Please see the attached . Management class Open Innovation Read the following articles: A New Approach to New ProductsHonda Took Pride in Doing Everything Itself. The Cost of Technology Made That

Please see the attached . 

Management class

Open Innovation

Read the following articles:

• A New Approach to New Products
• Honda Took Pride in Doing Everything Itself. The Cost of Technology Made That Impossible

Questions

Answer the following questions:

1. What is open innovation?
2. Honda once took pride in doing everything itself. Was this also good strategy or merely pride?
3. Why does Honda believe that such technology independence is no longer feasible? Which factors have eroded this strategy?
4. Provide one example from the article illustrating the need for Honda to shift its strategy toward outsourcing some technology.
5. Overall, can Honda still remain truly competitive by relying on others for technological components? How can Honda still supply unique products?

Marketing homework class

 McDonald’s

The company that is synonymous with the term fast food (to-day, more properly quick-service restaurant, or QSR) has decid-ed that they need to slow down a little. In an effort to attract the coveted millennial segment of the market, McDonald’s is taking more time to create higher quality food and a better experience at their restaurants. McDonald’s made its name and fortune using an assembly line process for preparation of their burgers and other food offerings. Along with world-class supply chain practices, this processing prowess allowed them to meet the two big goals of the industry they largely created—namely, speed and low prices. With almost 37,000 locations worldwide, McDonald’s is the biggest player in the burger and fries segment and second only to Subway (with almost 45,000) in QSR overall. But in the last decade, they began losing business to upscale burger competitors, such as Five Guys and Smashburger, and also to rivals Wendy’s, Whataburger, and In-N-Out, who focused more on fresh food. McDonald’s estimates these and other rivals si-phoned 500 million transactions from its stores since 2012.

Part of their challenge has been responding to the tastes and priorities of a key demographic target: millennials. Born between roughly 1979 and 1994, this generation accounts for about 25 percent of the U.S. population and holds $1.3 tril-lion in spending power. Millennials care about a high quality of life, prefer recycling or reusing to buying new, and—most importantly to McDonald’s—favor healthy food made of fresh ingredients. They are also famous for being “digital natives,” and they pay attention to the ethical and sustainable business practices of the firms they do business with. Steve Easterbrook took the helm as CEO in 2015 and be-gan making changes that address these priorities. At the top of the list is improving the food by using fresh (rather than frozen) beef in its popular Quarter Pounder. A new line of customizable burgers was launched and the chain is also taking a fresh approach to another fast food favorite—chicken, a product line heavily dominated by kFC and Chick-fil-A. McDonald’s artisan grilled chicken and Buttermilk Crispy Tenders have been popular with customers, and they now have the health and public relations benefit of being antibiotic-free. And by 2025, the company is committed to using only cage-free chicken eggs in their breakfast menu items. McDonald’s has made other changes that sit well with millennials, such as upgrading their restaurants through their “Experience of Tomorrow” initiative. Improvements include up-dated décor, self-order kiosks, and even table service. A mobile ordering and payment app makes ordering easier. Don’t care to drive to McDonald’s? No problem, the golden arches will come to you via their delivery service.

These and other millennial-centric changes have been well received by both customers and Wall Street, demonstrated by increases in sales, profits, and stock price! But for all of their re-cent successes, not everything at the Golden Arches has been well received by millennials. For example, a targeted promo-tion backfired when McDonald’s introduced a sriracha and kale burger, seen by some millennials as being a too in-your-face appeal to them. And they also generally give the chain low marks for community impact, with one study on young adults ages 18–34 indicating the perception that McDonald’s actually has a negative impact on the community. But along with the positive changes also comes higher costs for some of the premium items on the menu, an issue that McDonald’s has tried to partially address with a new take on its iconic Dollar Menu: now it’s the “$1 $2 $3 menu.” And the many improvements also come with another potential cost to customers: time. That is, preparation of the custom burgers, chicken, and other more deluxe elements can easily increase food-processing time, but management hopes that will be reduced as workers gain experience with the new process. Bottom line: With these improvements, McDonald’s seems to be winning again with both consumers and on the financial markets. Whether millennials will continue to tell them “I’m Lovin’ It” will heavily depend on how well McDonald’s marketers continue to understand and respond to the preferences of this demographic group that is so crucial to the future of the Golden Arches.

Be sure to include at least one source and to provide the appropriate amount of detail in your response.

1. What is the decision facing McDonald’s?

2. What factors are important in understanding this decision situation?

3. What are the alternatives? 

4. What are the challenges of marketing a product that has appeal to several generational market segments?

5. Besides age/generational segments, what other market segmentation approaches could McDonald’s use?

Advertisement Class

Read and analyze:

Imagine you are charged with developing a creative for a clearly defined target market: young children. Think it never happens? Actually, kids are a prime target for many advertisers.

Naturally, one of your challenges might be imagining how to do creative work that will resonate with a very young audience. But maybe there is a deeper issue: should kids ever be a target audience for ads of any kind?

From its inception, parents, regulators, and advocates have looked warily at television as a platform for advertising to kids. Until the Internet, TV was the one medium that offered advertisers a straight path to young hearts and minds. It could be argued that ads directed at youngsters are wasted because parents control the purse strings. Nothing could be farther from the truth.

A report published in 2012 by ad agency Digitas estimated that young children and tweens had purchasing power in the neighborhood of $1.2 trillion. That figure includes the money kids control for themselves as well as their ability to influence parents’ purchases. The report suggests that 6 in 10 tweens have “substantially influenced” adult decisions about a car purchase! According to one expert, the minivan was created because children demanded more room. Then, when kids decided the vehicle was “uncool,” their opinions helped to develop the SUV. Madison Avenue seems keenly aware of the power of these small “influencers,” and as a result, kids see lots of commercials.

One study estimated that kids between 6 and 11 see up to 20,000 commercials every year—easy to do when that group spends close to 30 hours a week watching TV. Of course, it can be argued that parents play a primary role in regulating what children watch and consume. Still, against a tide of commercial messages, parents can’t seem to get the upper hand. In response, the World Health Organization, focusing on one especially pernicious problem, childhood obesity, has recommended that advertisers reduce “food and beverage marketing directed at little children that is high in sugar, fat and sodium in order to help reduce the burden of obesity worldwide.” In the United States, the FTC notes that since 1980, “childhood obesity rates have tripled among adolescents and doubled among younger children.” While acknowledging that the causes of this health problem are complex, the agency concludes that “regardless of the causes, responsible marketing can play a positive role in improving children’s diets and physical activity level.”

Some have made the affirmative case for ads directed at kids. Among the most common arguments is that child-oriented programming on nonpublic stations might not exist if ad revenues dried up—a point that is both true and insufficient. Between an advertising ban and an all-out attempt to persuade youngsters to buy or pester their parents is a middle ground, one that acknowledges a role for advertisers to play in protecting kids.

One of the issues you will face as a creative is thinking through your own values toward the ads you create and the people you affect. In the case of advertising to children, knowing your own values and principles should come before you create your first ad.

Questions

1.Should advertising directed to kids be banned entirely? Why or why not?

2.If ads to kids are not banned outright, what might responsible advertising look like?

3.Many argue that it is up to parents to determine what their kids watch, not regulators or content creators. How would you evaluate that argument?

Provide at least 2 links to your research on this case study.