• Journal of Global Scholars of Marketing Science
• /
• v.20 no.3
• /
• pp.239-248
• /
• 2010

This paper describes a collaborative project between academia and industry which focused on improving the marketing and product development strategies for two private label apparel brands of a large regional department store chain in the southeastern United States. The goal of the project was to revitalize product lines of the two brands by incorporating student ideas for new solutions, thereby giving the students practical experience with a real-life industry situation. There were a number of key players involved in the project. A privately-owned department store chain based in the southeastern United States which was seeking an academic partner had recognized a need to update two existing private label brands. They targeted middle-aged consumers looking for casual, moderately priced merchandise. The company was seeking to change direction with both packaging and presentation, and possibly product design. The branding and product development divisions of the company contacted professors in an academic department of a large southeastern state university. Two of the professors agreed that the task would be a good fit for their classes - one was a junior-level Intermediate Brand Management class; the other was a senior-level Fashion Product Development class. The professors felt that by working collaboratively on the project, students would be exposed to a real world scenario, within the security of an academic learning environment. Collaboration within an interdisciplinary team has the advantage of providing experiences and resources beyond the capabilities of a single student and adds "brainpower" to problem-solving processes (Lowman 2000). This goal of improving the capabilities of students directed the instructors in each class to form interdisciplinary teams between the Branding and Product Development classes. In addition, many universities are employing industry partnerships in research and teaching, where collaboration within temporal (semester) and physical (classroom/lab) constraints help to increase students' knowledge and experience of a real-world situation. At the University of Tennessee, the Center of Industrial Services and UT-Knoxville's College of Engineering worked with a company to develop design improvements in its U.S. operations. In this study, Because should be lower case b with a private label retail brand, Wickett, Gaskill and Damhorst's (1999) revised Retail Apparel Product Development Model was used by the product development and brand management teams. This framework was chosen because it addresses apparel product development from the concept to the retail stage. Two classes were involved in this project: a junior level Brand Management class and a senior level Fashion Product Development class. Seven teams were formed which included four students from Brand Management and two students from Product Development. The classes were taught the same semester, but not at the same time. At the beginning of the semester, each class was introduced to the industry partner and given the problem. Half the teams were assigned to the men's brand and half to the women's brand. The teams were responsible for devising approaches to the problem, formulating a timeline for their work, staying in touch with industry representatives and making sure that each member of the team contributed in a positive way. The objective for the teams was to plan, develop, and present a product line using merchandising processes (following the Wickett, Gaskill and Damhorst model) and develop new branding strategies for the proposed lines. The teams performed trend, color, fabrication and target market research; developed sketches for a line; edited the sketches and presented their line plans; wrote specifications; fitted prototypes on fit models, and developed final production samples for presentation to industry. The branding students developed a SWOT analysis, a Brand Measurement report, a mind-map for the brands and a fully integrated Marketing Report which was presented alongside the ideas for the new lines. In future if the opportunity arises to work in this collaborative way with an existing company who wishes to look both at branding and product development strategies, classes will be scheduled at the same time so that students have more time to meet and discuss timelines and assigned tasks. As it was, student groups had to meet outside of each class time and this proved to be a challenging though not uncommon part of teamwork (Pfaff and Huddleston, 2003). Although the logistics of this exercise were time-consuming to set up and administer, professors felt that the benefits to students were multiple. The most important benefit, according to student feedback from both classes, was the opportunity to work with industry professionals, follow their process, and see the results of their work evaluated by the people who made the decisions at the company level. Faculty members were grateful to have a "real-world" case to work with in the classroom to provide focus. Creative ideas and strategies were traded as plans were made, extending and strengthening the departmental links be tween the branding and product development areas. By working not only with students coming from a different knowledge base, but also having to keep in contact with the industry partner and follow the framework and timeline of industry practice, student teams were challenged to produce excellent and innovative work under new circumstances. Working on the product development and branding for "real-life" brands that are struggling gave students an opportunity to see how closely their coursework ties in with the real-world and how creativity, collaboration and flexibility are necessary components of both the design and business aspects of company operations. Industry personnel were impressed by (a) the level and depth of knowledge and execution in the student projects, and (b) the creativity of new ideas for the brands.

• Journal of Intelligence and Information Systems
• /
• v.20 no.1
• /
• pp.35-48
• /
• 2014

According to the 2013 construction market outlook report, the liquidation of construction companies is expected to continue due to the ongoing residential construction recession. Bankruptcies of construction companies have a greater social impact compared to other industries. However, due to the different nature of the capital structure and debt-to-equity ratio, it is more difficult to forecast construction companies' bankruptcies than that of companies in other industries. The construction industry operates on greater leverage, with high debt-to-equity ratios, and project cash flow focused on the second half. The economic cycle greatly influences construction companies. Therefore, downturns tend to rapidly increase the bankruptcy rates of construction companies. High leverage, coupled with increased bankruptcy rates, could lead to greater burdens on banks providing loans to construction companies. Nevertheless, the bankruptcy prediction model concentrated mainly on financial institutions, with rare construction-specific studies. The bankruptcy prediction model based on corporate finance data has been studied for some time in various ways. However, the model is intended for all companies in general, and it may not be appropriate for forecasting bankruptcies of construction companies, who typically have high liquidity risks. The construction industry is capital-intensive, operates on long timelines with large-scale investment projects, and has comparatively longer payback periods than in other industries. With its unique capital structure, it can be difficult to apply a model used to judge the financial risk of companies in general to those in the construction industry. Diverse studies of bankruptcy forecasting models based on a company's financial statements have been conducted for many years. The subjects of the model, however, were general firms, and the models may not be proper for accurately forecasting companies with disproportionately large liquidity risks, such as construction companies. The construction industry is capital-intensive, requiring significant investments in long-term projects, therefore to realize returns from the investment. The unique capital structure means that the same criteria used for other industries cannot be applied to effectively evaluate financial risk for construction firms. Altman Z-score was first published in 1968, and is commonly used as a bankruptcy forecasting model. It forecasts the likelihood of a company going bankrupt by using a simple formula, classifying the results into three categories, and evaluating the corporate status as dangerous, moderate, or safe. When a company falls into the "dangerous" category, it has a high likelihood of bankruptcy within two years, while those in the "safe" category have a low likelihood of bankruptcy. For companies in the "moderate" category, it is difficult to forecast the risk. Many of the construction firm cases in this study fell in the "moderate" category, which made it difficult to forecast their risk. Along with the development of machine learning using computers, recent studies of corporate bankruptcy forecasting have used this technology. Pattern recognition, a representative application area in machine learning, is applied to forecasting corporate bankruptcy, with patterns analyzed based on a company's financial information, and then judged as to whether the pattern belongs to the bankruptcy risk group or the safe group. The representative machine learning models previously used in bankruptcy forecasting are Artificial Neural Networks, Adaptive Boosting (AdaBoost) and, the Support Vector Machine (SVM). There are also many hybrid studies combining these models. Existing studies using the traditional Z-Score technique or bankruptcy prediction using machine learning focus on companies in non-specific industries. Therefore, the industry-specific characteristics of companies are not considered. In this paper, we confirm that adaptive boosting (AdaBoost) is the most appropriate forecasting model for construction companies by based on company size. We classified construction companies into three groups - large, medium, and small based on the company's capital. We analyzed the predictive ability of AdaBoost for each group of companies. The experimental results showed that AdaBoost has more predictive ability than the other models, especially for the group of large companies with capital of more than 50 billion won.