-
In 1985, the Coca-Cola company made the decision to change the formula(配方) of its leading soft drink. The change was based on the findings of many market studies. These studies had shown that the general response to the new product was good. However, the change of the traditional. Coca-Cola by New Coke was rejected by the majority of drinkers. In fact, the company had to step back and restart production of the old formula of Coca-Cola.
The most important reason why New Coke was rejected was the emotional relationship that existed between drinkers and the old soft drink formula, Drinking Coca-Cola had become a tradition for many people over its 99 years of existence. The change made by the company was not only in Coke’s formula but also in the traditional values and memories that it represented to the drinkers. “We had taken away more than the product Coca-Cola. We had taken away a little part of them and their past“. The drinkers rejected this “improvement“ because “they believed that Coke stood for traditional value,…so they felt betrayed when the product changed completely overnight“.
Although a lot of research was done by Coca-Cola company, it didn’t show the depth of drinkers’ emotion for the product. The studies took many forms, but none of the tests was able to measure the degree of personal and emotional reactions caused by the disappearance of the old, traditional Coca-Cola. The weakness of the research was that it was mainly quantitative in form. The result was only numbers that could not show the deep meaning the product had for many people. A more extensive study focusing on the qualitative aspects of the change would perhaps have been able to demonstrate the close relationship existing between drinkers and product.
-
There are examples of what can be done by the retailer within his store, but perhaps the biggest opportunity for cost-reduction stems from cooperation between manufacturer and distributor in analyzing the total costs involved in moving the product from the factory to the shopper’s basket. A helpful technique in this connection is the concept of “direct product profit“ which is widely used in the United States.
This is a technique for analyzing very precisely the costs and profits associated with each product line, with a view to isolating opportunities for cost reduction. For example, the in-store handling costs for particular item may be reduced if the manufacturer puts it in a large case or reduces the number of layers in the case. With the growing importance of prepackaging both for perishable items like meat and for non-food products, it is essential that the container should facilitate quick unloading and easy display.
More obvious is the case for cooperation in reducing the costs of delivery and unloading; the night delivery experiment in Central London is an example of this. Many shops lack proper unloading facilities, often because the local authorities or private developers who built them were not aware of what was needed. Many retailers do not employ modern handling techniques.
Some consumer goods manufacturers, such as Unilever, are playing a big part in streamlining the distribution system, simply because they are “market-oriented“ companies which recognize the importance of low distribution costs. Even in Unilever, Lord Cole recalled the bad old days when distribution was looked upon as the least important of costs.
The process of distribution will gradually be made less labor-intensive; the difficulty of finding additional labor, apart from its cost, is the major factor behind.
