PV Technology Case 1 MKT 386
Tyler Plantz
PROACT Model
PV Technologies, Inc.: Were They Asleep at the Switch?
Problem:
Will Solenergy’s evaluation of PV Technologies put them at risk of a poor reputation and as a result position them lower in the renewable energy market?
Objectives:
Stay as an industry leader in the renewable energy industry
Keep true to company vision/mission statement
Profitability
Focus on building continuous and long-term personal relationships
Alternatives:
Four alternative courses of action-
1. Propose a warranty extension.
2. Increase the uptime that’s guaranteed.
3. Incorporate a developing product with a larger capacity and efficiency.
4. Contact Solenergy’s chief electrical engineer to confirm the evaluation.
Consequences of Alternatives: (See Appendix for Consequence Table.) In framing this analysis, you need to compare the merits of the competing alternatives by evaluating how well they correspond to the objectives. In this case, the alternatives the PVT has in mind correlate to better odds potentially, in terms of challenging Solenergy’s evaluation results.
Alternative 1 would not only make sure that Solenergy was given a quality product, but a product that was backed by an industry leading warranty extension. By including this extension, it not only shows that PVT stands with their product standards but it also shows dependability in terms of exceeding their customer’s needs; long after a transaction is made. Alternative 2 similarly takes care of the customers in terms of promoting quality personal relations. By including a 99% uptime guarantee for every inverter’s in-service life at no cost, it not only exceeds the industry standards but it also shows that it could also reinforce the quality, durability, and reliability aspects of PVT products.
Alternative 3 seems like a very effective way in potentially challenging Solenergy’s evaluation results. By incorporating a new product into the market, one that is leading edge and cost saving, it shows not
PROACT Model
PV Technologies, Inc.: Were They Asleep at the Switch?
Problem:
Will Solenergy’s evaluation of PV Technologies put them at risk of a poor reputation and as a result position them lower in the renewable energy market?
Objectives:
Stay as an industry leader in the renewable energy industry
Keep true to company vision/mission statement
Profitability
Focus on building continuous and long-term personal relationships
Alternatives:
Four alternative courses of action-
1. Propose a warranty extension.
2. Increase the uptime that’s guaranteed.
3. Incorporate a developing product with a larger capacity and efficiency.
4. Contact Solenergy’s chief electrical engineer to confirm the evaluation.
Consequences of Alternatives: (See Appendix for Consequence Table.) In framing this analysis, you need to compare the merits of the competing alternatives by evaluating how well they correspond to the objectives. In this case, the alternatives the PVT has in mind correlate to better odds potentially, in terms of challenging Solenergy’s evaluation results.
Alternative 1 would not only make sure that Solenergy was given a quality product, but a product that was backed by an industry leading warranty extension. By including this extension, it not only shows that PVT stands with their product standards but it also shows dependability in terms of exceeding their customer’s needs; long after a transaction is made. Alternative 2 similarly takes care of the customers in terms of promoting quality personal relations. By including a 99% uptime guarantee for every inverter’s in-service life at no cost, it not only exceeds the industry standards but it also shows that it could also reinforce the quality, durability, and reliability aspects of PVT products.
Alternative 3 seems like a very effective way in potentially challenging Solenergy’s evaluation results. By incorporating a new product into the market, one that is leading edge and cost saving, it shows not
Cited: Cespedes, Frank, Badame, Diana (12 July 2012). PV Technologies, Inc.: Were They Asleep at the Switch? [Case Study].