Mediquip S.A.

SU B M IT T ED B Y GROUP A14 G AU R AV SIN G H | VAIBH AV J ET WAN I | R AH U L R AVEEN D R AN | KASH IF H AID ER

Background
Lohmann University Hospital approached Mediquip for purchase of CT scanner

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

Mediquip loses the customer to competitor Sigma

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

Key Buyers
Competent after sales service
Public sector, health agencies (Government owned, non profit organization)

Minor share goes to private sector

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

Buying Centre
LUH User and Initiators Influencer Gatekeepers Decision Maker Professor Steinborn Head of radiology department Dr. Rufer Hospitals Physicist Secretary of hartmann Carl Hartmann General Director Remarks Initiated the deal His services is sought by doctors Write technical specifications Domain expert Suggested by Professor Steinborn Inside information Information about key factors for decision making

Other Important Factor: Buying Objective Task Objective Buying Involvement Vertical (Boss- Subordinate) | Complex
5

Possible GAPS
Lack of preparation
Didnt 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 approach Doesnt spend time for relationship building Cancellation of Paris trip If this happened due to budget constraint then bad decision

Action and possible negative impact

POD not mentioned effectively
Doesnt have price estimate No testimonial or feedback from client
Loss of competitive advantage Unimpressive first meet Unprofessional behavior Lack of interest They themselves contacted client Asked ability to serve client

Action and possible negative impact Contd..

Too much dependency on Broachers Lack of knowledge / Convincing skill Fluctuation in price offering (Lowers price by 5 Lakh Euros)
Impression of lack of knowledge Less impact on buyer

All the companies claim they have the latest technology (Doesnt have info to compare) Doubt about quality (Contradicts initial claim) Looks company trying to take advantage of Lohmann

Action and possible negative impact Contd..

High time gap between sales call By not revealing price to Professor Steinborn
Difficult to build rapport and trust Less impact on buyer Unprofessional behaviour and created conflict among members

Key Learning from Case

Preparation before sales pitch Understand stakeholders

10

Key Learning from Case Contd

Appropriate pricing strategy
For superior quality product high price is justifiable Mistake of discount Puts power in LUHs hand Contradict to quality statement Educational Best technology for best hospital Financial Easier to upgrade, wont become obsolete

Communicate relevant benefit

Training

Had expertise only to deal government client

11

THANK YOU
12