randomly use Turnitin.com to screen papers against other published work on the web to insure against plagiarism. SCHEDULE Introduction: Basic Marketing Concepts Globalizing Marketing & Global Expansion Syllabus Overview Cultural Foundations and Cultural Market Effects Retreat Friday, April 17, :30 am 2:30 pm Lecture Power Point Slides and Audio Sessions 1 and 2 Readings Chapters 1, 2, for basic concepts. Skim the following as a reminder: Chapter 3 plus Chapter 5 pages Chapter 6 pages

6 Chapter 7 pages Chapter 10 pages Discussion case: IKEA s Global Strategy (text, pages 85-90) Questions: See end of case, p. 90. Week 1 Buyer Decision Processes & Market Research Dates April 20 April 26, 2009 Lecture Power Point Slides and Audio Session 3 on Blackboard Readings Chapter 7, Ch.8 (pp ), Ch.9 (pp ), Ch. 10 (pp ). Assignment: Individually written case Colgate-Palmolive: Cleopatra in Quebec? (in text, pp ). Due date Submitted to the Digital Drop Box by April 26, 2009 Week 2 Global Products and Services Dates April 27 May 3, 2009 Lecture Power Point Slides and Audio Session 4 on Blackboard Readings Chapter 12 (skim ch.11). Week 3 Global Brands, Global Pricing and Distribution Dates May 4 May 10, 2009 Lecture Power Point Slides and Audio Session 5 on Blackboard Readings Chapters 13, 14 (skim pp ) and 15 (skim pp ). Assignment Due date Team written case Dell Selling Directly, Globally (aka Dell in China (hard copy) Posted to the Digital Drop Box Friday, May 8 no later than 6:00 pm cst Web Conference: Dell Case Discussion Web Conference Date: Saturday, May 9 8:30 am CST Peer Evaluation Due: Sunday, May 10

7 Week 4 Global Promotion (including Advertising) Dates May 11 May 17, 2009 Lecture Power Point Slides and Audio Session 6 on Blackboard Readings Chapters 16 & 17 Assignment Individually written case Illycaffe (A) and (B): The Starbucks Threat (in text, pp ). Due date Posted to the Digital Drop Box by May 17 Week 5 Organizing for Global Marketing & Wrap-up Dates May 18 May 31, 2009 Lecture Power Point Slides and Audio Session 7 on Blackboard Readings Chapters 11,18 Assignment Due date Team written case Samsung: Global Marketing Operations (Hard copy) Posted to the Digital Drop Box Friday, May 22 no later than 6:00 pm cst Web Conference: Samsung Case Discussion Web Conference Date: Saturday May 30, 8:30 am CST Peer Evaluation Due: Sunday, May 31 Plan ahead: Lenovo final exam individual assignment Week 6 Final Exam Dates June 1 June 7, 2009 Assignment Individually written Case Final - Lenovo: Building a Global Brand (hard copy). Due date Posted to the Digital Drop Box by June 7 Course Evaluation Due: June 7 Additional Information: CASE QUESTIONS

8 CASE 1: Individually written case Cleopatra in Quebec (in textbook, pp ). Focal issue : Standardization vs. Adaptation to local culture The Cleopatra case shows how expansion into a culturally similar but competitive market may or may not prove successful depending on the degree of adaptation needed. The case shows the market research before and after launch, and also describes in depth the competitive situation in Quebec s soap market. Questions : See end of case, p.367. CASE 2: Team written case and Web Conference Dell: Selling Directly, Globally (9-HKU-682) (hard copy) Focal issue : Expansion into the China market The Dell case deals with the company s entry into China. For the write-up, I want you to concentrate on the following questions: Questions : 1. (This question does not involve China but is about Dell s direct sales model). What are the functions that need to be carried out in the distribution of PCs? How are these distribution functions carried out in Dell s direct channel? What are the advantages and disadvantages of Dell s approach compared of the indirect approach? 2. How attractive is the China market for PCs (size, growth, competitive situation, regulations etc.)? What are the differences between the office market and the home market? 3. In general, is Dell's model more or less mobile than indirect distribution? Explain. To what extent does China offer middlemen and infrastructure for the indirect distribution? For Dell's direct model?

9 4. Why was (or was not) Dell's approach be particularly useful in China? What has Dell already done to ensure that its direct model can be transferred successfully into China? How should Dell change the direct model further to be more successful in China? CASE 3: Individually written case Illycaffe (A) and (B): The Starbucks Threat (in text, pp ) The Illycaffe case shows how a globalizing company threatens well established local marketers. The focus is on what the defensive strategy the incumbent can adopt. Questions: 1. How would you define Illycaffe s FSAs? CSAs? What is the best mode of entry for transferring these advantages abroad? 2. How would you explain Starbucks success in the U.S.? What are Starbucks CSAs and FSAs? 3. Why is the Starbucks business model more easily globalized than Illycaffe s or is it? 4. Would you judge that Starbucks and Illycaffe are or will become competitors? Please explain your reasoning. 5. Given your answer in 4, what would you recommend as an international strategy for Illycaffe? CASE 4: Team written case and Web Conference Samsung: Global Marketing Operations (Hard copy) The Samsung case shows how a commodity manufacturer can successfully globalize its marketing operations and develop a premium brand. The case demonstrates the difficulties in weaning the organization from a manufacturing mindset to a more market-oriented philosophy.

10 Questions: 1. What is Samsung trying to accomplish with the new market-oriented emphasis? Given its traditional manufacturing emphasis, how realistic is the new direction? What are the risks involved in changing the direction? 2. What was the role of the M-Net program in implementing the new direction? How did the M-Net program help pinpoint the necessary changes in the allocation of marketing resources between products and countries? 3. Evaluate the advertising and promotional strategy in the case (media and copy, product placement) and show how it helped to move the Samsung image from a Korean manufacturer to a global brand. Where is the image still weak and why? 4. Discuss how Kim implemented the process of re-allocating marketing resources to focus on the most promising markets? What did the M-Net program contribute? What should be the next step for Samsung? CASE 5: Final Case, Individually written: Lenovo: Building a Global Brand (hard copy). The Lenovo case shows how a newcomer to the global market can establish presence in the market and create a global brand. It also details how to change an acquired strong brand into the new brand without losing brand equity. Questions: 1. Lenovo is buying a losing business. Explain how the marketing synergies between Lenovo and IBM justify the acquisition. What are the risks? 2. What are the FSAs of Lenovo without the ThinkPad? With the ThinkPad?

11 3. Lenovo chose to position its own brand as a Masterbrand. Evaluate the pros and cons of the other options (pp.9-10 in the case). Did Lenovo make the right decision? 4. Lenovo decided to introduce a new product line 3000 instead of relying solely on the ThinkPad. What is this supposed to accomplish? How likely do you think this will succeed? 5. In retrospect, evaluate the brand-sharing agreement between Lenovo and IBM and the ThinkPad. What if anything would have liked to change if you had been involved on the Lenovo side? On the IBM side?