MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W1555445708

Ashworth, Inc.-A Case Study

2004· article· en· W1555445708 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Şakir Erdem

Notice bibliographique

RevueJournal of the International Academy of Case Studies · 2004
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineBusiness, Management and Accounting
ThématiqueManagement and Marketing Education
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMarketingBusinessEarningsOverhead (engineering)Personal sellingOutsourcingPurchasingDirect marketingClass (philosophy)Sales managementSales promotionFinanceComputer science
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

CASE DESCRIPTION primary subject matter of this case concerns the components of marketing communications strategy in terms of generating leads and creating sales. case has a difficulty level of three, appropriate for junior level. case is designed to be taught in three class hours and is expected to require two hours of outside preparation by students. CASE SYNOPSIS This case is about a (fictitious) company and its marketing communications strategy. manager in charge, Jeff Gill, is faced with a challenge of justifying its budget to the senior management. He has to analyze and explain his expenses in trade advertising, literature, trade shows, direct mail, and PR in terms of the number of leads generated and sales completed. He decides to outsource some of his functions to MSC, a database marketing/leads management company, and together they are able to maintain the strategy intact, and most importantly, profitable. ASHWORTH, INC. I can't cut back any more, complained Jeff Gill, manager of marketing communications for a large industrial company. I don't understand how senior management can continue to cut my budget mid-year, and expect me to help the sales team make their numbers. Don't they know you have to spend money to make money? Ashworth, Inc. had not reached its net earnings for January and February of the year. As a result, senior management sought cuts on expense items, and also looked to cut back on various departments that were considered overhead. Marketing communications was always one of the first departments to feel the budget cuts. Senior management doesn't understand how important my department is, Gill continued. The sales team won't get any sales leads if we cut the advertising budget. And how are they going to be able to competitively bid on business without leave-behind literature? It just doesn't make any sense. Ashworth, Inc. was a large industrial valve company based in Munich, Germany. company had been in business for 50 years. Its North American corporate office in Chicago, Illinois had been successful in making its mark in the United States. In order to be closer to the customers, the company had four area offices and 30 regional offices in the U.S. It also had significant coverage of Canada. United States sales teams were in the regional offices. Each regional office had a regional sales manager that managed the sales teams in their offices. president of the company, Thomas Wenderburg, was a real go-getter from the Germany headquarters. He believed in allowing the regional sales managers to have authority and accountability. He pushed command down to these managers and allowed them to make daily decisions that would affect their business. Accountability was key--and as long as they made their numbers, Wendelburg was happy. Advertising and marketing communications, however, was centralized at the corporate office in order to protect the company brand, including the logo. marketing communications department at Ashworth had three people; small for the amount of sales in the company ($3,000,000,000 annually in the U.S.). Jeff Gill was the manager of the group; his staff consisted of one writer and a secretary. Whenever there were problems with sales revenue or poor earnings, it seemed as if marketing communications was the first department to get hit. This was the second consecutive year that the marketing communications budget had been frozen mid-year, despite good planning. annual marketing communications budget at Ashworth was $1.65M. It was spent as follows: Type of Expense Amount Spent Trade Advertising $500,000 Literature $300,000 Trade Shows $650,000 Direct Mail $50,000 Public Relations $150,000 TOTAL $1,650,000 Gill needed to think of a way to get out of this rut. …

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,273
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,294

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,001
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,045
Tête enseignante GPT0,331
Écart entre enseignants0,286 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2004
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueJournal of the International Academy of Case StudiesMême sujetManagement and Marketing EducationTravaux en français237 207