Global product introductions: challenges, technology, and cultural alignment

Product Introductions

Developing and Launching new Products into Global Economies

There are many challenges companies face in developing and launching new products into a global economy. The intent of this analysis is to evaluate the most significant challenges in the context of three specific new product introductions. The contributions technology has made to streamlining the new product development and introduction (NPDI) process will also be analyzed in the context of three additional product introductions. There are also legal and ethical implications of launching new products and this aspect of the new product introductions mentioned will also be analyzed.

Challenges to New Product Development and Introduction in a Global Economy

The most common area of challenge marketers face when developing and launching new products for global markets is in correctly interpreting the unique needs of cultures that vary from their own. The majority of new product introductions fail globally due to anew products developed in other regions of the world not being culturally sensitive and aligned with those of the target market (Molina-Castillo, Munuera-Aleman, 2009). Many companies have begun using the Cultural Dimensions Model as defined by Dr. Geert Hofstede (Hofstede, McCrae, 2004) to quantify the level of congruence between their new products and the global markets of interest. The Five Cultural Dimensions Model also provides insights into the second-most challenging area of global new product development and introduction, and that is relevancy of marketing messaging. This is an area where new product introductions also fail with the products being seen as either irrelevant or offensive to the market. Examples of product introductions that failed due to a lack of consistency to the global markets they were targeted at include Cocaine Energy Drink (Starling, 2006) (Starling, 2007), the New Coke (Schindler, 1992) and Earring Magic Ken (Pereira, 1993). Each of these product introductions failed to align with any aspect of the global economy and is considered among the worst orchestrated new product introductions as a result. Cocaine Energy Drink immediately ran into legal queries and lawsuits as their advertising was aimed at pre-teen and teenage children (Starling, 2007). The New Coke failed to define its unique market position and differentiation relative to the previous brand that had exceptional brand loyalty (Schindler, 1992). Earring Magic Ken was immediately rejected by parents globally, with especially loud critics in the UK (Gillian, 2003) and the U.S. (Pereira, 1993).

Legal and Ethical Implications of New Product Development

The legal and ethical considerations of launching an energy drink named after an illegal drug, Cocaine, immediately drew criticism and legal action on the part of parents and consumer groups (Starling, 2007) (Starling, 2006). The ethics of promoting an energy drink to pre-teen and teenage consumers which are also the name of a highly addictive and dangerous drug showed an exceptional lack of legal and ethical judgment. Arguably the launch of Earring Magic Ken by Mattel, who appears to endorse an alternative lifestyle with the costume and earning, was considered unethical and in bad taste by the majority of parents who are the primary decision makers of which toys their children buy (Gillian, 2003). These lapses of judgment on the part of companies happen when the potential for attention in the market overshadows common sense. Developing an energy drink named after an illegal substance just underscores this point.