Section 1, Critical Summary:
This case is about Robert Allen who was trying to sell Bayfield a Drive system to work with a shearing line that they had recently purchased from Mangna Machinery. Allen lost the sale and was reviewing his call reports to see where he went wrong. The Exhibits shows that Allen did certain thing right, and he could’ve done more to keep the sale and to seal the deal so to speak. According to the text Allen built a good relationship with the engineers and the decision makers at the plant. He also contacted Magna and got the specifications for the shearing line, which was good move so they can tailor a custom system to better fit the shearling line. However, could’ve used that contact at Magna and involved them more in the process. Perhaps build and alliance with them and have them declare Lawford as a preferred partner. Section 2, Problem Statement:
The Problem is that Allen lost the sale and he could’ve leveraged his companies position better to have the decision makers on board and clear up any confusion about the specifications on the needed specs for the new system. Lawford was geographically close to Bayfield Milling company. He called them , “neighbors.” Later he goes on to say that there was a dispute with the features that they required. Lastly, on May 30, 1978 while with the foreman knowing that the temperature regulation unit was very important to team at Bayfield and they were having issues with an older Lawford motor, he didn’t discuss that this was their strong point now with the new machines. He simply asked if he wanted to purchase a new one. In the end, he was told that the Bayfield personnel (Vogel, Lorenz and Hughes) all thought that the new system would be a better fit and they thought so for different reasons without any explanation. Section 3, Alternative Options:
Referring back to the above section Allen could’ve turned those weaknesses in to strengths by doing the following....