Thursday, October 13

Topic

  • J.C. Penney Case Discussion

Objectives

  • To understand why a change in J.C. Penney’s pricing strategy affected its revenue and profitability
  • To learn how you can assess the likely effectiveness of a Hi-Lo versus EDLP pricing strategy, given a company’s external environment

Discussion Questions

  1. Read the case quickly and skim through its fourteen exhibits to identify one or two high-level concerns, problems, or issues that J.C. Penney faced in August of 2012. Describe them concisely. What might have caused them, and when does a decision need to be made?
  2. Re-read the case more carefully to become acquainted with facts and opinions that are relevant to the concerns, problems, or issues you identified above. As you re-read the case, catalog information presented in the case and arrange it in a systematic order from most to least important.
  3. Generate and evaluate alternative courses of action for J.C. Penney.
  4. How should Johnson proceed? Recommend a general action plan.
  5. Reflect on the time you dedicated to preparing for today’s discussion of the J.C. Penney case. How much time did you spend, and how could you develop skills that will enable you to prepare more wisely? Refer to page 3 of Haywood-Farmer (2008) for ideas.

Assignments Due

  • Answers to today’s discussion questions
    • After signing into Blackboard, submit your answers to this folder
  • Discuss your analysis of the J.C. Penney case before today’s class with your group members

Assignments Made

  • J.C. Penney Case Reflection
  • Answers to the discussion questions for our next session of marketing
  • Discuss your analysis of the Hubspot case with your group members before our next session of marketing

References

Haywood-Farmer, John (2008), An Introductory Note on the Case Method, London, ON: Ivey Publishing.
Ofek, Elie and Jill Avery (2013), J.C. Penney’s ”Fair and Square” Pricing Strategy, Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Publishing.
Thomke, Stefan and Jim Manzi (2014), The Discipline of Business Experimentation,” Harvard Business Review, 92 (12), 70–79.