Backbay Battery Simulation Reflection Report . In Playing

Through a partnership with Northrop Grumman, I develop my own projects with mentorship from a team of engineers. During my junior year, I utilized Java Eclipse and Android to develop and copyright a mobile application that digitized my high school’s school map, making navigation much easier for students. Due to my spectacular performance, Northrop Grumman offered me a paid summer internship. In collaboration with a team of my peers and the public works superintendent of the Fairfield Waterworks facility, I built a robot capable of diagnosing cracks and leaks in water main pipes. Over the summer, I also attended an eight-hour workshop about soldering electronics. This project garnered several awards at the Ohio State Technology and Engineering Showcase. Now, I am currently developing a low-cost Arduino-powered smartphone with WiFi capabilities.

Our team operated and managed the Littlefield Technologies facility over the span of 1268 simulated days. Our team finished the simulation in 3rd place, posting $2,234,639 in cash at the end of the game. We did intuitive analysis initially and came up the strategy at the beginning of the game. And then we applied the knowledge we learned in the class, did process analysis and modified our strategies according to the performance results dynamically. We have reinforced many of the concepts and lessons learned in class and had a better understanding of the operation of the Littlefield Technologies facility and how certain modifications would affect the throughput and lead time.

The original business strategy, which is still not fully implemented or thought out, is still intact and being somewhat utilized. Part of getting from where we are now to where we want to go, is to put together a comprehensive business and growth strategy plan that, brings about the most results. The original business strategy resembled that of a small business that had the most growth with the least risk. With little risk also means little or no technology. The company has changed, the competition is more intense and the economy is weakened. A new strategy that aligns with technology is essential in order to be successful. As business and technology have become increasingly intertwined, the strategic alignment of the two has emerged as a major corporate issue. With the emergence of IT from the back room to the forefront of business brings the alignment issue under the spotlight like never before. And as

Sony is one of the largest consumer electronics manufacturers in the world. It has introduced various high quality products such as the Play Station series product line. However, Sony has not managed to have a positive net income and has faced six net loss in the last seven years. Aiming for a turning a round, Sony declares a goal of $4.8 million of operating profit in the fiscal year 2017 and targets a 10% return on equity (the Economist, 2015). Sony’s business strategy to is to restructure and divide the company into three sectors, which are Growth Drivers, Stable Profit Generators, and Volatility Management, to give the business sectors the independence to operate in the most efficient manner (Baker, 2015).

Electro Inc. is fast developing company which strive to build a high tech wonder company image, it also has clear market segmentation and specific strategies to penetrate this segment. However, in recent report, the company’s financial statement indicates that the company experience financial difficulties at this moment. Some managers believe that this difficulty is largely due to two projects – Series A and Mercury. In this case analysis I will examine these two projects and make some recommendations for the company’s management as a whole.

My strategy seemed to work well for the first two years but then it became evident that I was losing market share in the NiMH business. I decided to cut down R&D in that division too early and that caused me to miss my sales targets. As I lost market share in my core business, the volume effect from my decision to lower NiMH prices did not compensate enough to allow that division to remain profitable. Suddenly, I had a very tight R&D budget to work with (as it was based on sales projections) and limited cash could be allocated to the improvement of the ultracapacitors business. I also reacted too late to the shift in customers’ demand for Power Packs products from Power Tools products, which caused late and lower-than-needed investments in other products’ features such as self-discharge (high priority for both NiMH and ultracapacitors).

Industries will look different with all of these forces. The strategy will change based on how these forces look for the organization and industry. These concepts can be applied across the board, and they help organizations from getting trapped into the latest trends and technology out there selling solutions. This matrix really helps to

Due to the growing competition and diminishing market share, companies are opting for different strategies to achieve their survival objectives as well as growth. Companies are thus executing grand strategies to provide their businesses with a clear direction for its strategic actions. These strategies, therefore, aim at both short term and long term sustainability and growth, and they include innovation, market development, product development, and concentration.

In terms of Porter’s analysis, cost-leadership and product differentiation strategies were implemented by the team during the simulation, which resulted in the maximum profit of 278.59 million dollars.

In determining our initial strategy, we knew that we wanted to focus on the product that would be most profitable and key in on features that are important to the customer. Looking at product sales in 2008, the NiMH sold 28.0 M units and the Ultracapacitor sold only 4.3 M units. Based on these sales, the NiMH generated $280.3 M and the Ultracapacitor generated $86.2 M. In addition, when reviewing the Income Statement, the NiMH produced a profitable contribution in the years 2006 through 2008. The Ultracapacitor, on the otherhand, produced an unprofitable contribution during the same timeframe. Based on these figures, we decided to focus on the NiMH.

The article raises the issue of revenue growth stalls that affect even the most successful companies. The article focuses on four major causes of the crisis. The first cause is the premium-position captivity that is”the inability of a firm to respond effectively to new, low-cost competitive challenge or to a significant shift in customer valuation of product features” (p.54). The second reason is the innovation management breakdown that is”some chronic problem in managing the internal business process for updating existing product and services and creating new one” (p.56). Third reason is the premature

The case GE´s Imagination Breakthroughs: The Evo Project is a really interesting case, it talks about the dramatic change that the company General Electric had to face in order to grow, and the process that the CEO had to pass in his first years in charge of the company.

Applying our knowledge about Economics of Strategy, we know that there are different ways to create additional value:

After analyzing the results from the previous quarter, it was determined that the prices set for each segment were not sufficient. Product sales priority were also not properly adjusted. With the R&D investments, sales priorities needed to be changed for the main focus to become the most profitable market segments. Prices were not competitive which in turned decreased revenue, market share, and profitability. To become more competitive we altered the prices in each market segment. The Workhorse product was the first to change, the price was lowered to $2500 in an attempt to increase sales; at this price Team 4 was still making a profit on this product, as well as making the price much more competitive. The Workhorse sales priority was also lowered to 3rd in Americas and 4th in APAC and EMEA. This product was not selling as well as we had hoped, and was no longer as profitable as it once was which led to this decision. Next, the Innovator product’s price was adjusted; this involved a price increase to $4100. This price was adjusted to include the new

For getting back profitability, there is no innovation and recover of profitability. The market has been fully matured; price continues decreasing and, as a result, industry revenues also continues decreasing even though volume of shipments increases.