In business, organizations tend to consider every possible approach to help them increase or save profits. However, even though some of these methods are risky and unreliable, managers still want to try them because they see no other opportunity to keep the business. In Best Buy’s case, the decision was made to separate the good customers from the bad ones (Elberse, Gourville & Narayandas 2007). However, it does not look like the company was able to reach what it endeavored.
There are many ways to increase customers’ interest in being loyal to the company. Sampling products allows potential clients to make a choice of some item over another one (Biswas et al. 2014). Commercial marketing is considered a significant advantage when an organization wants to make a positive impact on the buyers’ personal autonomy (Anker, Kappel & Sandøe 2010). Scholars emphasize the importance of thinking about the future when making decisions at present.
They find it a great way of saving money on things that one may not need in a couple of years (Hershfield 2013). Most of all, specialists emphasize the need to create successful strategies of market orientation so as to be able to meet the clients’ needs (Singh 2008). Taking all of these factors into consideration, it is possible to conclude that Best Buy’s angels and devils classification did not bring the expected positive change.
According to Kotler and Keller (2012), consumers pass five phases when making a purchase decision: recognition of the problem, search for information, assessment of alternatives, purchase resolution, and post-purchase conduct. The factors affecting the behavior of Best Buy’s customers were associated with the price of products suggested by the company and the possibility of gaining some advantage when returning the products and buying them at discount prices.
The brightest example of the five-stage model introduced by Kolter and Keller (2012) is the way in which the company arranged the evaluation of its customers’ post-purchase behavior. The organization monitored people’s post-purchase actions as well as their level of satisfaction and the use and disposal of purchased goods (Kotler & Keller 2012). However, when the company’s CEO initiated the process of diving clients into good and bad ones, he did not realize what adverse outcomes such approach would cause.
The competitors of Best Buy, Wal-Mart and Dell being the biggest ones, used the company’s new policy to their advantage (Elberse, Gourville & Narayandas 2007). They invited the customers not welcome at Best Buy and emphasized that each person coming to their stores was equally important to them. The consumers of Best Buy were disappointed and offended by the new policy. If I worked for a Best Buy’s competitor, I would not recommend this marketing approach for my organization.
It is not a good idea to ignore some customers because of their unsatisfactory post-purchase behavior. Rather than dividing buyers into different categories, companies should come up with the ways of eliminating negative conduct of some customers. Best Buy could have changed its policies of returning goods or reimbursement rules instead of discouraging some people from visiting its stores.
Overall, Best Buy’s customer-centricity approach cannot be considered as a successful one. Instead of encouraging more “good” customers to purchase at its stores, the company provoked many potential buyers’ decision to cooperate with its competitors. The decision was rather risky and involved additional expenditures on the part of the organization.
Reference List
Anker, TB, Kappel, K & Sandøe, P 2010, ‘The liberating power of commercial marketing’, Journal of Business Ethics, vol. 93, no. 4, pp. 519-530.
Biswas, D, Labrecque, LI, Lehmann, DR & Markos E 2014, ‘Making choices while smelling, tasting, and listening: the role of sensory (dis)similarity when sequentially sampling products’, Journal of Marketing, vol. 78, no. 1, pp. 112-126.
Elberse, A, Gourville, J & Narayandas, D 2007, ‘Angels and devils: Best Buy’s new customer approach (A)’, Harvard Business School, pp. 1-5.
Hershfield, H 2013, ‘You make better decisions if you “see” your senior self’, Harvard Business Review, pp. 1-3.
Kotler, P & Keller, K 2012, Marketing management, 14th edn, Pearson, New York, NY.
Singh, S 2008, ‘Sat & Co.: market orientation’, Harvard Business Review, pp. 1-10.