The Kirin case data analysis can be done using Enginius and answer the following nine questions: KIRIN CASE BACKGROUND: The case describes the strategic situation facing Kirin brewery in Japan. You are challenged to come up with a product design (beer!) that will deliver the desired incremental volume, net of cannibalization of the current product. Also, because Kirin is a niche product, it probably does not appeal to everyone. Therefore, your analysis should also include consideration of segmentation and targeting issues. The case involves multiple data sets and ME tools: segmentation, targeting and positioning as well as product design/conjoint. A complete analysis of the case will use cluster analysis, discriminant analysis, perceptual mapping and conjoint analysis. Note: the Kirin case in Enginius provides 9 different data blocs. FORMAT: Answers should be submitted in a WORD or PDF file that simply states answers to all parts of the questions as asked. I do NOT want to receive Enginius output files, but it may be helpful to insert selected key parts from the output into your written answers, such as a perceptual map, dendrogram, or other parts of the conjoint analysis or segmentation analysis that show how you developed your answers. If you do the correct analysis and answer the questions directly, a complete set of answers should be about 3 pages (single space). Questions: 1. Briefly describe the strategic situation facing Kirin in Japan and the U.S. market at the time of the case. Why is it important for Kirin to increase its sales and market share in the U.S.? How large of an increase does Kirin need to achieve in order to be successful? Explain. 2. What types of data did Kirin collect to analyze this situation? Who did they collect data from? What decision do they need to make? 3. Conduct a traditional needs-based segmentation analysis (including discriminant analysis) to determine if the U.S. import beer market can be segmented in a useful way. How many segments are there in the market? (Enginius identifies a default of 3 segments, but you should also compare a 2-segment and 4-segment solution to a 3-segment solution – you can easily run these analyses by manually forcing Enginius to identify either 2, 3, or 4 segments). Are there any distinct and targetable segments that emerge from this analysis? Briefly describe the size and characteristics of each segment you found in the 2, 3, and 4 segment solutions. What is similar or different in these three solutions? Which should Kirin use? 4. Create a perceptual map of the import beer market. How many dimensions should you use, and why this number? Describe where Kirin is located on the map. Who are its closest competitors? How does Kirin’s positioning compare to Sapporo? 5. Run a conjoint analysis to identify a product design that will enable Kirin to increase its existing market share in the U.S. and sell enough additional cases of beer to achieve its strategic goals. Which choice rule makes the most sense to use in this analysis, and why? What market share can Kirin achieve with the new product it is planning (Kirin’s “New product profile” compared to Kirin’s “Existing product profile”)? Can Kirin do even better, i.e., achieve an even higher market share, with a more “optimal” product design? Explain. 6. Use the conjoint preference partworths to conduct another segmentation analysis to explore if there are distinct segments (as opposed to the overall market) that would prefer the new Kirin product you designed. [Note: In Enginius, you need to first run the Segmentation tool on the Preference partworths, then send the output to an Excel spreadsheet, then copy the Preference partworths to the “Segment” tab in the Excel file, then sort the table by segment number, then carefully copy/paste the partworths from each segment separately back into Enginius to run a conjoin analysis on each separate segment to identify the best possible product for Kirin to introduce to each segment ]. Should you standardize the data when running this segmentation analysis? [why or why not]. How many segments do you find when you segment the Preference partworths? Which segment do you think would be most promising for Kirin, and what market share could Kirin achieve in this segment? Is it worthwhile for Kirin to design a brand specifically for this segment? Explain. 7. Compare and contrast the results of the two segmentation analyses you conducted in Questions 3 and 6 above (one using traditional needs-based “Segmentation data” versus the other using the “Preference partworths”). How are the results different? What can you conclude from this analysis about the market for beer? 8. BOTTOM LINE: From your combined answers to Questions 3-7 above, do you believe that Kirin can reach its strategic objective by introducing a new product to the U.S. market? If so, which new product would you recommend that Kirin introduce to the market (describe the new product design), and to which segment or segments should Kirin target this product? 9. Briefly describe the logic and sequence of steps you followed in answering Questions 3-8 above. I am looking for a straightforward verbal description of the steps you followed in running these analyses.