Mediquip S.A. ®

SUBMITTED BY

GROUP A14

GAURAV SINGH | VAIBHAV JETWANI | RAHUL RAVEENDRAN | KASHIF HAIDER

2

Background

Mediquip loses the customer to competitor Sigma

Kurt Thaldorf, a sales engineer was assigned to customer on May 5

Lohmann University Hospital approached Mediquip for purchase of CT scanner

3

About the company (Mediquip – Seller)

Product Range• CT scanner, X –

ray, ultrasonic and nuclear diagnostic equipment

Worldwide reputation for advance technology• “Two years

ahead of their most advance competition”

Competent after sales

service

Key Buyers• Public sector,

health agencies (Government owned, non profit organization)

Minor share goes to private sector

4

About the Buyer – Lohmann University

Large general hospital

New Task (New product, new vendor)• Awareness Information search Evaluation Decision Post purchase behavior

Lohman & Mediquip• Never had any transaction before• Private buyer

LHU has excellent reputation

5

Buying CentreLUH Remarks

User and Initiators

Professor SteinbornHead of radiology department

• Initiated the deal• His services is sought by doctors

Influencer Dr. RuferHospital’s Physicist

• Write technical specifications• Domain expert• Suggested by Professor Steinborn

Gatekeepers Secretary of hartmann • Inside information• Information about key factors for decision making

Decision Maker Carl HartmannGeneral Director

Other Important Factor:

Buying Objective Task ObjectiveBuying Involvement Vertical (Boss- Subordinate) | Complex

6

Possible GAPS

Lack of preparation• Didn’t have price quotation when asked by Professor Steinborn

Ignorance / Over confidence• Secretary gave hint about Buying centre

“Final decision was made up by committee having Hartmann, Steinborn and ‘one other person’

• Transactional approachDoesn’t spend time for relationship building

• Cancellation of Paris tripIf this happened due to budget constraint then bad decision

7

Action and possible negative impact

POD not mentioned effectively

● Loss of competitive advantage● Unimpressive first meet

Doesn’t have price estimate

● Unprofessional behavior

● Lack of interest

No testimonial or feedback from client

● They themselves contacted client

● Asked ability to serve client

8

Action and possible negative impact Contd..

Too much dependency on Broachers

● Impression of lack of knowledge● Less impact on buyer

Lack of knowledge / Convincing skill

● “ All the companies claim they have the latest technology”(Doesn’t have info to compare)

Fluctuation in price offering (Lowers price

by 5 Lakh Euros)

● Doubt about quality (Contradicts initial claim)

● Looks company trying to take advantage of Lohmann

9

Action and possible negative impact Contd..

High time gap between sales call

● Difficult to build rapport and trust

● Less impact on buyer

By not revealing price to Professor

Steinborn ●Unprofessional behaviour and created conflict among members

10

Key Learning from Case

• Preparation before sales pitch

• Understand stakeholders

11

Key Learning from Case Contd…

• For superior quality product high price is justifiable• Mistake of discount

• Puts power in LUH’s hand• Contradict to quality statement

Appropriate pricing strategy

• Educational “Best technology for best hospital”• Financial “Easier to upgrade, won’t become obsolete”Communicate relevant benefit

• Had expertise only to deal government clientTraining

12

THANK YOU