Price Setting and Volume Planning by Two European Industrial Companies: A Study and Comparison of Decision Processes

Abstract

Methodologies for analysis of industrial marketing decision systems are extended to allow systematic comparisons over decisions and over firms. Three such systems used by two firms to price and plan volumes for the French market are compared.

Managing Conflicting Stakeholder Interests: An Exploratory Case Analysis of the Formulation of Corporate Social Responsibility Standards in the Netherlands

“…Third, we searched for cases that could represent the four quadrants of Figure 1. Following Farley, Hulbert, and Weinstein (1980), we defined a case at the level of the decision-making system; therefore, our case selection procedure focused on cases in which animal interest groups and companies jointly developed standards for animal welfare to legitimize market offerings. We first developed a sampling frame, using desk research techniques and interviews with two experts, to determine standards developments in the agro-food industries.…”

“…The result of these decision-making processes by definition must be a compromise. This theory has inspired researchers to analyze organizational decision systems that involve multiple individuals and business functions, such as pricing and volume planning (Capon, Farley, and Hulbert 1975; Farley, Howard, and Hulbert 1971; Farley, Hulbert, and Weinstein 1980). Decision system analysis can provide a deeper understanding of how to organize decision processes effectively (Capon and Hulbert 1975).…”

“…In addition, the management ethics literature notes the ethical content of standards and the degree to which market actors comply with them (e.g., Healy and Iles 2002; Kolk and Van Tulder 2002). However, research has not yet focused on the process for formulating standards; to open this black box, this study maps detailed decision process charts (e.g., Farley, Hulbert, and Weinstein 1980) that depict four standards formulation processes. These charts uncover the key mechanisms that settle potential conflicts of interest among stakeholders.…”

The Role of Value‐Informed Pricing in Market‐Oriented Product Innovation Management*

“…Pricing typically is a multifunctional process, because it requires both internal information on costs and financial implications and external information on customers and competitors (Nagle and Hogan, 2006). Case studies on pricing processes show that to inject the price decision-making process with market information different business functions collaborate closely (Farley, Hulbert, and Weinstein, 1980;Hague, 1971). The NPD team may, for example, have accumulated knowledge on how the product innovation can satisfy (latent) customer needs and wants better than the existing products on the market.…”

“…For price decision makers to benefit from such knowledge, it is imperative that this information is shared between members and across functions. Information obtained during the development of the new product flows more easily to the price decision makers if different functions collaborate closely (Farley et al, 1980;Hague, 1971). Based on their knowledge of (customer reactions to) product benefits, price decision makers are in a better position to determine how the price instrument can enhance the perceived product advantage.…”