MANAGING COMPLEXITIES

SIMULATION REPORT

INDUSTRY-C112348
COMPANY-CHESTER
DIVISION C

SUBMITTED BY
ARSH PRIT SINGH-80303180183
SHASHANK NUTI-80303180133
DEEBAK BORA-80303180028
SHASHANK NANJUNDESWAR-80303180130
ANUP REDDY-80303180152
RAHUL NAIR-80303180127
OUR PERFORMANCE-CHESTER(112348)

We ended the simulation as the leader across the two industries of our
division(Section C). Our primary pillars of success were our wide product
portfolio, strategic pricing, calculated budget forecasting among others.

PRODUCT WISE ANALYSIS

Detailed analysis of the performance of each product in all of the 8 rounds has
been discussed below.

CAKE
 Joint market leader in round 1 and we capitalised on this performance by
decreasing the price by .5$ in round 2
 This enabled us to reach the pole position in round 2 with at least 4 %
greater than that of the nearest competitor
 Strategy in round 3 would be to follow a similar pricing strategy but
increase the promo and sales budget to increase the accessibility,
awareness and thus appeal to a wider market.
 It performed reasonably well in round 3
 Cake is the joint market leader with 15 % market share
 The promo and sales budget were increased in round 3 to enhance the
customer awareness and accessibility.
  Cake is the market leader in round 4. The clear strategy here was to make
the product more accessible so that it could reach out a wider audience.
 Being the most accessible product in round 4 enabled it to be the most
profitable and sold product in the segment .
 Cake maintained its pole position in round 5 as its performance and size
dimensions were more attractive than its competitors.
 The pricing of the product was decreased by .5 $ to gain a larger ground
over its competitors and this strategy worked perfectly.
 Cake maintained its position in round 6 as the accessibility factor is greater
than the market average.
 The pricing and reliability of the product is on par with the market median
in round 6
 The performance of Cake took a beating in round 7 as the performance
and size was way off the ideal scenario.
 Even though the pricing was on par with the median market range, the
accessibility factor dipped in round 7 due to low investment and this had
a negative impact on the product
 Cake regained the top position in round 8. The strategy we followed was
to decrease the price to appeal to a larger audience.
 Performance and Size were also the closest to the ideal preference which
enabled the product to perform better in round 8

CEDAR
 Cedar was unable to reach its potential both in round 1 and 2 as the
demand was greater than the units produced.
 This resulted in stock out of the product in both rounds and to resolve this
issue, the production would be greatly increased.
 Baldwin captured the market in R3 as it launched three products in low
end segment
 Even though Baldwin captured majority of the market, Cedar was able to
turn in decent profits and stood at third position.
 This is due to strategic pricing and enhanced accessibility.
 Cedar lost some ground in round 4 and ended the round at 3rd position
with 19% market share.
 As the segment is very price sensitive, competitors were able to beat
Cedar as the pricing of their products were 0.5 and 1$ less respectively.
 The price of the product was reduced by 1$ in round 5 and this enabled
Cedar to perform well and end the round at second position
 Again, Cedar maintained its second position in round 6 but it couldn’t
reach the pole position as the competitor offered attractive pricing.
 Due to the research and development changes in round 7 , Cedar moved
to the edge of the core perceptual mapping circle
 This indicates that the design of the product is less attractive when
compared to its competitors
 So, even though the pricing was on the lesser side, Cedar underperformed
in round 7 and has dropped to fourth position
 In round 8, Cedar moved up to second position , the reasons for this were
low pricing and high accessibility

CID
 The performance of Cid was extremely satisfying in round 1 but took a hit
in round 2
 This was due to the increase in pricing of the product which was more
than the ideal pricing scenarios.
 The immediate step would be to stabilise the product, as the R&D couldn’t
be changed in round 3, minimum investment would be done on Cid
expecting stabilization rather than market progress.
 Cid has underperformed again in round 3 due to issues such as stock out,
revision date among others
 Despite efforts, there has been no improvement in the position of Cid
 The performance has been very poor and efforts have to be made to bring
the product closer to the ideal position
 The core problem with Cid lies within faulty research and development
 The product’s R&D isn’t being updated in accordance with the market
specifications and this is hindering the performance of the product
 Due to the above mentioned reasons, one of the most crucial factors(age)
isn’t being designed according to the preference of the market
 Similar R&D issues plagued the product Cid in round 6.
 Inspite of trying out different marketing strategies , we couldn’t improve
the position of Cid in round 6
 After heavy inspection and analysis , we have come to a conclusion that
Cid comes under the Dogs category on the BCG matrix
 Thus from round 7 , less investment would be made on the product .
 Performance and size remained unattractive making it the least
performing product in the segment
COAT
 MTBF was increased from R1 to R2 and this resulted in further increase of
the demand and market share but as the demand was way more than
forecasted, the production would be increased in R3.
 In round 3, the performance of Coat was extremely satisfactory as it
captured the majority market share with 26%
 As coat is the most easily accessible product in the market and is the most
reliable, customers are preferring Coat even though its pricing is on the
higher side.
 Coat stood at second position in round 4 and wasn’t able to reach its
maximum potential as the demand was far greater than production due
to the investments made in TQM
 Inaccurate forecasting led to stock out of the product in round 5
 Coat had the potential to be the most dominant player in the market as it
leads its competitors across all dimensions but as mentioned above,
forecasting slowed its performance in round 5
 Coat has been the most dominant product in round 6 as it captured a
market share of 30 %
 Strategic pricing and a heavy investment into the promo and sales
budgets enabled the product to achieve and maintain the highest
accessibility and awareness factors in round 6 which in turn contributed
to the growth of product.
 Coat along with Cure have turned out to be the stars of our company.

 Coat maintained its pole position in round 7 and has cemented its positon
as the best product in the market as it outperformed its competitors
across all dimensions
 Coat maintained its pole position in round 8 . Banking on it good
performance in the previous rounds , the product was priced on the
higher side to bring in more profits
 This tactic worked perfectly as Coat not only stood first but also sold more
than forecasted demand.
CURE

 The performance of this product was excellent in both the rounds but
similar issues such as inaccurate forecasting and thus production
prevented the product from reaching its potential in R2.
 These issues were resolved in round 3 which resulted in Cure being the
top player in the segment.
 Cure maintained its pole position in round 4 even though the product got
sold out.
 Healthy profits are being made on this product as it has unmatched
awareness and accessibility factors .
 Both the units sold and market share grew in round 5 to 26% and its pole
position has been maintained
 But it could have been even better had we followed a more accurate
forecasting method as the product got sold out.
 The market share of cure has increased to 31% in round 6 and it continued
its dominance over the size segment .
 It is because of the following factors
Price-The price of the product is less and thus more attractive than its
competitors
Accessibility-Heavy investment over the course of all the rounds has
helped the product maintain a superior accessibility rate and thus appeal
to a wider audience
 Cure has outperformed itself as it captured an even greater market share
in round 7. Share grew from 31 to 34% and the next best competitor has
a share of 24 %.
 The price was less than that of the competitors and as the product already
offers attractive performance factor, it turned out to be the best available
option for the customer
 Market share was 36% in round 8 and a similar pricing strategy to Coat
was followed here
 Profit maximisation was done in round 8 banking on the superior
performance in the previous rounds
COOL
 R&D of the product was started in round 5 and is on course to be
introduced into the traditional segment by round 6
 Due to inadequate capacity ,the forecasted amount of goods weren’t
produced in round 6 which resulted in stock out of the product
 Efforts are made into increasing the capacity and also increasing the
accessibility and awareness factors as those are at industry low levels.
 Even though the production capacity has been increased, inaccurate
forecasting has led to the stock out of the product
 Investments are being made into the sales and promo budgets to increase
the sale of the product
 Cool acted as an ideal supplement for Cake in the traditional segment, its
primary objective was to cut down the market share of competitors and
it performed according to our expectations in round 8.
 It occupied 10% market share in round 8 and got sold out

COKE
 R&D of the product was started in round 5 and is on course to be
introduced into the low end segment by round 6
 Due to inadequate capacity ,the forecasted amount of goods weren’t
produced in round 6 which resulted in stock out of the product
 Efforts are made into increasing the capacity and also increasing the
accessibility and awareness factors as those are at industry low levels
 Even though the production capacity has been increased, inaccurate
forecasting has led to the stock out of the product
 Investments are being made into the sales and promo budgets to increase
the sale of the product
 It is a growing product at this stage and this was evident in round 8
 In the future, it is projected to grow at an healthy rate and cut down the
market share of competitors
CAESAR
 As Cid has been hit with R&D issues , we thought of introducing a new
product into the high end segment to supplement the already existing Cid
 R&D of the product was started in round 5 and is on course to be
introduced into the high end segment by round 6
 Due to inadequate capacity ,the forecasted amount of goods weren’t
produced in round 6 which resulted in stock out of the product
 Efforts are made into increasing the capacity and also increasing the
accessibility and awareness factors as those are at industry low levels
 Even though the production capacity has been increased, inaccurate
forecasting has led to the stock out of the product
 Investments are being made into the sales and promo budgets to increase
the sale of the product
 Caesar performed exceedingly well in round 8, it recorded more sales
than Cid even though it was introduced late into the simulation
 High accessibility allowed it to performed better in round 8.
CUMULATIVE SECTION WISE SUMMARY

R&D
The objective in the every round was to lay a solid foundation for the products
to perform well .R&D has been done according to the specifications mentioned
in the reports. Three new products were put into R&D in round 5 to supplement
the already existing products.
MARKETING
Marketing strategies were designed and budget allocation was given on a
priority basis to the traditional and low segments as these two segments
constitute the majority of the total industry. Forecasting was done on the basis
of units sold in the previous round and the growth projected for the current
round.
In the promotion and sales section of marketing, the bifurcation of funds has
been done on the basis of importance and projected impact of the investment
done.
Maximum funds (100%) were allocated to the expense and the platform with
highest importance
Moderate funds(50-60%) were allocated to the expense and platform with
medium importance
Low funds(20-30%) were allocated to the expense and platform with low
importance
PRODUCTION
In the production section, automation rating have been improved by 0.5 in every
round .We invested into increasing the production capacity from round 3
.Production capacity for the new products was not bought in round 5 when the
products were in the R&D stage.This hindered the performance of the products
in the following rounds as we couldn’t cater to our demands.This is a missed
opportunity .
HUMAN RESOURCES
In every round, our recruiting spend ranged between 2000-4000$ and training
hours were at limit of 80 hours. These had an effect on the employee
productivity rate and turnover . During labour negotiations, The wage structure
and profit share structure were designed to be marginally higher than the
competitors .This enabled us to have a happy workforce which resulted in high
employee retention rate.
FINANCIAL
The primary source of funding for the plant improved was through debt and
equity in the ratio of 2:1. We tried to maintain a cash balance of around 30K in
every round as it enables us to have better liquidity and a higher score in days
of working capital.
TQM
We have invested heavily in TQM which enabled us to decrease our
administration costs, R&D cycle, labour costs and also an increase in total
demand. Investments ranging from 800-1000 were done on every factor as
there is negligible change on investments above 1000$.