University of Tampa Software Testing Create Example of C ++ Opening Editor Lab Report For example, if you type “git commit” with no “-m” it will pop open v

University of Tampa Software Testing Create Example of C ++ Opening Editor Lab Report For example, if you type “git commit” with no “-m” it will pop open vim and let you type the commit message . git does this by creating creating a file that has the basic content, opening editor on that file with the fork & execp command in C++, and when the editor quits and the file has been changed, git proceeds with the commit, and if the file was not changed, it does nothing; which editor program to execute depends on the contents of the user’s EDITOR environment variable, and if that’s not set, then it just defaults to nano (for example). Brianca Post
Good day Professor,
As Millenials embrace more natural and organic products for themselves and their children, Johnson &
Johnson must offer products for the baby care industry to remain relevant. Currently, J&J offers their
own line which many of us are familiar with – it is the “No More Tears” baby shampoo line that is
considered the golden shampoo to J&J (Wischhover, 1). This line has been their best seller, however, has
lost tremendous hype and respect with Millenials due to its vast array of chemical ingredients. Millenials
as well as the rest of society now takes pride in what they put on and inside their body. Reading labels
has become a norm and having natural, clean and organic products is becoming a global trend. With this
demand, J&J must evolve their brand and offer such products for their consumers.
Europe’s “Johnson & Johnson” brand, Mustela managed to make a strategic and competitive switch to
natural and clean products for their baby care consumers thus increasing their sales by 30%
(Wischhover, 1). They deviated from the “clinical” view they once had to a product that families sought
to for their children by offering products that were personalized, clean, safe and natural. In order for J&J
to generate substantial topline sales, they must do the same. J&J currently holds the majority of the
market share and by offering natural and clean products, they will take a large piece of the pie (JWI 540,
2). With their current consumer base, they can create an organic growth that will also grow their market
share and will provide for a tactical and sustainable competitive advantage. What J&J has over other
brands is their name and heritage making it an easy transition for consumers to purchase their current
products to a natural and clean product.
Johnson & Johnson may have a heritage and a strong brand name, however, this may pose as a
disadvantage to potential consumers as J&J’s brand may be tainted from their chemical allegations.
Making the transition to natural and clean products will not only require the R&D behind producing
these products, but the proper marketing and positioning of the brand. Perhaps traditional marketing
would not be the solution to their brand, but brand recognition amongst those who cherish and favor
clean products for their babies. Furthermore, due to their immense sales, J&J would benefit from
economies of sales offering products that are either below or at average costs for clean and safe
products. With this in mind, J&J would benefit from attractive bottom line profit growth and would
become an even larger competitor in the industry than they currently are.
If J&J were to follow this transition that Millenials are requesting, they would align directly with Simons
winning strategy (3). J&J has identified their primary consumer base and has understood their values by
offering them expert knowledge and a global standard of excellence through a collective and interactive
process versus the typical marketing channels (Simons, 3).
1. Cheryl Wischhover. 2018. Vox. The skin care generation wants to pamper their babies, too.
2. JWI 540. 2020. Lecture Notes. Week Three. Pursuing the Right kind of Growth.
3. Robert Simons. 2014. Harvard Business Review. Choosing the Right Customer.
Scott’s Post
Describe one way my company could generate substantial topline growth?
One way that my company could generate topline sales growth would be to decrease the price we
charge our customers for potash. All customers generally want the lowest price product. Farmers
would buy more of our product on the North American market and we would potentially move more
product than our competitors, Nutrien. Topline sales growth is defined as “increasing revenue, usually
by selling more products” (Strayer University, 2020, p. 3). In this strategy Mosaic would increase our
customers and overall amount of potash that we would sell. As shown below this would likely have a
poor long term outcome.
Is this suggestion a tactical action that would generate short-term growth?
This type of action of would generate short-term growth but likely would hurt the company longer term
and overall. The action of lowering the price we charge customers is a very easy action for our
competitors to mirror. They would see that we are selling more potash and they are losing customers
and would match or lessen their price versus ours. It is important that our companies work together on
pricing so that we don’t drive the price down too much and cause ourselves to lose money per ton of
potash. In the notes it says “robust competition is naturally a good thing, not only for society but also
for individual competitors” (Strayer University, 2020, p. 6). In the case of Mosaic and Nutrien it is good
that we don’t flood the market with too much potash and keep demand strong for our products but not
to compete to much that one or both of us are no longer competitive in the market place.
If we drive our prices lower in the North American markets this could drastically affect the price of
potash globally. This would make our overall business suffer, our global market is over 50% of our
business. We compete against a few other companies globally which have distinct advantages when
compared to us. They have better access to markets (cheaper shipping) and they have a potential lower
cost per ton due to their labor costs being substantially than ours. These two major factors require us
not to get into a cost war with our global competitors. All of these competitors are “traditional
competitors” which are defined as “the ones you know the best. They are already active in your markets
and provide similar products and services” (Strayer University, 2020, p. 6). Mosaic must be very careful
when it comes to pricing of our products because our main North American competitors can out
produce us and our global competitors can potentially produce potash for cheaper than us.
What costs, systems or capabilities would be necessary for this to happen, would it result in attractive
bottom-line profit?
Unfortunately the strategy of lowering the price to customers would likely not generate attractive
bottom line profit. This strategy may work short term to produce more sales but is easily replicable and
would just drive the overall price down for potash. It is important for potash producers to match
demand with supply to ensure that the price does not get too high or too low. If the price gets too high
the customers are likely to not buy but if the prices dip too low then companies will not be profitable
and cut production. It is important to keep a healthy balance in order to keep everyone competitive.
It would not cost our company anything in order to drive prices down and our systems that we have in
place are more than capable to do this.
Strayer University. (2020). JWI 540: Strategy.

Purchase answer to see full

Submit a Comment