TerraCog

Global Positioning
System
By: Rameez Rehan
Salman
Waqas Yasir
 Introduction to TerraCog Inc.

•Privately held Company founded in 1977

•Specializing in High Quality GPS & Fishing Sonar Equipment.
•Translating retailer & user feedback into exceptional product design
and functionality was company core skill for leading in GPS.
•Industry reports speaks of TerraCog GPS outperformed competing
products on navigation.
•TerraCog Inc. usually lags in technological innovation products, but
once launched they surpassed those of competitors in addressing
customer needs.
•TerraCog Inc. got strong momentum with its handheld GPS.
 BirdsI Launch
• New GPS prototype BirdsI launched at summer 2006 Outdoor
retailer show by GPS competitor Posthaste.
• Static satellite photographs had been stitched into single view.
• TerraCog team was not impressed by new technological launch also
their research showed this new technology did not offer substantive
performance improvement over standard maps in TerraCog’s GPS.
• Dressed up graphics appealed more to users rather than simple
land, water & road marks.
• Adding these features to TerraCog’s existing GPS required
processor speed and memory upgrade along with new firmware.
• By spring 2007 TerraCog’s sales representatives were noticing
increasing customer demands for GPS with satellite imagery.
 Project Aeriel by TerraCog
• Upon repeated requests from sales VP Ed Pryor, decision for not
proceeding to satellite imagery was reverted.
• Sales team willing to compromise the speed but cost to be kept low.
• Redesign of existing GPS platform was proposed to launch by 2008
Holidays

TerraCog Management Organization Chart, 2008

The main problem was that the company leadership
lacked Vision, Goal, farsightedness, Decision Making.

How the company wants to

see it self from consumer’s
perspective w.r.t Handheld
GPS product line.
The target they need to
focus in order to pursue
their vision

Strategic Foresight &

Courage to take Decisions
necessary to achieve your
goal.
They addressed the situation in a completely wrong
manner from the beginning.
In 2007 Pryor persuaded Fiero to upgrade the product.
Separate meeting with Design, giving Richardson the
lead & following pre-launch meetings.

Everyone focused on their

respective goals. Adopting
most convenient way for
themselves.

As a result both the

meetings ended up in
conflicts. Richardson was
not able to draw them to a
conclusion as she had
never been a part of
product launch. Not able to
decide what to do.
• Company completely
shelved their GPS
product development.
• Saw no threat from any
competitor.
• Explored new GPS
submarkets in 2007.
• Always overestimated
itself.
 Team feedback
option was not
considered.

Advancements
made by their
competitors.

Launch of BirdsI prototype

followed by final launch
was ignored assuming
their product to be perfect.
Did not consider
feedback from main
audience.
They took many important
decisions without taking
their team onboard the
situation company faced.
Pryor was more focused on
his departmental goals.

Whistler the most

experienced with product
launch was not consulted
at all.
 After deciding to take it from the
front. Pryor & Fiero should hold
meetings with retailers & their team.
Share market feedback and the
situation TerraCog face.
Ask them to share their views as Team
how to get out of this situation. Feeback
They can avoid ending up in go/no go
scenario.
It will help them to align themselves with
company objective.
Help avoid conflict & accommodate each
other’s point of view.
They will join their strengths to overcome
their weaknesses, converting threats to
opportunities & develop a practical
solution toward target.
 Fiero should choose Whistler as
he is credible & trustworthy,
based on his vast experience
and association.

Develop a plan setting small

milestones, agreeing to meet in order
to monitor the development.
Drawing them to commitment.
•Launch of new product

•Development of strategy and its acceptance

•Clarity of expectations
 Primary Audience (Top Level Mgmt)

Richeard Fiero (President)

Emma Richardson (Executive VP)
Ed Pryor (VP Sales)
Harold Whistler (VP, Design and Development)
Allen Roth (Director Desing and Development)
Cory Wu (Manager Software & Firmware Design)
Alice Gorga (Manager, Hardware Design)
Beckey Timmons (CFO)
Secondary Audience

Middle Level Managers (Not directly

involved in decision making of
Project Ariel)

Lower Level Staff

 Audience Analysis

Fiero and Harold are both unable to give their time to Project Ariel

Hostility between Ed (VP sales) & Allen (Director Design & Development)

Hostilty between Ed (VP Sales), Tony (Director Production) & Cory (Manager
Software & Firmware)

Allience between Tony (Director Production) and Alice (Manager Hardware Design)
 Message Structure Strategy

INDIRECT APPROACH…… but why??

1. Audience is a blend of people with different backgrounds

2. Persuasion Needed

3. Hostility
 Communication Medium

• Email

• Formal Meetings

• Informal Communications

• Lower/Middle Level Meetings