Saturday, 29 November 2014

CASE STUDY: Amazon.com

Amazon.com

In 1994, with a handful of programmers and a few thousand dollars in workstations and servers, Jeff Bezos set out to change the retail world when he created Amazon.com (ticker: AMZN). Shel Kaphan, Amazon’s first programmer, assisted by others, including Paul Bar-ton-Davis, used a collection of tools to create Web pages based on a database of 1 million book titles compiled from the Library of Congress and Books in Print databases. Kaphan notes that “Amazon was dependent on commercial and free database systems, as well as HTTP server software from commercial and free sources. Many of the programming tools were free software” [Collett 2002]. In July 1995, Amazon opened its Web site for sales. Us-ing heavily discounted book prices (20 to 30 percent below common retail prices); Amazon advertised heavily and became the leading celebrity of the Internet and e-commerce.

Sales and Relationships

Amazon made its initial mark selling books, and many people still think of the company in terms of books. However, almost from the start, the company has worked to expand into additional areas—striving to become a global retailer of almost anything. Some of the main events include: 1995 books, 1998 music and DVD/video, 1999 auctions, electronics, toys, zShops/MarketPlace, home improvement, software, and video games [1999 annual report].
By the end of 1999, the company had forged partnerships with several other online stores, including Ashford.com, Audible, Della.com, drugstore.com, Gear.com, Green-light.com, HomeGrocer.com, Kozmo.com, living.com, NextCard.com, Pets.com, and Sothebys. Of course, most of those firms and Web sites later died in the dot-com crash of 2000/2001.
Amazon also established partnerships with several large retailers, including Target, Toys ‘R’ Us, Babies ‘R’ Us, and Circuit City. Effectively, Amazon became a service organization to manage the online presence of these large retailers. However, it also uses its distribution system to deliver the products. The Circuit City arrangement was slightly different from the others—customers could pick up their items directly from their local stores [Heun August 2001]. After Circuit City went under, the relationship ended.
By mid-2003, the Web sales and fulfillment services amounted to 20 percent of Amazon’s sales. Bezos points out that most companies realize that only a small fraction of their total sales (5 to 10 percent) will come from online systems, so it makes sense to have Amazon run those portions [Murphy 2003].
In 2001, Amazon took over the Web site run by its bricks-and-mortar rival Borders. In 2000, Borders lost $18.4 million on total online sales of $27.4 million [Heun April 2001]. Also in 2001, Amazon partnered with Expedia to offer travel services directly from the Amazon site. However, in this case, the Amazon portion consists of little more than an adver-tising link to the Expedia services [Kontzer 2001]. The deals in 2001 continued with a twist when Amazon licensed its search technology to AOL. AOL invested $100 million in Amazon and payed an undisclosed license fee to use the search-and-personalization service on Shop@AOL [Heun July 2001]. In 2003, Amazon launched a subsidiary just to sell its Web-sales and fulfillment technology to other firms. Bezos noted that Amazon spends about $200 million a year on information technology (a total of $900 million to mid-2003). The purpose of the subsidiary is to help recover some of those costs—although Bezos believes they were critically necessary expenditures [Murphy 2003].

With so many diverse products, and relationships, it might be tempting to keep everything separate. However, Amazon perceives advantages from showing the entire site to customers as a single, broad entity. Yes, customers click to the various stores to find individual items. But, run a search and you will quickly see that it identifies products from any division. Additionally, the company is experimenting with cross sales. In 2002, the Project Ruby test site began selling name-brand clothing and accessories. Customers who spent $50 or more on apparel received a $30 gift certificate for use anywhere else on Amazon [Hayes 2002].
By 2004, 25 percent of Amazon’s sales were for its partners. But, one of Amazon’s major relationships took a really bad turn in 2004 when Toys ‘R’ Us sued Amazon and Am-azon countersued. The complaint by Toys ‘R’ Us alleges that it had signed a ten-year exclu-sivity contract with Amazon and had so far paid Amazon $200 million for the right to be the exclusive supplier of toys at Amazon.com. David Schwartz, senior VP and general counsel for Toys ‘R’ Us stated that “We don’t intend to pay for exclusivity we’re not getting” [Claburn May 2004]. Amazon’s initial response was that “We believe we can have multiple sellers in the toy category, increase selection, and offer products that (Toys ‘R’ Us) doesn’t have” [Claburn May 2004]. The lawsuit counters that at least one product (a Monopoly game) appears to be for sale by third-party suppliers as well as Toys ‘R’ Us. A month later, Amazon countersued, alleging that Toys ‘R’ Us experienced “chronic failure” to maintain sufficient stock to meet demand. The court documents noted that Toys ‘R’ Us had been out of stock on 20 percent of its most popular products [Claburn June 2004]. Although the dispute sounds damaging, it is conceivable that both parties are using the courts as a means to renegotiate the base contract.
Small merchants accelerated a shift to Amazon’s marketplace technology. By 2007, Amazon was simply the largest marketplace on the Web. For example, John Wieber was selling $1 million a year in refurbished computers through eBay. But increased competition and eBay’s rising prices convinced him to switch to direct sales through Amazon. Similar small merchants noted that although the fees on Amazon are hefty, they do not have to pay a listing fee. Plus, eBay shoppers only want to buy things at bargain-basement prices (Mangalindan 2005).
In 2010, Target ended its contract with Amazon and launched its own Web servers. Amazon does not report sales separately for its partners such as Target, so it is difficult to determine what impact the change might have on Amazon. However, Amazon has many other sellers who offer similar products.

Digital Content

Amazon has been expanding its offerings in digital content—in many ways extending com-petition against Apple, but also leading the way in digital books. Although it was not the first manufacturer, Amazon is reportedly the largest seller of e-readers with the Kindle. Amazon does not report sales separately for the Kindle. Amazon also noted in 2011 that e-books for its Kindle reader have overtaken sales of paperback books as the most popular format. The e-books had already exceeded hard-cover books the year before [Wu 2011]. For many of these reasons, Borders, a bricks-and-mortar competitor to Amazon went under in 2011.
Amazon is also working to expand sales of music. The Web site has relatively standard pricing on current songs, but often offers discounts on older albums. By 2011, Amazon was also trying to expand into video streaming. Customers who pay $79 a year to join the

Prime program gain faster shipping, and also access to a library of digital movies and TV shows. Unfortunately, with limited ties to the movie studios, the offerings initially were relatively thin. However, other video streaming sites, including Netflix and Hulu, were also struggling to develop long-term contracts with studios. In September 2011, Amazon an-nounced a deal with Fox to offer movies and TV shows owned by the studio. At the same time, Netflix announced a similar deal with the Dreamworks studio. It will take time for studios to determine strategies on streaming video services and for consumers to make choices [Woo and Kung 2011].
In late 2011, Amazon released its own version of a tablet computer. The company continued to sell the Kindle e-book reader, but the tablet focused on audio and video, using a color LCD display screen with a touch interface. Although it lacked features available on the market-leading Applet iPad, the Kindle table carried a price that was about half that of the iPad and other competitors ($200). The obvious goal was to provide a device that encourages customers to purchase more digital content directly from Amazon [Peers 2011].

Sales Taxes

Sales taxes have been a long-term issue with Amazon. The Annual Report notes that several states filed formal complaints with the company in March 2003. The basis for the individual suits is not detailed, but the basic legal position is that any company that has a physical presence in a state (“nexus” by the terms of a U.S. Supreme Court ruling), is subject to that state’s laws and must then collect the required sales taxes and remit them to the state. The challenge is that the level of presence has never been clearly defined. Amazon argues that it has no physical presence in most states and is therefore not required to collect taxes. The most recent challenges are based on Amazon’s “affiliate” program. Amazon pays a small commission to people who run Web sites and redirect traffic to the Amazon site. For instance, a site might mention a book and then include a link to the book on the Amazon site. Several states have passed laws claiming that these relationships constitute a “sales force” and open up Amazon to taxation within any state where these affiliates reside. In response, Amazon dropped the affiliate program in several states, has initiated a legal challenge in the state of New York, and in 2011, negotiated a new deal signed into law in California [Letzing 2011]. In the California deal, Amazon obtained a delay in collecting tax-es for at least a year, in exchange for locating a new distribution center in the state and creating at least 10,000 full-time jobs. Amazon is also asking the U.S. Congress to create a new federal law to deal with the sales-tax issue. However, because the state sales tax issue is driven by the interstate commerce clause in the U.S. Constitution, a simple law will not alter the underlying principles. However, if Congress desired, it might create a Federal Sales tax law with some method of apportioning the money to states. But, do not bet on any major tax laws during a Presidential election year.

Information Technology

In the first years, Amazon intentionally kept its Web site systems separate from its order-fulfillment system. The separation was partly due to the fact that the programmers did not have the technical ability to connect them, and partly because the company wanted to improve security by keeping the order systems off the Web.
By 1997, Amazon’s sales had reached $148 million for the year. The big book data-base was being run on Digital Alpha servers. Applications were still custom written in-house. By early 2000, the company had over 100 separate database instances running on a variety of servers handling terabytes of data.
In 2000, Amazon decided to overhaul its entire system. The company spent $200 million on new applications, including analysis software from Epiphany, logistics from Manugistics, and a new DBMS from Oracle. The company also signed deals with SAS for data mining and analysis [Collett 2002]. But, one of its biggest deals was with Excelon for business-to-business integration systems. The system enables suppliers to communicate in real time, even if they do not have sophisticated IT departments. It provides a direct connection to Amazon’s ERP system either through programming connections or through a Web browser [Konicki 2000].
About the same time (May 2000), Amazon inked a deal with HP to supply new servers and IT services [Goodridge and Nelson 2000]. The new systems ran the open-source Linux operating system. Already by the third quarter of 2001, Amazon was able to reduce its IT costs by 24 percent from the same quarter in 2000 [Collett 2002].
By 2004, the supply chain system at Amazon was a critical factor in its success. Jeffrey Wilke, Senior VP of worldwide operations, observed that “When we think about how we’re going to grow our company, we focus on price, selection, and availability. All three depend critically on the supply chain” [Bacheldor 2004]. Almost the entire system was built from scratch, customized to Amazon’s needs. When a customer places an order, the system immediately connects to the distribution centers, determines the best way to ship the prod-uct, and provides the details to the customer in under two minutes. The entire process is automatic.
Dr. Russell Allgor moved from Bayer Chemical to Amazon and built an 800,000-equation computer model of the company’s sprawling operation. When implemented, the goal of the model was to help accomplish almost everything from scheduling Christmas overtime to rerouting trucks in a snowstorm. Allgor’s preliminary work focused on one of Amazon’s most vexing problems: How to keep inventory at a minimum, while ensuring that when someone orders several products, they can be shipped in a single box, preferably from the warehouse — the company had six — that is nearest the customer [Hansell, 2001]. Dr. Allgor’s analysis is simple, but heretical to Amazon veterans. Amazon should increase its holdings of best sellers and stop holding slow-selling titles. It would still sell these titles but order them after the customer does. Lyn Blake, a vice president who previously ran Amazon’s book department and now oversees company relations with manufacturers, disagrees with this perspective. “I worry about the customer’s perspective if we suddenly have a lot of items that are not available for quick delivery.”
Amazon’s merchant and MarketPlace systems are powerful tools that enable smaller stores to sell their products through Amazon’s system. Amazon continually works to im-prove the connections on those systems. This system caused problems in 2001—the main issue was that the data on the merchant Web sites was being updated only once every eight hours. The merchant’s link to Amazon’s main database servers, and internal applications transfer the data onto the displayed page as requested. As customers purchased items, the inventory quantities were altered in the main servers, but the current totals were not transferred to the display pages until several hours later. Consequently, customers would be told that an item was in stock, even it had sold out several hours ago. To solve the problem, Amazon installed Excelon’s ObjectStore database in 2002. The system functions as a cache management server, reducing the update times from eight hours down to two minutes. Paul Kotas, engineering director for the Merchants@Group noted that “with the growth of this business, we needed a zero-latency solution” [Whiting 2002].
In 2003, Amazon added a simple object access protocol (SOAP) gateway so that retailers could easily build automated connections to the system. Data is passed as XML documents and automatically converted to Amazon’s format [Babcock 2003].
One of the most successful technologies introduced by Amazon is the affinity list. When someone purchases an item, system makes recommendations based on similar items purchased by other customers. The system uses basic data mining and statistical tools to quickly run correlations and display the suggested products. Kaphan notes that “There was always a vision to make the service as useful as possible to each user and to take advantage of the ability of the computer to help analyze a lot of data to show people things they were most likely to be interested in” [Collett 2002]. The system also remembers every purchase made by a customer. So, the Amazon programmers created the Instant Order Update fea-ture, that reminds customers if they have already purchased an item in their cart. Bezo notes that “Customers lead busy lives and cannot always remember if they’ve already pur-chased a particular item.” He also observed that “When we launched Instant Order Update, we were able to measure with statistical significance that the feature slightly reduced sales. Good for customers? Definitely. Good for share owners? Yes, in the long run” [2003 annual report].
Capital expenditures for software and Web site development are not cheap: $176 million, $146 million, and $128 million for 2010, 2009, and 2008 respectively (2010 Annual Report). But, in comparison, in 2010, net income tax provisions were $352 million.

New Services

Amazon requires huge data centers and high-speed Internet connections to run its systems. Through vast economies of scale, Amazon is able to achieve incredibly low prices for data storage and bandwidth. Around 2005, the company decided that it could leverage those low costs into a new business selling Internet-based services. The company offers an online data storage service called S3. For a monthly fee of about 15 cents per gigabyte stored plus 15 cents per gigabyte of data transferred, any person or company can transfer and store data on Amazon servers [Markoff 2006]. Through a similar service (EC2), any company can use the company’s Web servers to deliver digital content to customers. The company essentially serves as a Web host, but instead of paying fixed costs, you pay 10 cents per virtual server per hour plus bandwidth costs. Amazon’s network can handle bursts up to 1 gigabit per se-cond. The system creates virtual servers, running the Linux kernel, and you can run any software you want [Gralla 2006]. By 2011, the company had several locations providing S3 and EC2 Web services. It also offered online relational database services using either MySQL or the Oracle DBMS. Anyone can pay to store data in the DBMS, with charges be-ing levied per hour, per data stored, and per data transferred. The point is that Amazon handles all of the maintenance and other companies avoid fixed costs. Even government agencies are adopting the benefits of storing data in these cloud services—including those run by Amazon. For example, the U.S. Treasury Department moved is public Web sites to the Amazon cloud. [Pratt 2011].
Perhaps the most unusual service is Mturk. The name derives from an 18-century joke where a “mechanical” chess-playing machine surprised European leaders and royalty by beating many expert players. The trick was that a human was hidden under the board and moved the pieces with magnets. Amazon’s trick is to use human power to solve problems. Companies post projects on the Mturk site and offer to pay a price for piecemeal work. Any individual can sign up and perform a task and get paid based on the amount of work completed. Amazon takes a 10 percent commission above the fee. For example, the company Casting Words places audio files on the site and pays people 42 cents to transcribe one mi-nute of audio files into text [Markoff 2006].
The Amazon EC2 and S3 services suffered some problems in the summer of 2011. A configuration error during an upgrade in the East Coast facility triggered a cascade that delayed all services in the facility. Internet services including Foursquare and Reddit that used the facility were impacted by the problems for almost a week [Tibken 2011]. Amazon engineers learned a lot from the problems and the same issue is unlikely to occur again [http://aws.amazon.com/message/65648/]. But, the outage points out the risks involved in any centralized system. Ironically, the main problems were caused by algorithms designed to copy data to multiple servers to reduce risks. On the other hand, with multiple facilities, Amazon provides the ability to spread content and risk across multiple locations.
Adam Selipsky, vice president of product management and developer relations at Amazon Web Services observed that “"Amazon is fundamentally a technology company; we’ve spent more than one and a half billion dollars investing in technology and content. We began by retailing books, but it was never in our business plan to stay with that” [Gralla 2006].

Financial Performance

When Amazon started, it spent huge amounts of money not only building infrastructure, but also buying market share. It took Amazon nine years to achieve profitability. And the profits started to arrive only after the company changed its pricing model—focusing on re-tail prices for popular items and smaller discounts for all books. In the process, the company lost almost $3 billion. It was not until 2009 that Amazon had generated enough profits to cover all of its prior losses (ignoring interest rates and debt).

The company’s financial position has improved since 2000. Most of the improvement is due to increases in sales—which is good. But, those sales increased largely by selling products for other firms, and from one more twist. Amazon no longer discounts most of the books that it sells. In fact, it is generally more expensive to purchase books from Amazon than to buy them from your local bookstore. For competitive online pricing, check www.campusi.com, which searches multiple Web sites for the best price, but the selection might not be as large.
Another source of increased sales is the international market (largely Britain, Eu-rope and Japan). Notice in the table that media sales (books, audio, and movies) are higher in the International market than in North America. More products are sold in North America, but clearly the growth path is the international market.

Out of curiosity, where did all of that money go? In 2003, Bezos noted that $900 mil-lion went to business technology; $300 million was spent on the fulfillment centers; and $700 million on marketing and customer acquisition [Murphy 2003]. That last part largely represents selling books at a loss or offering free shipping while trying to attract customers. Those numbers add up to the $1.9 billion debt, but what happened to the other $1 billion in net losses? Interestingly, according to the 2010 Annual Report, Amazon still runs a loss on shipping. In 2010, the company declared shipping revenue of $1.2 billion, against outbound shipping costs of $2.6 billion, for a net loss of $1.4 billion!
Amazon continues to expand aggressively. In 2011, Amazon estimated revenue in-creases of 28-39 percent but increased operating expenses by about 38 percent. Tom Szkutak, Amazon’s finance chief noted that “When you add something to the magnitude of 23 fulfillment centers, mostly in the course of the second half of last year, you have added costs and you’re not as productive on those assets for some time,” [Wu 2011].
For the longer term, Amazon’s leaders clearly indicate that they are aware of the stiff competition—both from bricks-and-mortar retailers and from online rivals including small start-ups and established rivals including Apple and Google.


Case Questions

1. Who are Amazon’s competitors?
2. Why would customers shop at Amazon if they can find better prices elsewhere?
3. Why did Amazon create most of its own technology from scratch?
4. If Amazon buys products from other firms and simply ships them to customers, why does it need so many of its own distribution centers?

5. Will other retailers buy or lease the Web software and services from Amazon? Can Amazon make enough money from selling these services?
6. Write a report to management that describes the primary cause of the problems, a detailed plan to solve them, and show how the plan solves the problems and describe any other benefits it will provide.


CASE STUDY: Wal-Mart: attaining competitive advantage from information technology



Wal-Mart is the world's largest and most profitable retailer, with $44 billion in 1992 sales and 380,000 employees. Its growth from a single store in Rogers, Arkansas to almost 2,000 bright, attractive stores in 43 states is legendary in American business. Sam Walton was central to the legend. He built his empire on a belief in providing value for the customer and empowering employees, who are called associates. The Wal-Mart culture is built on obtaining the most current information about what customers want, getting the best ideas from employees about how to run the stores well, and sharing some of the profits with employees. The way Wal-Mart operates has been a model for General Electric's quest to increase speed and productivity. Jack Welch, CEO of General Electric said "Many of our management teams spent time there observing the speed, the bias for action, the utter customer fixation that drives Wal-Mart."
The use of information technology has been an essential part of Wal-Mart's growth. A decade ago
Wal-Mart trailed K-Mart, which could negotiate lower wholesale prices due to its size. Part of Wal-
Mart's strategy for catching up was a point-of-sale system, a computerized system that identifies
each item sold, finds its price in a computerized database, creates an accurate sales receipt for the
customer, and stores this item-by-item sales information for use in analyzing sales and reordering
inventory. Aside from handling information efficiently, effective use of this information helps Wal-
Mart avoid overstocking by learning what merchandise is selling slowly. Wal-Mart's inventory and
distribution system is a world leader. Over one 5 year period, Wal-Mart invested over $600 million
in information systems.
Wal-Mart use telecommunications to link directly from its stores to its central computer system and
from that system to its supplier's computers. This allows automatic reordering and better coordination. Knowing exactly what is selling well and coordinating closely with suppliers permits Wal-Mart to tie up less money in inventory than many of their competitors. At its computerized warehouses, many goods arrive and leave without ever sitting on a shelf. Only 10% of the floor space in Wal-Mart stores is used as an inventory area, compared to the 25% average for the industry. With better coordination, the suppliers can have more consistent manufacturing runs, lower their costs, and pass some of the savings on to Wal-Mart and eventually the consumer. Some 3,800 vendors now get daily sales data directly from Wal-Mart stores. And 1,500 have the same decision and analysis software that Wal-Mart's own buyers use to check how a product performs in various markets.
Aside from computers and telecommunications equipment, the technical basis of the point-of-sale system is the bar code scanner. Bar code scanners make it possible to record the sale of each item and make that information available immediately for both reordering and sales analysis. The first use of bar code scanners occurred in the 1970s. After two decades of experience, accurate inventory tracking using bar code scanners is a competitive necessity for large grocery stores and retailers. Consistent with the adoption of any information technology, development and acceptance of bar codes required agreements on standards. The idea of bar code scanning required that industry develop a universal product code (UPC) system, a standard method for identifying products with numbers and coding those numbers as the type of bar code shown in the photo. The UPC codes that we see routinely today were chosen from a number of alternatives developed by different companies.
As happens with other uses of technology, the use of bar codes has brought a range of problems along with the benefits Wal-Mart and other retailers have realized. The use of bar code scanners made it unnecessary to stamp the price on every item (except in states that still require this for consumer protection). This reduced costs but also eliminated jobs of some of the clerks who formerly did the stamping. Other problems (not necessarily related to Wal-Mart) were uncovered when a UCLA study of 1,200 purchases at three retail chains in California found mischarges on 5% to 12% of the purchases. For example, a researcher was charged a scanner price of $21.99 for a pair of jeans that were marked on sale for $15.44. The ratio of overcharges to undercharges at one chain was as high as 5-to-1. In other words, the majority of the mistakes were overcharges, not undercharges. The Riverside, California district attorney who prosecuted three retailers for scanner overcharges said, "I don't believe scanners have helped the consumer at all." On the one hand, the productivity of modern retailing depends on bar code scanners; on the other, the system of updating the prices is imperfect and may even be an opportunity for dishonesty.
Stepping away from the technology and back to Wal-Mart, even its tremendous success has brought some problems. The huge Wal-Mart stores on the outskirts of small towns have overwhelmed many merchants on Main Street. Wal-Mart is so large that it can sell products profitably at prices less than many small-town merchants' cost. Some feel that Wal-Marts have killed the traditional business districts of some small towns. If this is true, consumers in these towns receive the benefits of the best selection and pricing, but lose some of the benefits of living in a small town.


Questions:
1. Explain how advances in information technology played a major role in Wal-Mart's success.
2. Explain how the case reveals some of the negative impacts that sometimes result from technology usage.
3. Analyze the feasibility of adapting Wal-Mart's policies d to suit Indian retail stores and give
some suggestions regarding its implementation.

CASE STUDY: DOMINO’S SIZZLES WITH PIZZA TRACKER

When it comes to pizza, everyone has an opinion. Some of us think that our current pizza is just fine the way it is. Others have a favorite pizza joint that makes it like no one else. And many pizza lovers in America agreed up until recently that Domino’s home-delivered pizza was among the worst. The home-delivery market for pizza chains in the United States is approximately $15 billion per year. Domino’s, which owns the largest home-delivery market share of any U.S. pizza chain, is finding ways to innovate by overhauling its in-store transaction processing systems and by providing other useful services to customers, such as its Pizza Tracker. And more important, Domino’s is trying very hard to overcome its reputation for poor quality by radically improving ingredients and freshness. Critics believe the company significantly improved the quality of its pizza and customer service in 2010.

Domino’s was founded in 1960 by Tom Monaghan and his brother James when they purchased a single pizza store in Ypsilanti, Michigan. The company slowly began to grow, and by 1978, Domino’s had 200 stores. Today, the company is headquartered in Ann
Arbor, Michigan, and operates almost 9,000 stores located in all 50 U.S. states and across the world in 60 international markets. In 2009, Domino’s had $1.5 billion in sales and earned $80 million in profit. Domino’s is part of a heated battle among prominent
pizza chains, including Pizza Hut, Papa John’s, and Little Caesar. Pizza Hut is the only chain larger than Domino’s in the U.S., but each of the four has significant market share. Domino’s also competes with local pizza stores throughout the U.S. To gain a competitive advantage Domino’s needs to deliver excellent customer service, and most importantly, good pizza. But it also benefits from highly effective information systems.
Domino’s proprietary point-of-sale system, Pulse, is an important asset in maintaining consistent and efficient management functions in each of its restaurants. A point-of-sale system captures purchase and payment data at a physical location where goods or services are bought and sold using computers, automated cash registers, scanners, or other digital devices.


In 2003, Domino’s implemented Pulse in a large portion of its stores, and those stores reported improved customer service, reduced mistakes, and shorter training times. Since then, Pulse has become a staple of all Domino’s franchises. Some of the functions Pulse performs at Domino’s franchises are taking and customizing orders using a touch-screen interface, maintaining sales figures, and compiling customer information. Domino’s prefers not to disclose the specific dollar amounts that it has saved from Pulse, but it’s clear from industry analysts that the technology is working to cut costs and increase customer satisfaction. More recently, Domino’s released a new hardware and software platform called Pulse Evolution, which is now in use in a majority of Domino’s more than 5,000 U.S. branches. Pulse Evolution improves on the older technology in several ways. First, the older software used a ‘thick-client’ model, which required all machines using the software to be fully equipped personal computers running Windows. Pulse Evolution, on the other hand, uses ‘thin-client’ architecture in which networked workstations with little independent processing power collect data and send them over the Internet to powerful Lenovo PCs for processing. These workstations lack hard drives, fans, and other moving parts, making them less expensive and easier to maintain. Also, Pulse Evolution is easier to update and more secure, since there’s only one machine in the store which needs to be updated.
Along with Pulse Evolution, Domino’s rolled out its state-of-the-art online ordering system, which includes Pizza Tracker. The system allows customers to watch a simulated photographic version of their pizza as they customize its size, sauces, and toppings.
The image changes with each change a customer makes. Then, once customers place an order, they are able to view its progress online with Pizza Tracker. Pizza Tracker displays a horizontal bar that tracks an order’s progress graphically. As a Domino’s
store completes each step of the order fulfillment process, a section of the bar becomes red. Even customers that place their orders via telephone can monitor their progress on the Web using Pizza Tracker at stores using Pulse Evolution. In 2010, Domino’s introduced an online polling system to continuously upload information from local stores.


As with most instances of organizational change of this magnitude, Domino’s experienced some resistance.
Domino’s originally wanted its franchises to select Pulse to comply with its requirements for data security, but some franchises have resisted switching to Pulse and sought alternative systems. After Domino’s tried to compel those franchises to use
Pulse, the U.S. District Court for Minnesota sided with franchisees who claimed that Domino’s could not force them to use this system. Now, Domino’s continues to make improvements to Pulse in an effort to make it overwhelmingly appealing to all
franchisees.


Pizza Hut and Papa John’s also have online ordering capability, but lack the Pizza Tracker and the simulated pizza features that Domino’s has successfully implemented. Today, online orders account for almost 20 percent of all of Domino’s orders, which is
up from less than 15 percent in 2008. But the battle to sell pizza with technology rages on. Pizza Hut customers can now use their iPhones to place orders, and Papa John’s customers can place orders by texting. With many billions of dollars at stake, all the
large national pizza chains will be developing innovative new ways of ordering pizza and participating in its creation.


CASE STUDY QUESTIONS
1. What kinds of systems are described in this case? Identify and describe the business processes each supports. Describe the inputs, processes, and outputs of these systems.
2. How do these systems help Domino’s improve its business performance?
3. How did the online pizza ordering system improve the process of ordering a Domino’s pizza?
4. How effective are these systems in giving Domino’s a competitive edge? Explain your
answer.

Case Study : UPS COMPETES GLOBALLY WITH INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY

United Parcel Service (UPS) started out in 1907 in a closet-sized basement office. Jim Casey and Claude Ryan—two teenagers from Seattle with two bicycles and one phone—promised the “best service and lowest rates.” UPS has used this formula successfully for more than 100 years to become the world’s largest ground and air package delivery company. It’s a global enterprise with over 408,000 employees, 96,000 vehicles, and the world’s ninth largest airline.
Today, UPS delivers more than 15 million packages and documents each day in the United States and more than 200 other countries and territories. The firm has been able to maintain leadership in small-package delivery services despite stiff competition from FedEx and Airborne Express by investing heavily in advanced information technology. UPS spends more than $1 billion each year to maintain a high level of customer service while keeping costs low and streamlining its overall operations.
United Parcel Service (UPS) started out in 1907 in a closet-sized basement office. Jim Casey and Claude Ryan—two teenagers from Seattle with two bicycles and one phone—promised the “best service and lowest rates.” UPS has used this formula successfully for more than 100 years to become the world’s largest ground and air package delivery company. It’s a global enterprise with over 408,000 employees, 96,000 vehicles, and the world’s ninth largest airline.
Today, UPS delivers more than 15 million packages and documents each day in the United States and more than 200 other countries and territories. The firm has been able to maintain leadership in small-package delivery services despite stiff competition from FedEx and Airborne Express by investing heavily in advanced information technology. UPS spends more than $1 billion each year to maintain a high level of customer service while keeping costs low and streamlining its overall operations.
It all starts with the scannable bar-coded label attached to a package, which contains detailed information about the sender, the destination, and when the package should arrive. Customers can download and print their own labels using special software provided by UPS or by accessing the UPS Web site. Before the package is even picked up, information from the “smart” label is transmitted to one of UPS’s computer centers in Mahwah, New Jersey, or Alpharetta, Georgia, and sent to the distribution center nearest its final destination.
Dispatchers at this center download the label data and use special software to create the most efficient delivery route for each driver that considers traffic, weather conditions, and the location of each stop. UPS estimates its delivery trucks save 28 million miles and burn 3 million fewer gallons of fuel each year as a result of using this technology. To further increase cost savings and safety, drivers are trained to use “340 Methods” developed by industrial engineers to optimize the performance of every task from lifting and loading boxes to selecting a package from a shelf in the truck.
The first thing a UPS driver picks up each day is a handheld computer called a Delivery Information Acquisition Device (DIAD), which can access one of the wireless networks cell phones rely on. As soon as the driver logs on, his or her day’s route is downloaded onto the handheld. The DIAD also automatically captures customers’ signatures along with pickup and delivery information.
Package tracking information is then transmitted to UPS’s computer network for storage and processing. From there, the information can be accessed worldwide to provide proof of delivery to customers or to respond to customer queries. It usually takes less than 60 seconds from the time a driver presses “complete” on a DIAD for the new information to be available on the Web.
Through its automated package tracking system, UPS can monitor and even re-route packages throughout the delivery process. At various points along the route from sender to receiver, bar code devices scan shipping information on the package label and feed data about the progress of the package into the central computer. Customer service representatives are able to check the status of any package from desktop computers linked to the central computers and respond immediately to inquiries from customers. UPS customers can also access this information from the company’s Web site using their own computers or mobile phones.
Anyone with a package to ship can access the UPS Web site to check delivery routes, calculate shipping rates, determine time in transit, print labels, schedule a pickup, and track packages. The data collected at the UPS Web site are transmitted to the UPS central computer and then back to the customer after processing. UPS also provides tools that enable customers, such Cisco Systems, to embed UPS functions, such as tracking and cost calculations, into their own Web sites so that they can track shipments without visiting the UPS site.
In June 2009, UPS launched a new Web-based Post-Sales Order Management System (OMS) that manages global service orders and inventory for critical parts fulfillment. The system enables hightech electronics, aerospace, medical equipment, and other companies anywhere in the world that ship critical parts to quickly assess their critical parts inventory, determine the most optimal routing strategy to meet customer needs, place orders online, and track parts from the warehouse to the end user. An automated e-mail or fax feature keeps customers informed of each shipping milestone and can provide notification of any changes to flight schedules for commercial airlines carrying their parts. Once orders are complete, companies can print documents such as labels and bills of lading in multiple languages.
UPS is now leveraging its decades of expertise managing its own global delivery network to manage logistics and supply chain activities for other companies. It created a UPS Supply Chain Solutions division that provides a complete bundle of standardized services to subscribing companies at a fraction of what it would cost to build their own systems and infrastructure. These services include supply chain design and management, freight forwarding, customs brokerage, mail services, multimodal transportation, and financial services, in addition to logistics services.
Questions
1. What are the inputs, processing, and outputs of UPS’s package tracking system?
2. What technologies are used by UPS? How are these technologies related to UPS’s business strategy?
3. What strategic business objectives do UPS’s information systems address?

Wednesday, 26 November 2014

E- Marketing Challenges & Opportunities - Introduction Case

Introduction  DELL - HELLCASE

On June 21, 2005, a “citizen journalist” by the name of Jeff Jarvis posted a single negative blog-post about his experience with one of the top computer and technology companies in the world- Dell Inc.  His rant was lengthy, and unforgivable, with sentences like, “DELL SUCKS. DELL LIES. Put that in your Google and smoke it, Dell,” and it attracted computer buyers from around the globe.
dell - hell on-line rant this is the cause for the on-line outrage

Dell had built a strong reputation during the 1990′s and early 21st century, however, the experience of one customer would serve as a catalyst to Dell for over two years.  Dell Inc. became known instead as, “Dell Hell,” and the bold opinion of Jarvis resulted in a domino effect that caused bad critiques and drastic declines in Dell’s success.  Their business, their brand, was under attack, and getting this smudge off their record was no easy task.

The Reason

Dell set themselves up for this situation by failing to relate to the very people who keep them in business. The first reason to get serious about your business’s on-line presence is so you have a better grasp on what your customers are thinking.  Billions of dollars in marketing efforts are spent each year on studies, surveys, and behaviour patterns to find out what people want and how to appeal to consumers.  But don’t think just because there aren’t conversations about your brand on-line that this is a good thing.  In fact, if you aren’t a topic of conversation on-line, this can be an even bigger warning: no one is talking about you because no one cares or knows about you.

The Output

Dell learned to listen and “they ended up seeing the value in listening to and ceding control to customers. They reached out to bloggers; they blogged; they found ways to listen to and follow the advice of their customers. They joined the conversation. That’s all we asked.” In fact, Dell ended up earning the forgiveness and respect of Jarvis back again.

Jarvis posted this on his blog on October 18, 2007, explaining in detail exactly what he saw in Dell that caused his change of heart:
Dell realized that engaging in the conversation wasn’t just a way to stop blogging customers like me from harming the brand. We, the customers, bring them great value besides our money: We alert them to problem. We will tell them what products we want. We share our knowledge about their products. We help fellow customers solve problems. We will sell their products. But this happens only if you have a decent product and service and only if you listen to us.
dell learns to listen  The response from jarvis after two years
this incident caused Dell to create this website  dedicated to listen to customers  idea storm by dell
Now if you see this whole incident it is a perfect example of companies underestimating new forms of interaction and how it can affect you. This in fact highlights the need for marketing in newer avenues with vigour.


Monday, 10 November 2014

Information Systems - Human Resource Information System

 Its primary objective is providing suitable manpower in number and with certain ability, skills and knowledge as the business organization demands from time to time.
Its goal is to control costs through increase in productivity by following techniques
  •  Human resource development through training and upgrading the skills
  •  Motivation through leadership and job enrichment
  •  Promotion and rewards through performance appraisal
  •  Grievance handling
  •  Structuring the organization.

The various documents which serve as inputs for HRIS are as follows
  •  Personnel application form
  •  Appointment letter
  •  Attendance and leave record
  •  Biodata , self and family
  •  Appraisal form
  •  Production /productivity data on the jobs
  •  Wage /salary agreement
  •  Record of complaints, grievances, accidents
  •  Industry data on wage/salary structure
  •  Industry data on manpower, skills. Qualifications
  •  Record of sources of manpower – university, institution, companies
  • Record on manpower application trend in view of automation and computerization
Accounting
Following entries are accounted in the HRIS
  •  Attendance
  •  Manpower
  •  Leave
  •  Salary / wages , statutory deductions
  •  Loans and deductions
  •  Accidents
  •  Production data
  •  Skills
  •  Biodata
  •  Family data
Human resource management has the following questions
  •  Who is who ?
  •  Strength of the section,department, division
  •  Number of persons with a particular skill.
  •  Attendance, leave and absenteeism record of all employees.
  •  Salary/wage of employees.
  •  Designation and number of persons holding these designations
  •  Personal records of the employees
these queries are processed with employee number, skill code, department code as keys.
Analysis:
  •  Analysis of attendance by a class of employees
  •  Leave analysis by a group of employees
  •  Trend in the leave record
  •  Analysis of accidents and types
  •  Analysis of salary/wages structure.
  •  Analysis of overtime
 Control
  •  Probable absence versus workload
  •  Projection of personnel cost against manpower increase
  •  Assessment of accident records against safety measures taken
  •  Personnel cost versus industry cost and its projection
  •  Projection of manpower needs and evolving recruitment and training programmes
Statuatory reports
  •  Attendance record
  •  Strength of the employees by category
  •  Provident fund, ESI reports, ledgers and returns
  •  Accident reports
  •  Income tax Form 16,24A
  •  Strength of employees to Director General of Technical Development
These reports are submitted to various government agencies .

Information updates
  •  Daily attendance report
  •  Employee strength
  •  Joining and transfer of employees
  •  Personnel cost by department, job product
  •  Periodical statements showing personnel costs by salary/wages, overtime.
 Operation updates
  •  Daily attendance to plan the workload
  • Overtime versus work completed
  •  Projected absenteeism and distribution of workload
  •  Cost of personnel by jobs or work completed.
Decision analysis
  •  Analysis of attendance for season, festival and by skills, scheduling of the jobs accordingly
  •  Overtime analysis by department, employees and job to decide the strength of personnel
  •  Analysis of accidents and deciding on safety measures and training
  • Cost analysis by personnel vs jobs vs skills and planning for new recruitment's
 Action reports
  •  Recruitment and additional manpower or subcontracting of jobs
  •  Acceptance of orders on the basis of workload
  •  Reduction, transfer and reorganisation of employees to control costs
  •  Preparation of training and development programmes with specific needs.
Most of these reports are used by people in operations management