strategic situation facing Kirin brewery in Japan
Order ID 53563633773 Type Essay Writer Level Masters Style APA Sources/References 4 Perfect Number of Pages to Order 5-10 Pages Description/Paper Instructions
Question Description
The Kirin case data analysis can be done using Enginius and answer the following nine questions:KIRIN CASE BACKGROUND: The case describes the strategic situation facing Kirin brewery in Japan. You are challenged to come up with a product design (beer!) that will deliver the desired incremental volume, net of cannibalization of the current product. Also, because Kirin is a niche product, it probably does not appeal to everyone. Therefore, your analysis should also include consideration of segmentation and targeting issues. The case involves multiple data sets and ME tools: segmentation, targeting and positioning as well as product design/conjoint. A complete analysis of the case will use cluster analysis, discriminant analysis, perceptual mapping and conjoint analysis.
Note: the Kirin case in Enginius provides 9 different data blocs.
FORMAT: Answers should be submitted in a WORD or PDF file that simply states answers to all parts of the questions as asked. I do NOT want to receive Enginius output files, but it may be helpful to insert selected key parts from the output into your written answers, such as a perceptual map, dendrogram, or other parts of the conjoint analysis or segmentation analysis that show how you developed your answers. If you do the correct analysis and answer the questions directly, a complete set of answers should be about 3 pages (single space).
Questions:
1. Briefly describe the strategic situation facing Kirin in Japan and the U.S. market at the time of the case. Why is it important for Kirin to increase its sales and market share in the U.S.? How large of an increase does Kirin need to achieve in order to be successful? Explain.
2. What types of data did Kirin collect to analyze this situation? Who did they collect data from? What decision do they need to make?
3. Conduct a traditional needs-based segmentation analysis (including discriminant analysis) to determine if the U.S. import beer market can be segmented in a useful way. How many segments are there in the market? (Enginius identifies a default of 3 segments, but you should also compare a 2-segment and 4-segment solution to a 3-segment solution you can easily run these analyses by manually forcing Enginius to identify either 2, 3, or 4 segments). Are there any distinct and targetable segments that emerge from this analysis? Briefly describe the size and characteristics of each segment you found in the 2, 3, and 4 segment solutions. What is similar or different in these three solutions? Which should Kirin use?
4. Create a perceptual map of the import beer market. How many dimensions should you use, and why this number? Describe where Kirin is located on the map. Who are its closest competitors? How does Kirins positioning compare to Sapporo?
5. Run a conjoint analysis to identify a product design that will enable Kirin to increase its existing market share in the U.S. and sell enough additional cases of beer to achieve its strategic goals. Which choice rule makes the most sense to use in this analysis, and why? What market share can Kirin achieve with the new product it is planning (Kirins New product profile compared to Kirins Existing product profile)? Can Kirin do even better, i.e., achieve an even higher market share, with a more optimal product design? Explain.
6. Use the conjoint preference partworths to conduct another segmentation analysis to explore if there are distinct segments (as opposed to the overall market) that would prefer the new Kirin product you designed. [Note: In Enginius, you need to first run the Segmentation tool on the Preference partworths, then send the output to an Excel spreadsheet, then copy the Preference partworths to the Segment tab in the Excel file, then sort the table by segment number, then carefully copy/paste the partworths from each segment separately back into Enginius to run a conjoin analysis on each separate segment to identify the best possible product for Kirin to introduce to each segment ]. Should you standardize the data when running this segmentation analysis? [why or why not]. How many segments do you find when you segment the Preference partworths? Which segment do you think would be most promising for Kirin, and what market share could Kirin achieve in this segment? Is it worthwhile for Kirin to design a brand specifically for this segment? Explain.
7. Compare and contrast the results of the two segmentation analyses you conducted in Questions 3 and 6 above (one using traditional needs-based Segmentation data versus the other using the Preference partworths). How are the results different? What can you conclude from this analysis about the market for beer?
8. BOTTOM LINE: From your combined answers to Questions 3-7 above, do you believe that Kirin can reach its strategic objective by introducing a new product to the U.S. market? If so, which new product would you recommend that Kirin introduce to the market (describe the new product design), and to which segment or segments should Kirin target this product?
9. Briefly describe the logic and sequence of steps you followed in answering Questions 3-8 above. I am looking for a straightforward verbal description of the steps you followed in running these analyses.
RUBRIC
QUALITY OF RESPONSE NO RESPONSE POOR / UNSATISFACTORY SATISFACTORY GOOD EXCELLENT Content (worth a maximum of 50% of the total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 20 points out of 50: The essay illustrates poor understanding of the relevant material by failing to address or incorrectly addressing the relevant content; failing to identify or inaccurately explaining/defining key concepts/ideas; ignoring or incorrectly explaining key points/claims and the reasoning behind them; and/or incorrectly or inappropriately using terminology; and elements of the response are lacking. 30 points out of 50: The essay illustrates a rudimentary understanding of the relevant material by mentioning but not full explaining the relevant content; identifying some of the key concepts/ideas though failing to fully or accurately explain many of them; using terminology, though sometimes inaccurately or inappropriately; and/or incorporating some key claims/points but failing to explain the reasoning behind them or doing so inaccurately. Elements of the required response may also be lacking. 40 points out of 50: The essay illustrates solid understanding of the relevant material by correctly addressing most of the relevant content; identifying and explaining most of the key concepts/ideas; using correct terminology; explaining the reasoning behind most of the key points/claims; and/or where necessary or useful, substantiating some points with accurate examples. The answer is complete. 50 points: The essay illustrates exemplary understanding of the relevant material by thoroughly and correctly addressing the relevant content; identifying and explaining all of the key concepts/ideas; using correct terminology explaining the reasoning behind key points/claims and substantiating, as necessary/useful, points with several accurate and illuminating examples. No aspects of the required answer are missing. Use of Sources (worth a maximum of 20% of the total points). Zero points: Student failed to include citations and/or references. Or the student failed to submit a final paper. 5 out 20 points: Sources are seldom cited to support statements and/or format of citations are not recognizable as APA 6th Edition format. There are major errors in the formation of the references and citations. And/or there is a major reliance on highly questionable. The Student fails to provide an adequate synthesis of research collected for the paper. 10 out 20 points: References to scholarly sources are occasionally given; many statements seem unsubstantiated. Frequent errors in APA 6th Edition format, leaving the reader confused about the source of the information. There are significant errors of the formation in the references and citations. And/or there is a significant use of highly questionable sources. 15 out 20 points: Credible Scholarly sources are used effectively support claims and are, for the most part, clear and fairly represented. APA 6th Edition is used with only a few minor errors. There are minor errors in reference and/or citations. And/or there is some use of questionable sources. 20 points: Credible scholarly sources are used to give compelling evidence to support claims and are clearly and fairly represented. APA 6th Edition format is used accurately and consistently. The student uses above the maximum required references in the development of the assignment. Grammar (worth maximum of 20% of total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 5 points out of 20: The paper does not communicate ideas/points clearly due to inappropriate use of terminology and vague language; thoughts and sentences are disjointed or incomprehensible; organization lacking; and/or numerous grammatical, spelling/punctuation errors 10 points out 20: The paper is often unclear and difficult to follow due to some inappropriate terminology and/or vague language; ideas may be fragmented, wandering and/or repetitive; poor organization; and/or some grammatical, spelling, punctuation errors 15 points out of 20: The paper is mostly clear as a result of appropriate use of terminology and minimal vagueness; no tangents and no repetition; fairly good organization; almost perfect grammar, spelling, punctuation, and word usage. 20 points: The paper is clear, concise, and a pleasure to read as a result of appropriate and precise use of terminology; total coherence of thoughts and presentation and logical organization; and the essay is error free. Structure of the Paper (worth 10% of total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 3 points out of 10: Student needs to develop better formatting skills. The paper omits significant structural elements required for and APA 6th edition paper. Formatting of the paper has major flaws. The paper does not conform to APA 6th edition requirements whatsoever. 5 points out of 10: Appearance of final paper demonstrates the student’s limited ability to format the paper. There are significant errors in formatting and/or the total omission of major components of an APA 6th edition paper. They can include the omission of the cover page, abstract, and page numbers. Additionally the page has major formatting issues with spacing or paragraph formation. Font size might not conform to size requirements. The student also significantly writes too large or too short of and paper 7 points out of 10: Research paper presents an above-average use of formatting skills. The paper has slight errors within the paper. This can include small errors or omissions with the cover page, abstract, page number, and headers. There could be also slight formatting issues with the document spacing or the font Additionally the paper might slightly exceed or undershoot the specific number of required written pages for the assignment. 10 points: Student provides a high-caliber, formatted paper. This includes an APA 6th edition cover page, abstract, page number, headers and is double spaced in 12’ Times Roman Font. Additionally, the paper conforms to the specific number of required written pages and neither goes over or under the specified length of the paper. GET THIS PROJECT NOW BY CLICKING ON THIS LINK TO PLACE THE ORDER
CLICK ON THE LINK HERE: https://www.perfectacademic.com/orders/ordernow
Also, you can place the order at www.collegepaper.us/orders/ordernow / www.phdwriters.us/orders/ordernow
Do You Have Any Other Essay/Assignment/Class Project/Homework Related to this? Click Here Now [CLICK ME] and Have It Done by Our PhD Qualified Writers!!