Essay Instructions: Assignment research paper
Minimum complete 10 pages
1/2" to 3/4" margin, regular type
cover sheet to include name, paper title, and date
table of content should be the detailed outline with page numbers (minimum 2 pages)
paper should be briefly footnoted
Conclusion/analysis- more than a summary or review. It's a critique and or an evaluation
Must have a bibliography minimum 10 sources
Bibliography should have various sources like books, journals, corporate website, and government material
Research paper requirements: Minimum 10 complete pages, 2 page detailed outline, paper should have footnotes (don't place websites in the foot notes; put them in the bibliography) Introduction should be in the appendix, and bibliography should be at the end of the paper.
I would like this paper to be about the market strategy of Shanghai Disney Resort. As mentioned earlier I need a two page outline with the paper. I began the outline already. Here is what I have so far (below).
I. Introduction
a. Brief history of Shanghai Disney Resort
II. Background
III. Product Strategy
IV. Pricing Strategy
V. Distribution Strategy
VI. Promotion Strategy
VII. Overall Plan
VIII. Failed Market Strategy
IX. Successful Market Strategy
X. Conclusion
I have not started writing the paper yet. As you write this paper, please focus on the marketing strategies of Shanghai Disney Resort because this is what my instructor wants me to focus on.
Below is a sample outline another student submitted that my instructor gave me. This is how the outline should look.
I. Introduction
a. Brief History of Coke
II. Background
a. Pepsi's gain market share
i. Pepsi's challenge
ii. Supermarket sales
III. Product
a. Marketing research (Project Kansas)
i. New Coke
1. Sweeter flavor preferred over Pepsi and Coke in taste tests
2. Surveys seemed promising
ii. Millions of dollars spent on this research
iii. Failed to factor in brand loyalty
1. 80/20 rule
IV. Price
a. Traditionally based on competitive forces
i. Price of new Coke to the customer was same as Old Coke
b. Price of "Old Coke" skyrocketed if it could be found
V. Distribution
a. New product was distributed the same way the old product was
i. Supermarkets
ii. Franchisee agreements
b. bottlers
VI. Promotion
a. New Coke Introduction
i. Big marketing pushes in New York
ii. Sales increased over previous formula
iii. Criticism
1. Pepsi took advantage
2. boycotts of products
3. Bad publicity
VII. Reversal
a. Occurred 3 months after its introduction
b. The old formula returned as Coca Cola Classic
i. Instead of using sugar can though high fructose corn syrup was substituted
ii. By the years end Coke Classic out sold both Pepsi and New Coke
VIII. Conclusion
a. Bad advertising is better than no advertising at all
b. Analysis
below is a sample of my writing style. please write the paper similar to my writing style.
General Motors was once considered the Great American Company, but now they are clinging to attributes that made its logo. General Motors now realizes that they drove the company into ruins that began more than twenty years ago. As customer preferences changed, competition tightened, and technology was making big leaps, General Motors always found themselves a lap or two behind their competitors. ?General Motors has been losing market share in the U.S. since the 1960?s, destroying capital for years, and returning no share price appreciation to investors? (Taylor III, 2008 p. 6). Over the years the company has tried to reform itself any number of times, but it has been doomed by what once made it successful: doing things the GM way. If you were to ask Rick Wagoner why GM is not like Toyota, he would tell you, ?We?re playing our own game-taking advantage of our own unique heritage and strengths? (Taylor III, 2008 p. 6).
Over the years General Motors and the United Auto Workers (UAW) Union have fought each other over union contracts for the employees of GM. The UAW has had employees go on strike many times in order to get the best wages with no cap on cost of living adjustments, health care benefits, and full retirement after thirty years regardless of age. The strike in 1970 lasted 67 days, and 400,000 employees walked off the job. This strike was described by a Historian as a ?titanic clash between two massive permanent entities? (Taylor III, 2008 p. 7). The union won this clash, because GM?s high fixed costs made the company vulnerable to a production shutdown. The UAW no longer has the power to help the employees as it did in the past. With General Motors reorganizing under Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code, the company now has the upper hand, and the UAW has no choice but to work with GM to make the best for survival of the company and their employee?s jobs and benefits.
General Motors has found itself in financial trouble because of the UAW fighting to get the best wages and benefits for the union employees of the company. With General Motors' inability to keep up with consumer demands and needs, the company has let their competitors get ahead of them by not producing more fuel efficient vehicles until the last few years. All of these are problems that General Motors is working on to try and improve the company, and get it back on its feet by downsizing the company and focusing on restructuring the way the company operates.
On June 1, 2009, General Motors filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in New York. President Obama hailed GM?s plan to emerge from its current woes as ?credible? and ?full of promise? (Whoriskey, 2009 p. 2). Along with the Chapter 11 bankruptcy, General Motors was given an additional $30 billion to aid the company through the bankruptcy process, bringing the total amount to $50 billion given to them from the U.S. government. The President also sought to reassure Americans who were skeptical about the plan?s provisions to transfer a 60 percent ownership stake in the company to the U.S. government in return for the additional investment.
The President said that ?We are acting as reluctant shareholders, because that is the only way to help GM succeed. What we are not doing?what I have no interest in doing?is running GM.? ?The federal government will refrain from exercising its rights as a shareholder in all but the most fundamental decisions,? vowed the President. He also promised that a board?not the government?would call the shots and make the decisions about how to turn this company around. Obama also said, ?our goal is to get GM back on its feet, take a hands-off approach and get out quickly? (Whoriskey, 2009 p. 2).
The Obama administration had been pushing the bankruptcy as the most practical way to restructure General Motors. ?Officials said their hope is that GM would emerge from the process smaller, with fewer workers and brands, less debt, but also more viable? (Peter, 2009 p. 3). Working together, the Auto Task Force, GM, and its stakeholders have created a practical, feasible plan that will give this ionic American company a chance to rise again. Under the new plan, a larger share of GM vehicles will be built in the United States, including most of all the fuel-efficient cars.
President Obama said, ?the deal is tough but fair and does not give special treatment to any of GM?s stakeholders. He also reminded potential car-buyers that GM warranties will be safe and government backed during the restructuring? (Whoriskey, 2009 p. 3). GM and the Auto Task Force could not have had better timing for the restructuring, thanks to Toyota and all of the problems they had bringing down consumer trust on quality of the Toyota vehicles. ?I will not pretend the hard times are over, he said in comments directed at GM employees. More jobs will be lost. More plants will close. More dealerships will shut their doors, and so will many parts suppliers. But I want you to know that what you are doing is making a sacrifice for the next generation?so that your children and all of our children can grow up in an America that still makes things, that builds cars, that still strives for a better future.? He expressed confidence that the ?new GM? will be able to ?out-compete automakers around the world,? and become an integral part of America?s economic future once again (Whoriskey, 2009 p. 3).
Many of the GM workers are looking for honesty and good ethics from the company, and also from the government as the restructuring process continues. The employees should be informed of how the company is progressing and if there are problem areas that need to be changed. The employees should be asked for their input, since this would help to motivate the employees and there is a good chance they would have innovative ideas for solutions to problems. Ethics are a very touchy subject with GM and its workforce at the present time. ?Ethics refers to the study of moral principles or values that determine whether actions are right or wrong and outcomes are good or bad. People rely on their ethical values to determine the right thing to do? (McShane p.52). Unlike Enron, GM has not done anything unethical. Although closing plants, laying employees off, and replacing them with new hires could be considered to be unethical to some of the existing employees. We personally feel that it would be in the best interest for GM to supplement ethical codes by providing some type of ethics training for all employees to help them get through the reconstructive phase successfully.
The Auto Task Force and GM intend to revamp its structural costs and try to lower its break-even point down to U.S. industry volumes of 10 million vehicles by the fourth quarter of 2011. This is substantially lower than the 16 million vehicles of the boom-era. In order for this to happen, GM is going to need to focus on their employees very closely, and management is going to need to know how to settle problems that they are already facing. They will need to come up with ideas on how to keep their employees motivated, so that they are meeting their capabilities to their maximum competencies. It will be very important for GM management to make certain that employees understand what their role perceptions are.
Employees? behavior and performance also depend on how much the situation supports or interferes with their task goals. ?Situational factors include conditions beyond the employee?s immediate control that constrains or facilitates behavior and performance. Some situational characteristics such as a consumer preference or economic conditions originate from the external environment and can be beyond the employee?s or the organization?s control? (McShane p. 37).