Managing Information Technology Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 250 words - 11

Managing Information Technology - Essay Example The sequential access files could either be in the form of line sequential organization or indexed sequential organization (Brown, DeHayes, Hoffer, Martin, Perkins, 2009). What is most important is how the records are accessed. If these are accessed in the form of the sequential format, the sequence is maintained nonetheless but if this is done through a direct approach, there is no fixed mechanism behind the same. The direct access files are the ones which come about in a random fashion and are easily understood within the search mechanisms. It is easy for the files to be found on the record because there is no order to this system which has been employed. Hence it becomes easier to access files in this fashion nonetheless. In the end, it is correct to state that both sequential access files and direct access files are significant towards the file organization

Personal statement, interview in your filed of interest Essay

Personal statement, interview in your filed of interest - Essay Example It reflects both the goals I have in life as well as what drives me in achieving them. I try to plan my life and set both the short-term and long-term goals in a way that will enable me to become each day better than I was yesterday, delimiting always some new horizons to be discovered. Knowing that my actions and my efforts were not in vain, but brought good and well-being to other people and society I live in is what fills the life with sense and brings inner satisfaction. Only by striving for more a person can expect to become versatile personality and knowledgeable professional. Following my credo, I know that any experience, either successful or not, is always good for a person, but it is essential to know how to make use of it and be ready to turn the past mistakes into the future gaining. My aim is not getting an access to material benefits as they are not the values I serve. However, I know that I possess all the skills and traits of character needed to reach heights in civil engineering. Finding and applying my own approach to challenges and seemingly desperate situations, I will be able to make a difference in this profession and prove that I am capable of much. The only indeed valuable award, in this regard, is seeing the outcomes of the completed work and to knowing that they will serve people good for ages. Subsequently, I believe that what I managed to achieve today will lay the ground for what I will gain tomorrow. The following confidence constantly encourages me to try even harder and applying even more efforts on the way to my

Statistical Techniques in Business and Economics Essay Example for Free

Statistical Techniques in Business and Economics Essay Abstract Along with the web 2.0 prevailing since the beginning of the 21st century, social media has become one of the most important tools for companies to develop the markets or public relations during this decade. Most companies around the world have a good sense of the importance of the social media. Companies use all the social media websites available to create more chances to meet more businesses online, or only to get a platform to show what they have such as products or services, even though the audiences only catch a glance of their companies’ profiles, they have already achieved their marketing purposes. Individuals are very obsessed in social media personally as well as businesses; they think social media is a great way to distinguish themselves from others or let the world get to know them. Introduction Through our survey, it is not hard to find that social media can impact businesses in some certain areas. In the U.S., with Facebook floating on the stock exchange at a mind boggling $104 billion, many naysayers predict an Internet bubble. However, there is no denying the power of social media and the impact that it can have on the business of marketing. Particularly, there are four aspects. Firstly, social media websites such as Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, and Pinterest represent a huge opportunity for businesses to grab the attention of customers while simultaneously building a brand image. There are plenty of tactics that businesses can employ to do this including the creation of brand profiles on social networks such as Facebook fan pages and creative advertising via branded podcasts and applications, also known as apps. Secondly, we know how important the word of mouth is in business. Social media platforms provide the perfect opportunity to take advantage of word of mouth and to see it spreading. Social media is growing at its fastest rate in developing countries. People are connected on a global scale and casually participate in each other’s lives through online observation. Something as simple as â€Å"Liking† a brand on Facebook can spread very quickly throughout the various social media channels. It is worth noting that individuals trust the opinions of their peers far more than a glossy magazine advert. Millions of people review products and services directly via social media sites using videos through YouTube, which in many cases are then shared and disseminated via various other social media websites. As a consequence, the public increasingly looks to social media to find reviews on various products and services to help them to make buying decisions. As a result, companies can and do provide products to popular Youtube users to review for their subscribers as well as create their own branded Youtube channels with branded videos about their products. (Social Media can impact business) Regarding communicating with customers, companies may see massive negative reviews about their products or services when they are expecting to use it as their advantage. By utilizing social media effectively, companies can reach out to dissatisfied customers directly, within their own social m edia environment, to find innovative ways of improving the product or service they have offered. When creating a social media marketing strategy, it is worth thinking very carefully about who is being targeted. There will be people within social networks who may not necessarily be customers, but who nevertheless can have a massive impact on marketing efforts. More than 80 % of that population is made up of â€Å"potential influencers†. It is worth making the effort to identify that these people are in the network and connect with them to attract shares and likes which ultimately help to spread brand name. One website which is excellent for identifying these people is Klout. Klout gives social networkers a score out of 100, which indicates how influential an individual is over their network while also identifying who the broadcasters and influencers are within that network. The purpose of the whole research process is to find out how companies use social media based on a stati stic view. Research Methodology There were 199 survey attendants given the questionnaires. The questionnaire was divided into 12 parts and each part had 3-13 questions. The questionnaires contained questions such as how companies use social media to provide customer services, marketing research, and improve the public relation with supplier or partners. We will use the information provided by the survey respondents to combine what we learned from statistics class, which included but not limited to probability from chapter 5, estimation and confidence intervals from chapter 9, one sample and two- sample test of hypothesis from chapter 10 and 11; simple linear regression and correlation which is from chapter 14, and Chi-square test. This research is based on the sets of data that were collected from Survey Monkey, collected by Survey Monkey Survey System. Survey Monkey is a company that provides platforms for those who need information for any legal purpose such as market research, education, and customer satisfaction. There are three steps to complete a survey. The surveyors usually design the surveys based on the purpose of their organizational behavior, and then they would distribute the survey to their targeted population such as customers or students; finally, they would use mathematic tools to analyze the data that was collected from the surveys. In this research paper I would like to represent some data graphs that we learned from the statistics class (Survey Monkey, 2013). First, we will show a pie chart of the gender information about the survey respondents. Table 1: What is your gender? The sample population of this survey consists of 103 (51.26%) participants who were male, while 78 (39.20%) participants were female, and 19 (9.55%) participants did not select their gender. (See table below) Among all the survey respondents, 24.12% of them were 18-24 years old, total 48 respondents; 51.76% were 25-34 years old, total 103 respondents, 6.53% were 35-44 years old, total 13 respondents, 6.53% were 45-54 years old, total 13 respondents also. Only 5 respondents (2.51%)are 55-64 years old, 0 (0%) respondents are 65-75 years old, and 17 (8.54%) participants didn’t answer this question. (See table below) Table 2: How old are you? Regarding the working experience, 39(19.6%) out of 199 respondents (100%) chose â€Å"less than 1 year†, 89 respondents (44.7%) chose â€Å"1-5 years†, 11 of them (5.5%) chose â€Å"5-10 years†, 23 respondents (11.6%) chose â€Å"more than 10 years†, and 23 respondents (11.6%) didn’t answer this question. (See Table 3 below) Table 3: How many years have you worked in company? Table 4: How dose your company use social media? Since gender, age and working experience are dependent variables that describe how company used social media. In table 4, there were 28(14%) of respondents use social media extremely likely, 31(15%) respondents use social media very likely, 61 (30%) used social media moderately likely, 39(19%) respondents used social medias slightly likely, 31(15%) participants did not use social media very likely, and 19(9%) respondents did not use social medina at all, and 24(12%) respondents chose â€Å"don’t know†. (See Table 4 below) Table5: Relationship between companies founded years and how long does company use social media? Base on this table we can tell that the relationship between the companies founded date and the year they began using social media. Normally, The Company began using social media for 1-2 years when the company founded 1-5years, the rate of possibility is 3/179; the company founded 5-10 years and they used social media for 2-4years, the rate of possibility is 4/179. ] The company uses 4-6years social media when the company founded 10-15years, the rate of possibility is 8/179; finally, the company used social media above 6 years when the company founded more than 20 years, the rate of possibility is 22/179. Data Result and Analysis Descriptive Statistic To help explain descriptive statistics, we will use the total number of How long has the companies begun using social media, and based on the description above, we will demonstrate that how likely is the companies going to adopt new social media applications in the next 12 months. (See table below) Descriptive statistics can include graphical summaries that show the spread of the data, and numerical summaries that either measures the central tendency (a typical data value) of a data set or that describes the spread of the data (Gerald, 2011). There are five different tests including â€Å"Hypothesis (one sample)†, â€Å"Hypothesis (two sample)†, â€Å"F-test†, â€Å"Regression†, and â€Å"ANOVA (multiple sample)† that we used in data result and analysis to illustrate the relationship among different data. I. Hypothesis (One Sample) Question background is permitting employees to use mobile applications to interact with customers. We hypothesize that respondents would largely use mobile applications of social media to interact with customers at 4 of 5 scales. In order to prove our hypothesis we use one sample hypothesis method. We hypothesize the null is at 4 scale of 5, and we use 95% as the confident level, so the alpha is 5%. Because we know the sample mean (S), so we choose the T test. To perform the test, please see Table 8 below. To conclude that because the P (T=t)= 0.00019813, and it less than 5%, so we should reject the null which means the employees use the mobile application such as social media to interact with customers is less than 4-scale. II. Hypothesis (Two Sample) Background question is how social media used for company awareness and PR purpose. In order to prove our hypothesis that two industries use social media at the same frequency we use two sample hypothesis methods. We hypothesize that the permitting employees to use mobile applications to interact with customers is equal to the employees who use the Internet tools. And we know the sample mean (S) so we also use the T test. To perform the test: (See Table below) Conclusion: Because the P (T=t)=2.08, and it larger than 0.05, so we choose the accept the null, which means the retail industry and business service industry used social media for PR purpose at the same frequency. III. F- Test Background question is to market and operate our business, our organization has done the following activities: 3.1. Permitting employees to use their creative ideas to facilitate business 3.2. Permitting employees to use Internet tools to interact with each other The F-test is designed to test if two population variances are equal; in order to prove our hypothesis we use two sample hypothesis methods as well. It does this by comparing the ratio of two variances. So, if the variances are equal, the ratio of the variances will be 1. We hypothesis the permitting that to market and operate our business, our organization has done the following activities, permitting employees to use their creative ideas to facilitate business. We use F-Test two-sample for variances firstly, and then we will use T-Test two-sample assuming equal variances to perform the test. (See Table 10 below) Permitting employees to use internet tools to interact with each other| Mean| 3.755102041| 3.888324873| Variance| 1.867922554| 1.579301771| Observations| 196| 197| df| 195| 196| F| 1.182752142| 　| P (F=f) one-tail| 0.120713955| 　| F Critical one-tail| 1.265936455| 　| Because the P- value equal to 0.120713955, so we use equal variance and t -test to test sample means. To perform the t-test, please see Table 11 below. Permitting employees to use internet tools to interact with each other| | Mean| 3.755102041| 3.888324873| Variance| 1.867922554| 1.579301771| Observations| 196| 197| Pooled Variance| 1.723243082| 　| Hypothesized Mean Difference| 0| 　| df| 391| 　| T Stat| -1.005935799| 　| P (T=t) one-tail| 0.157534284| 　| T Critical one-tail| 1.648760041| 　| P (T=t) two-tail| 0.315068568| 　| T Critical two-tail| 1.966049679| 　| Because the P (T=t)=0,155490816, and it larger than 0.05, so the conclusion is we choose to accept the null, which means the permitting employees to use mobile applications to interact with customers is equal the employees who use the Internet tools. IV. Regression Background questions are following: X:In what year was your company founded? Y1: How long has your company begun using social media (e.g. Facebook, Twitter, Sina Weibo, QQ, etc.)? Y2: How many employees currently work for your organization? Regression and correlation is a method that we use to find the relationship between dependent variables (Ys) and independent variables (Xs). From Table 6 we can tell that the p-value of variable X which is â€Å"when the company was founded† is not significant means it is not related to Y1 of â€Å"How many employees currently work for your organization? †, and the p-value of variable Y2 of â€Å"How long has your company begun using social media† is not significant explains that it is related to â€Å"In what year was your company founded?† From the regression analysis table # 6, we can find out that 57.57% of the numbers of employees are explained by when the company was founded. From the regression analysis table # 7, we can find out that 36.1% of the social media uses for companies are expla ined by when the company was founded. Table 12: Table 13: To market and operate our business, our organization uses the Internet for the following activities: V. ANOVA analysis The background questions are below. 5.1. Permitting employees to use Internet tools to interact with customers 5.2. Permitting employees to use Internet tools to interact with each other From Table 14, the P-value for rows indicates three different activities are highly significant, which mean three activities have different means. P- value for column indicates that 200 different respondents are not significant which means 199 different respondents have practiced similar activities. (Table 14 below) Conclusion From this research, we conclude that generally, male uses social media more often than female, it is because male is still the mainstream of the business area; from the survey, we got to know that most of the social media users were very young and had a little working-experience. We surprisingly found out that most companies use social media moderately, to be specific, employees use mobile applications to interact with customers at 4-scale of 5 which means they did not use them extremely likely. We would expect they used them very often. One is within our expectation that the earlier the company founded, the longer period they use social media, most of companies used social media for long time though they did not use them very often which explains than people are willingly trying new technology, however, it takes time for them to form a habit. We also surveyed people to compare the frequency of smartphone application use and Internet use; we found out that people approximately use them half and half. From this result, we can conclude that there are lots of s martphone or tablet technologies grow very rapidly and people can complete their business process through cellphone instead of laptop or desktop that are much more cumbersome to carry. In a word, we can make precise decision process though both survey results and analysis results in the related business. Social media is a blessing technology, which we will rely more in our businesses and daily lives, we will find out more advantage of social media and prove it with data analysis and improve our life quality.

Order Management Reengineering At Heatway

Order Management Reengineering At Heatway Heatway Systems lost a lengthy legal battle when a federal jury in Cleveland held Goodyear Tire Rubber Co. blameless for its role in manufacturing the rubber hose the radiant company marketed as Entran II. The jury reached its decision February 3 after three days of deliberation and after three weeks of testimony. Frankly, the outcome of this trial was a surprise to everyone-including Goodyear, if they were honest, Heatway president Mike Chiles said the day after the verdict. Chiles had high praise for the evidence presented by his Cleveland legal team. During three days of testimony, for example, an expert witness from the Naval Research Laboratory pointed out that Goodyear used inadequate antioxidants, inappropriate volatile plasticizers and cheap clay fillers in making the hose. A second expert witness testified that Goodyears failure to properly test the Entran II product for radiant heat purposes led to the problems. Meanwhile, mechanical contractors from Colorado and Alaska testified that they had employed exactly the same installation methods when installing Heatways other radiant brands-yet only experienced problems with Entran II hose. Goodyear argued that the failures were due to Heatways radiant system design, as well as problems with installation and maintenance by contractors. It said that field inspections showed that leaks were caused by the wrong type of hose connectors and that the hose was damaged by highly acidic fluid. In addition, Goodyear said it had been using the same 20-year-old formula to make hose for other applications, such as air and water hose, without any problems. In a statement about the jurys decision, Goodyear says it is obviously very gratified by the verdict. We always have believed that the Entran II hose was appropriate for use in radiant home heating systems when it was sold. Chiles said the numbers just didnt add up for his side. The jury looked at the fact that there had only been 658 cases of failure out of 10,000 installations, he said, and didnt think that was a high enough failure rate. After the verdict, Chiles said his lawyers interviewed the jury and many expressed the sentiment that if there had been two or three times as many cases of failure, we would have won. While Heatway lost this case, Goodyears win may be far from solid. Theyre not out of the woods at all, Chiles said. We have unearthed some ugly internal memos as a result of our discovery process. Its our firm belief that Goodyear will pay for this problem-its just going to take a couple of more years and more litigation. Chiles added that the courtroom was packed with plaintiff attorneys from across the country who are in line to sue Goodyear next. Heatway failed on its claim of a breach of implied warranty of merchantability. However, Goodyear still faces a growing number of homeowner claims and will have to fight other legal theories of liability. Heatway bought 25 million feet of the hose between 1989 and 1993. But the hose soon began to crack and leak, causing extensive damages. Entran II tubes started out orange and flexible, like garden hoses. Over time, the tube released plasticizers that hardened the tube, effectively dissolving in hot water, according to expert testimony. The first phase of the problem begins with leaks where the hose connects to the manifold, and continues until the tube spontaneously cracks and leaks elsewhere. There are about 10,000 radiant heating systems in the Unites States that contain Entran II tubes, and Heatway has spent more than $6.5 million to settle more than 100 claims since 1992. Despite the verdict against Heatway, Denver attorney William Maywhort has advised clients that the Ohio jury verdict for Goodyear does not prevent Colorado residents who have Entran II hose in their homes from suing Goodyear. In fact, suing Goodyear and Heatway directly now may be the homeowners only option for recovering for the damage caused by Entran II, said Maywhort, who represents more than a dozen Colorado homeowners who have experienced problems with the Entran II hose What is BPR? Business process re-engineering is a business management strategy, originally pioneered in the early 1990s, focusing on the analysis and design of workflows and processes within an organization. BPR aimed to help organizations fundamentally rethink how they do their work in order to dramatically improve customer service, cut operational costs, and become world-class competitors. In the mid-1990s, as many as 60% of the Fortune 500 companies claimed to either have initiated reengineering efforts, or to have plans to do so. BPR seeks to help companies radically restructure their organizations by focusing on the ground-up design of their business processes. According to Davenport (1990) a business process is a set of logically related tasks performed to achieve a defined business outcome. Re-engineering emphasized a holistic focus on business objectives and how processes related to them, encouraging full-scale recreation of processes rather than iterative optimization of subprocesses. Business process re-engineering is also known as business process redesign, business transformation, or business process change management. The role of information technology Information technology (IT) has historically played an important role in the reengineering concept. It is considered by some as a major enabler for new forms of working and collaborating within an organization and across organizational borders[citation needed]. Early BPR literature identified several so called disruptive technologies that were supposed to challenge traditional wisdom about how work should be performed. Shared databases, making information available at many places Expert systems, allowing generalists to perform specialist tasks Telecommunication networks, allowing organizations to be centralized and decentralized at the same time Decision-support tools, allowing decision-making to be a part of everybodys job Wireless data communication and portable computers, allowing field personnel to work office independent Interactive videodisk, to get in immediate contact with potential buyers Automatic identification and tracking, allowing things to tell where they are, instead of requiring to be found High performance computing, allowing on-the-fly planning and revisioning In the mid-1990s, especially workflow management systems were considered as a significant contributor to improved process efficiency. Also ERP (Enterprise Resource Planning) vendors, such as SAP, JD Edwards, Oracle, PeopleSoft, positioned their solutions as vehicles for business process redesign and improvement. BPR Success Failure Factors Critique Many companies used reengineering as an pretext to downsize their companies dramatically, though this was not the intent of reengineerings proponents; consequently, reengineering earned a reputation for being synonymous with downsizing and layoffs. In many circumstances, reengineering has not always lived up to its expectations. Some prominent reasons include: Reengineering assumes that the factor that limits an organizations performance is the ineffectiveness of its processes (which may or may not be true) and offers no means of validating that assumption. Reengineering assumes the need to start the process of performance improvement with a clean slate, i.e. totally disregard the status quo. According to Eliyahu M. Goldratt (and his Theory of Constraints) reengineering does not provide an effective way to focus improvement efforts on the organizations constraint[citation needed]. Others have claimed that reengineering was a recycled buzzword for commonly-held ideas. Abrahamson (1996) argued that fashionable management terms tend to follow a lifecycle, which for Reengineering peaked between 1993 and 1996 (Ponzi and Koenig 2002). They argue that Reengineering was in fact nothing new (as e.g. when Henry Ford implemented the assembly line in 1908, he was in fact reengineering, radically changing the way of thinking in an organization). The most frequent critique against BPR concerns the strict focus on efficiency and technology and the disregard of people in the organization that is subjected to a reengineering initiative. Very often, the label BPR was used for major workforce reductions. Thomas Davenport, an early BPR proponent, stated that: When I wrote about business process redesign in 1990, I explicitly said that using it for cost reduction alone was not a sensible goal. And consultants Michael Hammer and James Champy, the two names most closely associated with reengineering, have insisted all along that layoffs shouldnt be the point. But the fact is, once out of the bottle, the reengineering genie quickly turned ugly. Introduction to Case Problem before Allan Firestone, president of Heatway Cooperationà ¢Ãƒ ¢Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ã‚ ¬Ãƒ ¢Ã¢â‚¬Å¾Ã‚ ¢s Industrial Products Division and Bob Hemphill, a VP charged with designing and implementing a new process. Design and implementation of a new process, named Proposal to payment (PTP) for selling and delivering Heatway products. Change in organizational structure as well as IT architecture, and even a new philosophy of business. Trouble between Hemphill and Firestone over the spending budget, where Hemphill demanded $35 million and Firestone was ready to spend only $15 million. Funding Considerations before Firestone: How money could be arranged for PTP without sacrificing the profit objectives? Could corporate pay for the rest of amount? Could some of the other international divisions that had expressed interest contribute? Firestone himself believed that PTP was necessary and design for the new process, organization, and technology environment were very exciting. But, the VP had doubts about the urgency to implement PTP. So, firestone resolved to take one more look at the numbers, in hope to find some source of additional savings had been overlooked. Background-Industrial Products Industrial and consumer markets in 27 countries throughout the world. Activities involved heating, ventilation, air conditioning(HVAC) products and services. business heavily dependent on New Construction. IPD sold to medium % large sized businesses. Systems configured to suit the size, location and design of the businesses. Had its own direct-sales engineering groups. Heatway engg worked with architects, contractors and tenants to configure an HVAC solution. Reengineering at heatway An early adopter of new approaches to business improvements Quality based management approaches had been accepted in Manufacturing engineering but lacking in Sales Service In late 1980à ¢Ãƒ ¢Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ã‚ ¬Ãƒ ¢Ã¢â‚¬Å¾Ã‚ ¢s radical changes to improvement in contrast to incremental changes using IT. Sought order-of-magnitude improvements in Time Cost Quality Designing First phase Assess current state of order management Create vision of new process Work divided into two teams Team A 8 members Analyze current state of the processes Understand the costs time of doing business Recommend short term improvements Team B 10 internal managers consultants Create vision for future state of process. Both teams were jointly responsible for managing the organizational changerequired for the initiative to succeed Implications of New Process Team created a large financial model to analyze the costs, benefits, and financial risks of implementing the new PTP process. The new process was very expensive (around $150million) Cost for prototype process efforts Cost of SAP Implementation Cost of fully implementing and operating the new workstations, networks, and SAP software Cost for retaining, relocating, and removing employees Return on the PTP investment appeared very high. Prototypes and pilots was planned in the middle Atlantic states region. Changes in Information technology Mobile data network necessary SAP installation Sales force workstation Not only the designà ¢Ãƒ ¢Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ã‚ ¬Ãƒ ¢Ã¢â‚¬Å¾Ã‚ ¢s adoption has to be justified in financial terms, but also the long process of changing had to be started. Implications for Employees Adoption of the new process. Management, evaluation and compensation of their day to day work. Communicated the nature of these changes through written communication. Mixed Reaction Performers loved the new process because of more freedom and less bureaucracy. Less capable performers were worried about how they would fare Dramatic change not only in how the field personnel did their work bt also how they were managed, evaluated and implemented Reorganization at Heatway Change in the management Salada remain as chairman Kacher would leave Heatway Information systems function would be outsourced to an external firm with substantial SAP experience. Reorganization could have been problematic for PTP European groups would have less incentive to adopt the PTP design. Want of new system provider to implement SAP without concern of PTP process vision Concerns Firestone concern Difficulty in assessing how rapidly the construction and rollout of PTP capabilities should take place. Other memebers of the operations committee were neither worried nor committed to PTP. Change in the commitment by the key managers after t He reorganization. These are those managers whose functional areas would shrink with the adoption of PTP despite being offered important role at Heatway. Financing for PTP If all the resources are devoted then both revenue and profitability goals would not meet. Decisions Everyone understood that PTP implementation is a good investment. Head of international said she wanted to wait to see how PTP worked in the U.S. before transferring resources from her budget. Friestone tried unsucessfully at one one meeting to make PTP corporate initiative. Its upto firestone and other executives to decide how quickly to roll out the new process and how to fund it

Argument-based Homicide In Ame :: essays research papers fc

Argument-based Homicide in America Feeling alienated by fellow classmates, two students at Columbine High School in Littleton, CO who referred to themselves as the Trench Coat Mafia went on a rampant killing spree which took the lives of themselves, twelve other students and one teacher (Obmascik 1). This incident caused an immediate plea for more socially responsible communities, assuming that greater moral values would curb the likelihood of these argument-related homicides. This relies on the notion that greater social organization will lead to a decrease in the rate of crime. Dov Cohen, in her article "Culture, Social Organization, and Patterns of Violence" shows that in the West (which includes Colorado) and South, where a culture of honor persists, there is a higher rate of argument-related homicide that in other areas of the country (the North). More specifically, in the South and West, more organized societies have a higher rate of argument-related homicides than less stable ones. Argument-related homicides are far more prevalent in the South and West than they are in the North (Cohen 412). This is not merely supported by the number of argument-related homicides in the given regions, but also by the beliefs within the cultures. Southerners and Westerners support honor-related violence more than Northerners and also react more aggressively when insulted (Cohen 408). In addition, laws in the South and West are more likely to support those who use violence consistent with honor (Cohen 409). For these reasons, it is hardly surprising that argument-related homicide is more common in these regional locations. The more stable communities within these regions are more likely to be on the extreme sides. The morals ingrained in the more stable Northern communities do not find this behavior acceptable and argument-based homicide is therefore more common in less stable communities. The opposite is true in the South and West. The stronger communities condone these actions and they become more common than in those places that are morally more blasà ©. Nevertheless, the most striking difference is the regional difference between the communities of the South and West and the communities of the North. The correlation between the homicides in more stable and less stable communities for the given regions is striking. In the North, the homicide rate per 100,000 for white males ages 15-39 is 4.7 in a stable community and 6.7 in an unstable community (Cohen 412). In the South and West, however, the numbers are much higher.

Fertilizing the Flowers with Anger :: Personal Narrative Writing

Tulips in California-the winters are not cold enough. But the obsessive among us, the true lover of flowers, of garden, earth, and growth persists. Women mostly, women like my mother, know that tulips will not bloom unless they have six weeks of cold, yet they persist. My mother simulates the growing conditions: she places the tulip bulbs in a special drawer in the refrigerator. A drawer empty but for tulip bulbs, resting, maturing for six weeks long. During these six weeks, my father is periodically chastised for placing softening apples in the refrigerator so they will not rot on the kitchen counter. Chemicals released by apples stunt the maturation of tulip bulbs and prevent blooming. "How many times do I have to tell you? The bulbs will not bloom with apples!" my mother screams at my father, when she discovers a bag of apples in the adjoining drawer. He knows this-he has watched the thwarted growth of her tulips time and time again. He refuses to waste good fruit, and he will sacrifice a year of tuliping for the sake of saving. And my mother goes to the nursery and buys another bag full of bulbs. "I have to be on constant look out for those goddamn apples," she says to me over dinner. It amazes and befuddles me, that my mother, who does all the grocery shopping, who chooses all of the fruit, buys apples and only apples, apples in great numbers and different sizes. It is a war they play over and back to each other-wasting money by saving money, wasting fruit by saving tulips, buying more apples to replace the lost fruit, wasting tulips to save the fruit. And so the battle goes-sacrificing to save and saving to sacrifice. It is like this with everything, with everything with my parents. They love each other very much. They are furious in their love-it is an uncontrollable, full-blown process, like the blooming flower, one I will never fully understand. My father goes into fits of depression; he furls his brow, he turns inward, and goes crazy over things like overflowing garbage cans, unfolded laundry, shoes left in the center of the living room floor. His head shakes and his eyes muddy-you can see the pressure and smell the mood. Then he explodes. She stands there and watches him, my father burning like a branch, with her finger pressed to her temple.

Sealed Air Company Hbs Case

For the exclusive use of M. HUSSAIN Harvard Business School 9-582-103 Rev. September 24, 1985 Sealed Air Corporation The president and chief executive officer of Sealed Air Corporation, T. J. Dermot Dunphy, explained the firm’s 25% average annual growth in net sales and net earnings from 1971 to 1980: The company’s history has been characterized by technical accomplishment and market leadership. During the last 10 years we built on our development of the first closed-cell, lightweight cushioning material, introduced the first foam-in-place packaging system, and engineered the first complete solar heating system for swimming pools.We intend to follow the same management guidelines in the 1980s. We intend to seek market leadership because market leadership optimizes profit, and foster technological leadership because it is the only long-term guarantee of market leadership. In July 1981 Barrett Hauser, product manager of Sealed Air’s Air Cellular Products, was refle cting on Dunphy’s management philosophy as he considered how Sealed Air should respond to some unanticipated competition in the protective packaging market.As product manager, Hauser was responsible for the closed-cell, light-weight cushioning material that Dunphy had mentioned. Sealed Air’s registered trademark name for this product was AirCap. 1 AirCap cushioning materials had always faced a variety of competitors in the protective packaging market. More recently, however, several small regional producers had invented around Sealed Air’s manufacturing process patents and begun to market cheap imitations of AirCap in the United States. AirCap Cushioning and Its CompetitorsAirCap cushioning was a clear, laminated plastic sheet containing air bubbles of uniform size (see Exhibit 1). The feature that differentiated AirCap cushioning from all other bubble products was its â€Å"barrier-coating†: each AirCap bubble was coated on the inside with saran. This gr eatly increased air retention, meaning less compression of the material during shipment and, consequently, better protection. Barrier-coating and its customer benefits had been the central theme of Sealed Air’s AirCap cushioning selling effort for 10 years. Sealed Air, AirCap, and Instapak are registered  ® trademarks of Sealed Air Corporation. Solar Pool Blanket is a TM trademark of the same corporation. Robert J. Dolan, associate professor, prepared this case as the basis for class discussion rather than to illustrate either effective or ineffective handling of an administrative situation. Certain nonpublic data have been disguised. Copyright  © 1982 by the President and Fellows of Harvard College. To order copies or request permission to reproduce materials, call 1-800-545-7685 or write Harvard Business School Publishing, Boston, MA 02163.No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, used in a spreadsheet, or transmitted in any form or by any means—electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise—without the permission of Harvard Business School. 1 This document is authorized for use only by Md. Saquib Hussain in marketing ? nal taught by Suresh Ramanathan from October 2012 to October 2012. For the exclusive use of M. HUSSAIN 582-103 Sealed Air Corporation Between 1971 and 1980 Sealed Air and Astro Packaging of Hawthorne, New Jersey, were the only air bubble packaging material producers in the United States.Sealed Air licensed Astro to use Sealed Air’s patented technology. Astro produced two types of bubbles: a barrier bubble similar to AirCap,2 and an uncoated bubble. Its sales were split about evenly between the two. In 1980 Astro’s total U. S. sales were approximately $10. 5 million, compared with $25. 35 million in U. S. sales for AirCap cushioning. Sealed Air’s market education had made customers aware of the advantages of coated bubbles; consequently, uncoated bu bbles had never achieved greater than a 15% dollar share of the U.S. market before 1980. In July 1981 uncoated bubble operations were being set up in Ohio, California, and New York. GAFCEL, which served the metropolitan New York market, was the only competitor yet to achieve significant sales volume. Two GAFCEL salespeople—one full time, the other about half time—had reached a $1 million annual sales rate. Several of AirCap’s distributors had taken on the GAFCEL line. Hauser was preparing to recommend Sealed Air’s reaction to these somewhat unanticipated competitors.The firm could produce an uncoated bubble as cheaply as GAFCEL within a month with no major capital investment; it could run on machines used for another Sealed Air product. If Hauser were to recommend that the historic champion of barrier-coating offer an uncoated bubble, he would have to specify timing, the marketing program for the new product, and any adjustments in policies for AirCap cus hioning and Sealed Air’s other products. As Hauser thought about his options, he again flipped through the training manual recently distributed to Sealed Air’s sales force: â€Å"How to Sell against Uncoated Bubbles. †The Protective Packaging Market The three major use segments of the protective packaging market were: 1. Positioning, blocking, and bracing: These protective materials had to secure large, heavy, usually semirugged items in a container. Typical applications included shipment of motors and computer peripherals. 2. Flexible wraps: These materials came under less pressure per square foot. Applications included glassware, small spare parts, and light medical instruments. 3. Void fill: These materials were added to prevent movement during shipping when an item and its protective wrap (if any) did not fill its carton.The positioning, blocking, and bracing market was unique because of the heavier weights of items shipped. Flexible wrap and void fill were sometimes hard to separate because it was convenient to use the same product for both functions. The key distinction was that loose fills (for instance, polystyrene beads) dominated the void fill market but provided no cushioning protection and, hence, did not qualify as flexible wrap. Until 1970 most materials used for protective packaging were produced primarily for other purposes. Heavy, paper-based products had dominated the market. Sealed Air was one of the first Astro’s barrier bubble and the AirCap bubble differed in both manufacturing process and coating material. Astro used nylon rather than saran. The basic idea of reinforcing the polyethylene bubbles to improve air retention was, however, the same. 2 This document is authorized for use only by Md. Saquib Hussain in marketing ? nal taught by Suresh Ramanathan from October 2012 to October 2012. For the exclusive use of M. HUSSAIN Sealed Air Corporation 582-103 companies to approach the market with a customer orientat ion, i. e. , it began product development with an assessment of packagers’ needs.Since then a variety of products specifically designed for protective packaging had appeared. Sealed Air served these markets with two products: 1. Instapak ® foam-in-place systems (1980 worldwide sales of $38. 8 million) could accommodate any application, though their most advantageous use was for heavy items. In this process two liquid chemicals were pumped into a shipping container. The chemicals rapidly expanded to form a foam cushion around the product. Instapak’s comparative advantage resulted in a majority of applications in positioning, blocking, and bracing. . AirCap bubbles (1980 worldwide sales of $34. 3 million) primarily served the flexible wrap and void fill markets. In addition to coated and uncoated polyethylene air bubbles, there were two major competitors in these markets: paper-based products (cellulose wadding, single-face corrugated, and indented kraft), and foams (p olyurethane, polypropylene, and polyethylene). An excerpt from an AirCap promotional brochure in Exhibit 2 shows how Sealed Air positioned AirCap as a cost-effective substitute for these competitive products and loose fills.The brochure first pointed out the cost savings from AirCap cushioning, then presented results of â€Å"fatigue† and â€Å"original thickness retention† tests to demonstrate AirCap’s protective superiority. Exhibit 3 compares products competitive with AirCap cushioning and Exhibit 4 gives their U. S. Iist prices, which represent relative costs for any order size from an end user. Quantity discounts were offered on all materials. Buying Influences The proliferation of packaging products and the lack of easily demonstrable universal superiority caused confusion among end users.For example, products such as pewter mugs were shipped around the United States in AirCap cushioning, Astro coated bubbles, or even old newspapers. Users were a varied lo t. Some bought on a scientific price/performance basis. They understood â€Å"cushioning curves† such as those in Exhibit 5. Sealed Air could provide independently measured cushioning curves for competitive products as well as its own. Regardless, many firms did their own testing. At the other end of the spectrum were firms with â€Å"a purchasing-department mentality,† as some packaging materials suppliers put it.Price per square foot was their first consideration, delivery their second. As one Sealed Air executive commented, â€Å"To these people, cushioning curves are like accounting numbers. They think you can make them say anything you want. † There were no systematically collected data on the buying process or the extent to which price dominated performance in the purchase decision. Based on his experience as a district sales manager and now product manager, Hauser guessed that a packaging engineer influenced about 40% of the material purchase decisions. 3 This document is authorized for use only by Md.Saquib Hussain in marketing ? nal taught by Suresh Ramanathan from October 2012 to October 2012. For the exclusive use of M. HUSSAIN 582-103 Sealed Air Corporation The U. S. Market In 1980, dollar sales by segment in the U. S. protective packaging market were: †¢ †¢ †¢ Positioning, blocking, and bracing: $585 million Flexible wrap: $126 million Void fill: $15. 6 million Exhibit 6 breaks down total sales for the flexible wrap market by product type for 1975, 1978, and 1980. AirCap cushioning annual sales in the United States since 1972 were: Year 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 Gross Sales (in millions) $7. 10. 0 13. 0 12. 8 14. 6 Year 1977 1978 1979 1980 Gross Sales (in millions) $16. 4 18. 4 21. 2 25. 3 Despite the high cost of coated bubbles relative to the uncoated product, Sealed Air had kept most of the U. S. air bubble market. Key factors were Sealed Air’s patent protection and licensing of only one competitor, ext ensive market education, and the packaging mentality in the United States. Packaging engineers enjoyed a status in U. S. organizations not accorded them elsewhere. Packaging supplies were viewed as a productive, cost-saving resource.In contrast, recent research by Sealed Air indicated that many European firms viewed packaging supplies as â€Å"expendable commodities. † The European Market Sealed Air had manufacturing operations in England and France and a sales organization in Germany. 3 It was the only company selling a coated product in these countries. Sales figures for 1980 were: Country England France Germany Total Bubble Sales $3,649,000 4,480,000 7,688,000 AirCap Sales $2,488,500 592,200 404,600 3 The firm also had a manufacturing facility in Canada and a sales organization in Japan.Sealed Air licensees operated manufacturing facilities in Australia, Mexico, South Africa, and Spain. 4 This document is authorized for use only by Md. Saquib Hussain in marketing ? nal tau ght by Suresh Ramanathan from October 2012 to October 2012. For the exclusive use of M. HUSSAIN Sealed Air Corporation 582-103 Table A Differing Grades of AirCap Cushioning Bubble Heights SB: SC: ST: SD: 1 8 / in. high, used for surface protection when cushioning requirements were minimal. 3/16 in. high, used primarily for wrapping small, intricate items, possibly for larger items if not very fragile. 5 16 / in. igh, used in same kinds of applications as SC grade, except with slightly greater cushioning requirements. Also used as a void fill. / in. high, used for large, heavy, or fragile items or as a void fill. 1 2 Plastic Film Thicknesses Light duty (110): each layer of film was 1 mil (1/1,000 of an inch) thick; used for light loads. Regular duty (120): one layer of 1 mil and one layer of 2 mils; for loads up to 50 lbs. per sq. ft. Heavy duty (240): one layer of 2 mils and one of 4 mils; for loads up to 100 lbs. per sq. ft. Super duty (480): one layer of 4 mils and one of 8; for l oads over 100 lbs. er sq. ft. England. Sealed Air had developed the protective packaging market here and had good distribution. Later on, Sansetsu, a Japanese firm, began marketing a high-quality uncoated product made in Germany. Prices for the uncoated bubble were 50% less than the cost of comparably sized AirCap cushioning. Sansetsu and other uncoated bubble manufacturers had chipped away at Sealed Air’s one-time 90% market share. The most pessimistic Sealed Air distributors estimated that the firm would lose 50% of its current market share to uncoated bubbles within three years. France.Here, Sealed Air owned an uncoated bubble manufacturer SIBCO, with sales of $750,000 in 1980. In 1972 SIBCO was the only marketer of uncoated bubbles in France. Two major competitors, one with superior production facilities, had entered the market. Uncoated bubbles were priced about 40% lower than AirCap, and price was the key buying determinant. The major French distributor of AirCap cushio ning had a 50-50 mix of coated and uncoated sales in 1978. In 1980 the mix had changed to 70-30 (uncoated over coated), with 90% of new bubble applications being uncoated. Germany.AirCap cushioning was a late entrant (1973) to the German market and never held commanding share. Moreover, from 1978 to 1980, it had lost share at a rate of 20% to 30% per year. Sansetsu had an efficient manufacturing facility in Germany and sold approximately $6 million of uncoated product in 1980. (The price for uncoated was about 35% less than for coated. ) AirCap Cushioning Grades and Sales AirCap cushioning grades differed in bubble height and thickness of the plastic films. Bubble heights were designated by a letter code, and the plastic films came in four thicknesses (see Table A).Sealed Air produced eight different height/thickness combinations (see Table B). Some of the known end uses for each grade are shown in Exhibit 7. 5 This document is authorized for use only by Md. Saquib Hussain in market ing ? nal taught by Suresh Ramanathan from October 2012 to October 2012. For the exclusive use of M. HUSSAIN 582-103 Sealed Air Corporation Table B Eight Different Height/Thicknesses by Sealed Air Thickness Height (inches) SB-1 8 110 X 120 X X X 240 X X X 480 / SC-3/16 ST-5 16 SD-1 2 / / X Table C AirCap Sales by Grade Sales in 1,000 Square Feet Grade 1/8 in.SB-110 3/16 in. SC-120 SC-240 5/16 in. ST-120 ST-240 1/2 in. SD-120 SD-240 SD-480 Total sales July–December 1979 59,128 76,349 5,036 31,912 4,369 44,252 25,202 3,138 249,386 January–June1980 48,513 81,014 4,426 42,234 3,914 43,624 21,799 1,358 246,882 Note: In addition, because SB-110 could not compete in price against foams for many surface protection applications, Sealed Air introduced an A-100 grade in January 1980. The A-100 bubble was 3/32 in. high—the shortest coated bubble Sealed Air could make with available technology. January to June 1980 sales of A-100 were 17,802,000 sq. ft.Sales by grade for the last six months of 1979 and the first six months of 1980 are shown in Table C. Pricing All AirCap cushioning was sold through distributors. Prices reflected Sealed Air’s costs and the prices of competitive products. Variable costs and prices to the distributor are shown in Table D. Sealed Air’s suggested resale price list is shown in Exhibit 8. Largely because of its selective distribution policy, distributors generally followed this list. The price schedule entailed quantity discounts for end users. Thus, distributor margins varied with the size of the customer’s individual order. Quantity price was determined by the total square footage of a single order, combining all grades, ordered for shipment at one time to a single destination. ) In some major metropolitan areas, up to 50% of AirCap business was truckload/railcar orders by end users. In this event Sealed Air shipped the material from its plant directly to the end user; the distributor received a 10% mar gin and handled user credit and technical service. In some markets the percentage of direct shipments was as low as 10%. 6 This document is authorized for use only by Md. Saquib Hussain in marketing ? al taught by Suresh Ramanathan from October 2012 to October 2012. For the exclusive use of M. HUSSAIN Sealed Air Corporation 582-103 Selling Effort Sealed Air’s U. S. operation consisted of 7 regional manufacturing operations, 62 salespeople (each selling AirCap cushioning, Instapak, and other Sealed Air products), and 370 distributors. To control the shipping cost of its bulky product, Sealed Air had regional manufacturing operations in three eastern states, Ohio, Illinois, Texas, and California. The regional presence, however, had proven to be an effective sales promotion device as well.Table D AirCap Variable Costs and Distributor Prices (in dollars per 1,000 sq. ft. ) (1) Total Variable Cost $13. 78 16. 01 20. 56 32. 47 30. 65 38. 12 36. 31 44. 45 70. 81 (2) Price to Distrib utor for Truckload Deliverya $20. 60 30. 25 43. 50 56. 30 51. 40 65. 35 65. 35 78. 60 140. 90 (2) – (1) Sealed Air Dollar Margin $6. 82 14. 24 22. 94 23. 83 20. 75 27. 23 29. 04 34. 15 70. 09 Grade A-100 (3/32 in. ) SB-110 (1/8 in. ) SC-120 (3/16 in. ) SC-240 (3/16 in. ) ST-120 (5/16 in. ) ST-240 (5/16 in. ) SD-120 (1/2 in. ) SD-240 (1/2 in. ) SD-480 (1/2 in. ) Manufacturing $12. 46 14. 02 17. 92 29. 83 25. 36 32. 83 28. 38 36. 52 62. 88Freight $1. 32 1. 99 2. 64 2. 64 5. 29 5. 29 7. 93 7. 93 7. 93 a Less than truckload shipments were priced 15% to 20% higher. Consequently, distributors almost always ordered in truckload quantities. They were allowed to mix grades within an order. Depending on the grade ordered, a truckload could contain 70,000 sq. ft. (all SD-480) to 420,000 sq. ft. (all A-100). Before Instapak was acquired in 1976, 28 salespeople devoted 90% of their time to AirCap cushioning products. In 1981 the 62-person force was expected to allocate time as follows: 60 % to Instapak systems, 35% to AirCap cushioning, and 5% to other Sealed Air products. Exhibit 9 shows Sealed Air sales by product line and other financial data. ) Part of Sealed Air’s market share leadership philosophy was a consultative selling approach. Salespeople spent about half their time making cost studies at end-user locations. With the help of Sealed Air’s packaging labs, salespeople attempted to show how their products could save on material and labor cost and reduce damage in the end user’s particular situation. Distributors’ salespeople took orders on AirCap cushioning but did little to demonstrate AirCap use and application to customers.If a distributor’s salesperson identified a potential AirCap account, he or she would inform the Sealed Air salesperson and a joint call would be arranged. In this way the potential account learned about the product and ordering procedures simultaneously. Distributors sometimes complained to Sealed Air about the level of AirCap selling effort. Since distributor’s margins on AirCap cushioning were generally higher than the 10% to 12% for Instapak sales, distributors were not happy with Sealed Air’s greater allocation of salesperson time to Instapak.Some distributors said they would be content if the salesperson in their area really allocated 35% to AirCap; some claimed the actual AirCap selling effort amounted to only 20%. Instapak’s sales growth had been impressive, but some Sealed Air executives felt this had cost them some distributor satisfaction. Both distributors and end users regarded Sealed Air’s salespeople as among the best trained and most knowledgeable in the packaging industry. Sales force salaries were above average. They were composed of a base salary plus commissions of 2% on net AirCap sales and 1% on net sales of all other products, including Instapak. As an added incentive Sealed Air gave salespeople $75 for each Instapak dispenser pl aced. It took back $75 for each one removed. ) In a typical week a salesperson called on 20 end users and checked in with two or three distributors. 7 This document is authorized for use only by Md. Saquib Hussain in marketing ? nal taught by Suresh Ramanathan from October 2012 to October 2012. For the exclusive use of M. HUSSAIN 582-103 Sealed Air Corporation U. S. Distributors During the 1970s Sealed Air invested heavily in developing a selected distributor network. The firm had 370 distributors by 1980.Sealed Air considered 135 of these their â€Å"first-line distributors† because they collectively handled over 80% of its business. The 20 largest AirCap distributors handled about 35% of the business. Larger distributors typically carried both Instapak foam-in-place and AirCap cushioning. The largest distributor of Sealed Air products had 1980 Sealed Air sales of approximately $2 million, just about half of which were AirCap. Distributors traditionally tried to be full-line houses—capable of meeting each customer’s complete packaging needs—so they carried a broad range of products.A survey of Sealed Air’s firstline distributors showed that 83% carried loose fills, 65% carried polyethylene foam, and 29% carried Du Pont’s polypropylene foam. Although most carried competitive products, distributors had displayed loyalty to Sealed Air and AirCap cushioning. Sealed Air, in turn, had kept to its selective distribution policy. Competing Uncoated Bubble Cushioning Sealed Air considered both types of bubbles made by Astro as inferior products. GAFCEL, the new regional producer, made a â€Å"decent product† in Hauser’s estimation; he felt that its success to date came largely at Astro’s expense.The New York metropolitan market was ideal for the new producer. It was not customer- or distributor-loyal, and price was a key variable. Sealed Air’s estimate of GAFCEL sales rates was $750,000 per year for the 1/2-in. -high uncoated bubble and $250,000 per year for the 3/16-in. bubble. Both had two layers of film 2 mils each. GAFCEL’s distributor prices for truckload shipments and suggested resale prices to end users for the metropolitan New York market are shown in Table E. (Astro’s uncoated bubble prices are in Exhibit 4. ) Sealed Air had not yet extensively tested the GAFCEL uncoated bubble.Although it was better than Astro’s uncoated, its performance would not be dramatically different from that found in previous uncoated testing (see Exhibit 2). In terms of cushioning curves, the l/2 in. GAFCEL bubble was comparable to Sealed Air’s ST-120 or SD-120 for very light loads, not greater than 0. 15 lbs. /sq. in. pressure. At greater loads, however, the acceleration curve would increase rapidly, moving above even the SB-110 by pressures of 0. 25 lbs. /sq. in. (see Exhibit 5). 8 This document is authorized for use only by Md. Saquib Hussain in marketing ? nal taught by Suresh Ramanathan from October 2012 to October 2012.For the exclusive use of M. HUSSAIN Sealed Air Corporation 582-103 Table E GAFCEL’s Distributor Prices per 1,000 Sq. Ft. SO-22 (3/16 in. ) LO-22 (1/2 in. ) $36. 03 Distributor truckload Suggested resale by order size: 1,000 sq. ft 20,000 sq. ft 40,000 sq. ft 100,000 sq. ft Truckload $31. 63 $56. 54 47. 12 42. 84 39. 40 34. 79 $75. 24 62. 70 57. 07 44. 68 39. 63 Sealed Air Decisions Sealed Air had conducted a good deal of research on manufacturing uncoated bubble products. It knew the best production process would be similar to that currently used for its Solar Pool Blanketsâ„ ¢.Thus, the firm could begin manufacture of an uncoated product quickly in its New Jersey plant. Likely distributor response to a Sealed Air uncoated product was difficult to predict. Some distributors had requested it, but others regularly complained that there were already too many coated grades. Preliminary estimates of the variable cost s for producing Sealed Air uncoated bubbles were $19 per 1,000 sq. ft. for 3/16 in. height, $20 per 1,000 sq. ft. for 5/16 in. , and $21 per 1,000 sq. ft. for 1/2 in. Freight cost depended on bubble height and distance shipped.Although GAFCEL’s production process was completely different, its production costs were believed to be comparable. Hauser now had to decide whether to recommend that Sealed Air enter the uncoated bubble market (with an about-face on its previous exclusive emphasis on coated bubbles), or whether to suggest some other reaction to its new competitors. 9 This document is authorized for use only by Md. Saquib Hussain in marketing ? nal taught by Suresh Ramanathan from October 2012 to October 2012. For the exclusive use of M. HUSSAIN 582-103 Sealed Air Corporation Exhibit 1 AirCap ® Products and UsesCushioning AirCap ® air bubble cushioning protects products against shock and vibration during handling and shipping by literally floating them on a cushion of air. This material offers consistent performance because our unique barrier-coating guarantees air retention. AirCap withstands repeated impact since it will not fatigue or take a compression set. Cushioning applications include a range of products from lightweight retail items to delicate power supplies weighing several hundred pounds. Choose the grade that best fits your cushioning application! Protective Wrap/InterleavingAirCap is an excellent â€Å"protective wrap† material and ideal for â€Å"interleaving† between similarly shaped items. It is clean, non-abrasive, easy to use and provides superior surface protection. Lay your product on AirCap sheeting, fold it over and your product is fully protected! Typical protective wrap/interleaving applications include china, glassware, printed circuit boards, and spare parts. Void Fill When a void in a package is not completely filled, the cushioned product may migrate within the shipping container. This movement is a m ajor cause of damage in transit.Since large regular-duty AirCap bubbles do not compress, they fill voids effectively and eliminate product movement. Simply stuff AirCap sheeting into the carton, (left) or use an economical rolled â€Å"log. † It’s easy, clean, lightweight, and cost efficient! 10 This document is authorized for use only by Md. Saquib Hussain in marketing ? nal taught by Suresh Ramanathan from October 2012 to October 2012. 582-103 -11- Exhibit 2 Sealed Air Presents AirCap as Cost-Effective Substitute Typical Cost-Savings Comparisons 60 Cellulose Wadding Rubberized Hair Type IV Resists Fatigue 50 40 0 Uncoated Bubbles Urethane Foam Polypropolene Foam AirCap % Increase in Shock 20 In the transportation environment packages are subjected to many jolts, bumps, and shocks that can potentially cause damage. To function effectively a cushioning material must retain its ability to protect over a series of repeated impacts. The loss of protective ability during r epeated impact is termed ‘material fatigue. ’ This graph (left) indicates the increased shock an average procut (0. 25 psi) will receive during a ten drop sequence from 24 inches. Test results show barrier-coated AirCap ® outperforms all materials tested. 0 0 1 Number of Impacts 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 BARRIER-COATING Each individual AirCap bubble is barriercoated to retain the air. AirCap Vs. Corrugated Inserts A distributing firm found that it needed an excessive amount of flowable to prevent product migration. A new AirCap package (left) using a simple criss-cross technique resulted in reduced material, shipping, labor and carton costs. Item Carton Inner packaging Labor Freight Total Cost Savings w/ AirCap IMMEDIATE THICKNESS LOSS AirCap retains its original thickness upon the immediate application of a load (See Below).Loose Fill Package $ . 73 . 75 . 42 3. 02 $4. 92 AirCap Vs. Loose Fills Material Tested A manufacturer using corrugated inserts, cellulose wadding and p olyethylene bags eliminated the need to inventory many packaging components (right) and reduced labor 84% by switching to AirCap (left). Total Thickness Loss Retains Original Thickness Item Carton Inner Packaging Labor Freight Total Cost Savings w/ AirCap Corrugated Package $ . 55 . 80 . 83 2. 60 $4. 78 AirCap Package $ . 55 1. 05 . 13 2. 40 $4. 13 $ . 65 AirCap Package $ . 47 . 54 . 25 2. 72 $3. 98 $ . 94AirCap SD 240 14% Polypropylene Foam 30% Polyethylene Foam 40% Cellulose Wadding 38% Rubberized Hair IV 51% Uncoated Bubbles 64% (Large) Urethane Foam (1. 25 53% * * pct) Embossed 54% * * Polyethylene (Hex) *30 day evaluation not conducted due to excessive initial thickness loss. Initial Thickness Loss Upon 04 psi Load 7% 19% 16% 26% 24% 14% Gradual Thickness Loss After 30 Days 7% 11% 24% 12% 27% 50% When a load is placed on a cushioning material two things occur that may contribute to a deterioration in its performance. First, is the immediate compression of the material.Second, i s the additional, more gradual loss of thickness termed ‘creep. ’ Generally excessive thickness loss of a material results in increased material usage in cushioning and dunnage applications. Creep may contribute to product damage as the loss of thickness creates a void in a package, allowing the product to move, shift, or migrate. This chart (left) demonstrates how barrier-coated AirCap retains its original thickness better than all materials tested and provides product protection throughout the entire packaging, shipping, handling, and storage cycle.GRADUAL THICKNESS LOSS (CREEP) AirCap’s unique barrier-coating retains the air more effectively than uncoated bubbles, eliminating creep. AirCap Vs. Thin-Grade Foams AirCap Vs. Cellulose Wadding A metering firm discovered it needed only half as much AirCap to achieve the same performance that cellulose wadding provided (right). In addition to lowering material costs, AirCap (left) is clean, lint free, non-abrasive, a nd lightweight. Item AirCap Package An electronic service center employing the use of a thin-grade foam (right) required many layers of wrapping to protect against shock and vibration.Large AirCap bubbles (left) provided superior performance and lower packaging costs. This document is authorized for use only by Md. Saquib Hussain in marketing ?nal taught by Suresh Ramanathan from October 2012 to October 2012. Carton Inner Packaging Labor Freight Total Cost Savings w/ AirCap Cellulose Wadding Package $ . 30 . 22 . 25 1. 35 $2. 12 $ . 22 . 12 . 08 1. 20 $1. 62 $ . 50 CONVENTIONAL CELLULOSE MATERIAL UNCOATED BUBBLES Item Foam Package For the exclusive use of M. HUSSAIN Carton Inner Packaging Labor Freight Total Cost Savings w/ AirCap $ . 46 1. 33 . 66 4. 09 $6. 4 AirCap Package $ . 38 . 87 . 33 3. 94 $5. 52 $1. 02 For the exclusive use of M. HUSSAIN 582-103 Sealed Air Corporation Exhibit 3 1. Competitive Product Information Cellulose wadding (a paper-based product which tries to trap a ir between piles of sheeting) †¢ Major suppliers: Jiffy Packaging, Hillside, N. J. CelluProducts Co. , Patterson, N. C. †¢ Sizes available: Thickness of 0. 17 in. , 0. 25 in. , 0. 37 in. , 0. 50 in. †¢ Advantages/disadvantages: Much cheaper than AirCap in thin grades; will not mark item wrapped; heavier than AirCap (3–4 Ibs. per cu. ft. vs. less than 1 lb. or AirCap) meaning higher shipping cost; excessive compression under heavy loads (see test results, Exhibit 2). Corrugated products (sheets of ribbed cardboard, often cut and perforated to specific sizes) †¢ Major suppliers: About 800 firms manufacturing in 47 states, including larger paper companies. †¢ Advantages/disadvantages: Single face (cardboard with ribs on one side) appreciably cheaper than AirCap on square-foot basis; labor cost of using corrugated usually very high; poor cushioning. Polyethylene foam (thin, smooth, rigid sheets of low-density foam) †¢ Major suppliers: Sentinel Foam P roducts, Hyannis, Mass.CelluProducts Co. , Patterson, N. C. Jiffy Packaging, Hillside, N. J. †¢ Sizes available: 48 or 68 in. wide rolls of thickness 1/16, 3/32, 3/16, 1/4 in. †¢ Advantages/disadvantages: Appreciably cheaper than AirCap in thin grades on square-foot basis; does not mark item wrapped; rigid product means hard to work with; tendency to tear; cushioning inferior to AirCap; more expensive than AirCap in thicker grades. Polypropylene foam (thin, coarse, rigid sheets of low-density foam) †¢ Major supplier: Du Pont Microfoam †¢ Sizes available: Standard 72 in. wide rolls of thickness 1/16, 3/32, 3/16, 1/4 in. Advantages/disadvantages: Basically the same as for polyethylene foam. Loose fills (expanded polystyrene beads, peanuts, etc. ) †¢ Major suppliers: Many small firms †¢ Advantages/disadvantages: 50% cheaper than AirCap on cubic foot basis; messy; poor cushioning. Uncoated bubbles (sheets of small air bubbles made of polyethylene film) â₠¬ ¢ Major producer: Astro, Hawthorne, N. J. (Sealed Air licensee) †¢ Sizes available: 48 in. wide roll standard, bubble heights 3/16, 1/4, 1/2 in. Bubbles also varied in the thickness of the films used. Generally, thicknesses were 1, 2, 3, or 4 mils with increasing film thickness giving greater strength. Advantages/disadvantages: Cheaper than comparable height coated bubble; excessive air loss over time (about 65% height loss under 50 Ibs. per sq. ft. pressure over 30 days vs. 15% for AirCap). Competitive coated bubble (essentially the same as uncoated bubble except nylon film coating added) †¢ Major supplier: Astro, Hawthorne, N. J. (Sealed Air licensee) †¢ Sizes available: 48 in. wide roll standard, bubble heights 1/8, 3/16, 1/4, 1/2, 1 in. †¢ Advantages/disadvantages: Under heavy loading, nylon barrier holds up better than Sealed Air’s saran barrier; poor quality control (bubble heights generally 13% less than specified). . 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 12 This docume nt is authorized for use only by Md. Saquib Hussain in marketing ? nal taught by Suresh Ramanathan from October 2012 to October 2012. For the exclusive use of M. HUSSAIN Sealed Air Corporation 582-103 Exhibit 4 Suggested End User Prices (in dollars) for Major Competitive Products 1. Paper-Based Cellulose Wadding (Jiffy Packaging) Thickness (in. ) 0. 17 0. 25 0. 37 0. 50 2. Foams Thickness (in. ) 1 16 Price $27. 70 37. 40 50. 60 65. 00 Single-Face Corrugated $22. 75 Jiffy Packaging (polyethylene) $20. 30 25. 90 34. 15 53. 35 na Sentinel Products (polyethylene) $18. 20 24. 00 32. 70 49. 40 naDu Pont Microfoam (polypropylene) $17. 20 25. 17 34. 90 53. 86 109. 72 / / 1/8 3/16 3/8 3 32 3. Competitive Bubbles (Astro) Coated Nylon Bubble Height (in. ) 1 8 3 16 Uncoated—Polyethylene a Film Thickness (mils) 1 and 1 1 and 2 1 and 2 1 and 2 2 and 4 1 and 2 2 and 4 Price $35. 25 49. 50 57. 00 71. 75 87. 75 90. 00 110. 00 Bubble Height (in. ) 3 16 Film Thicknessa (mils) 2 and 3 2 and 3 2 and 4 Price $47. 00 54. 50 65. 75 / / 1/4 1/2 1/2 1 1 / / 1/2 1 4 Note: Prices are per 1,000 sq. ft. based on a 50,000 sq. ft. order. a. Each bubble is made of two layers of film. Thicknesses shown are for individual layers in mils.Thicker film produces a stronger product. 13 This document is authorized for use only by Md. Saquib Hussain in marketing ? nal taught by Suresh Ramanathan from October 2012 to October 2012. For the exclusive use of M. HUSSAIN 582-103 Sealed Air Corporation Exhibit 5 Comparative Cushioning Performance by Grade Engineered To Provide Superior Cushioning The test data on the graph below was developed by the Lansmont Corporation, an independent testing laboratory. The test method used closely simulates actual shipping conditions, and employs the use of an enclosed test block and shock machine.Five bottom drops were executed from 24 inches at each static stress. The last four drops were averaged to arrive at data points used to develop each cushioning effective ness curve. This data illustrates AirCap’s superior performance over a wide range of loadings, and may be used for comparison and to specify the best AirCap grade and thickness for your cushioning requirements. (SD-240 curves taken from data provided in Military Handbook 304-A). 300 SB-110 SC-120 250 SC-120 (2 layers) Peak Acceleration (G’s) 200 SCT-120 150 SD-120 100 ST-120 (2 layers) SD-120 (2 layers) SD-120 (3 layers) SD-240 (4 layers) 50 SD-240 (6 layers) . 05 . 1 . 15 . 2 . 25 . 3 . 35 . 4 Static Stress (psi) Source: AirCap brochure. Note: To be read: For a product exerting 0. 25 Ibs. per sq. in. of pressure on the packaging material while at rest, the peak acceleration (a measure of shock to the product) when dropped from 2 ft. is 118 g. if SD-120 is used, 260 g. if SB-110 is used. 14 This document is authorized for use only by Md. Saquib Hussain in marketing ? nal taught by Suresh Ramanathan from October 2012 to October 2012. For the exclusive use of M. HUSSAIN Sealed Air Corporation 582-103 Exhibit 6 U. S.Market—Flexible Wraps by Product Type (in millions of manufacturers’ dollars) 1975 1978 23 25 1 49 11 5 6 22 22 93 1980 23 27 1 51 12 7 25 44 31 126 Paper-based Cellulose wadding Single-face corrugated Indented kraft Foamsa Polyurethane Polypropylene Polyethylene Polyethylene air bubbles Coated and uncoated (combined) Total Source: Company records. b 20 20 1 41 10 4 1 15 15 71 a. Sales figures exclude nonpackaging uses, such as construction and furniture industries. b. Figures are for flexible wrap market only and are therefore less than AirCap’s and Astro’s total U. S. sales. Exhibit 7 Grade SB-110AirCap Applications by Grade Package Contents Furnace thermostats Shorthand machines Taco shells Tempered glass sheets Clocks Wooden picture frames Light fixtures Overhead projector lenses Computer components Telephone bell ringers Amplifiers Saucepans Two-way radios Exit alarms Mixers Fryers Carbonless paper rolls Oven burners Pharmaceutical bottles Candleholders Recorders Carburetors Lamps Gallon jugs Computer terminals Printed circuit boards Foil wallpaper Blood coagulation timers Leaded glass windows Custom motorcycle seats Motor controls Shredded paper Packaging Material Displaced (if known) 16-in. Corrugated / polypropylene foam SC-120 SC-240 ST-120 Shredded paper Corrugated Corrugated Corrugated / polyethylene foam Corrugated Urethane foam pads 3 32-in. ST-240 SD-120 Polypropylene foam SD-240 Corrugated Foam pads and corrugated Corrugated Astro uncoated bubble LP-24 SD-480 15 This document is authorized for use only by Md. Saquib Hussain in marketing ? nal taught by Suresh Ramanathan from October 2012 to October 2012. For the exclusive use of M. HUSSAIN 582-103 Sealed Air CorporationExhibit 8 Suggested U. S. Resale Price List, Effective March 1980 Sq. Ft. per Order per Single Destination 1,000 or more 5,000 † † 10,000 † † 30,000 † † 50,000 † â⠂¬  Truckload/railcar 1,000 or more 5,000 † † 10,000 † † 30,000 † † 50,000 † † Truckload/railcar 1,000 or more 5,000 † † 10,000 † † 30,000 † † 50,000 † † Truckload/railcar 1,000 or more 5,000 † † 10,000 † † 30,000 † † 50,000 † † Truckload/railcar 1,000 or more 5,000 † † 10,000 † † 30,000 † † 50,000 † † Truckload/railcar Same price per 1,000 sq. t. as SD-120 1,000 or more 5,000 † † 10,000 † † 30,000 † † 50,000 † † Truckload/railcar 1,000 or more 5,000 † † 10,000 † † 30,000 † † 50,000 † † Truckload/railcar 1,000 or more 5,000 † † 10,000 † † 30,000 † † 50,000 † † Truckload/railcar $107. 85 97. 70 87. 55 81. 40 79. 35 72. 40 130. 75 118. 30 105. 95 98. 55 95. 70 87. 25 232. 75 210. 55 188. 35 175. 55 171. 25 $155. 60 Price per 1,000 Sq. Ft. $34. 30 30. 85 27. 45 25. 70 24. 75 22. 80 50. 00 45. 40 40. 90 38. 10 37. 05 33. 50 71. 0 64. 55 57. 40 53. 75 52. 60 47. 65 93. 40 84. 40 74. 95 70. 20 68. 60 62. 25 85. 30 77. 10 68. 50 64. 25 62. 75 $57. 25 Item (thickness in inches) A-100 (3/32) SB-110 (1/8) SC-120 (3/16) SC-240 (3/16 ) ST-120 (5/16) ST-240 (5/16) SD-120 (1/2) SD-240 (1/2) SD-480 (1/2) 16 This document is authorized for use only by Md. Saquib Hussain in marketing ? nal taught by Suresh Ramanathan from October 2012 to October 2012. For the exclusive use of M. HUSSAIN Sealed Air Corporation 582-103Exhibit 9 Selected Financial Data ($ thousands) 1976 1977 $21,422 15,489 3,595 2,682 $43,188 35,765 $24,270 12,093 (816) 6,009 1978 $25,028 21,133 3,453 4,644 $54,258 43,410 $31,111 14,527 (738) 7,882 1979 $29,996 29,056 3,432 7,951 $70,435 54,325 $43,199 16,855 (278) 10,103 1980 $34,330 38,802 3,688 11,777 $88,597 67,344 $54,125 21,4 85 (119) 12,868 Net sales by class of product Air cellular packaging Foam-in-place packaging Other packaging Recreational and energy prod.Total worldwide United States Costs and expenses Cost of sales Marketing, administration, development Other income (expense) Earnings before income tax $18,872 3,049 4,553 $26,474 – $16,451 6,696 32 3,359 Source: Sealed Air Annual Reports 1979, 1980. 17 This document is authorized for use only by Md. Saquib Hussain in marketing ? nal taught by Suresh Ramanathan from October 2012 to October 2012.