ENTREPRENEURIAL MARKETING

MKT 6380 FALL 2005

Class Meeting Dr. Joseph C. Picken
Thursday 1900-2145, SOM 2.903 SOM 4.212
Office Hours: Mon/Wed 3:00 – 4:30 PM Email: jpicken@utdallas.edu
Or by appointment Phone (UTD office): (972) 883-4986
Phone (McKinney office): (972) 562-5401

COURSE OBJECTIVES:
This course is about the choices and challenges of entrepreneurial marketing. Although emphasis will be on
technology-based entrepreneurial ventures, the principles and practices addressed are broadly applicable across
multiple industry contexts.
Firms in established and stable industries are faced with a limited set of choices – in all likelihood, the competitive
landscape is reasonably well defined, market segments are known, distribution channels have been established, and
the firm’s competitive strengths and limitations are understood. Technology (will it work?) and market (will they
buy?) ris ks are min imized; competitive actions and the firm’s ability to execute are the principal areas of
uncertainty. Marketing options are partially constrained by established industry structure and prior choices.
Entrepreneurs competing ni rapidly evolving competitive environments, or established firms introducing new
products or services into unfamiliar or emerging markets, often face multiple unknowns (technology, market,
competitive and execution risks). Entrenched competitors will jealously defend their turf; multiple new entrants will
aggressively compete to establish next -generation technologies. Market definitions and customer requirements are
often in a state of flux and customer confusion is high. The emerging industry may lack established technical
standards, distribution channels and pricing models. Most entrepreneurial challengers will lack brand identity and
name recognition, and may face severe resource constraints. Although classic marketing principles (product,
positioning, pricing, promotion) still apply, the context is very different and the target is always moving.
The good news is that there are relatively few constraints on marketing and strategic choices and strategies ; the bad
news is that each choice is critical and each in turn constrains future options and flexibility. Often, the innovator or
entrepreneur is faced with a “David and Goliath” challenge where the resources and legitimacy of incumbent(s) and
established business models create substantial barriers for a challenger firm with limited resources and capabilities.
This course will examine these strategic choices utilizing readings, case studies and guest speakers.

REQUIRED COURSE MATERIALS:

§ Davidow, W.H. 1986. Marketing High Technology: An Insider’s View. ISBN 0-02-907990-X
§ Moore, G.H. 1995. Inside the Tornado: Marketing Strategies from Silicon Valley’s Cutting Edge. ISBN 0-88730-824-4
§ Chaston, I. 2000. Entrepreneurial Marketing. ISBN 0-333-79299-8 (paperback)
§ Coursepack: Cases

SELF INTRODUCTION
Each student should post a Self-Introduction in the Discussion area of WebCT prior to the first class. Guidelines are
provided on the WebCT Discussion page. This information will assist in the formation of groups for the course.

FORMATION OF GROUPS
Much of the work in this course will be performed in groups. Students should form small groups (3 members)
during the first two weeks of the course. It is important that you select your groups to include a diverse set of skills
and make sure that at least one member is proficient in accounting and spreadsheet analysis. A list of the members
of each group (with name, email and telephone contact information) should be turned into the instructor at the
beginning of class on September 1st .

Dr. Joseph C. Picken

Revised: June 23, 2005
Printed: September 22, 2005
 MKT 6380
ENTREPRENEURIAL MARKETING

LECTURE NOTES
The MS Powerpoint slides used in lectures and cas e discussions and other course-related materials will be posted on
WebCT (http://webct.utdallas.edu) under course ID MKT 6380. You should be able to access WebCT with your
UTD Unix ID and password. Call computer services at (972) 883-2911 if you need assistance.

COURSE REQUIREMENTS & GRADING:

The list of assigned readings and cases is attached. Discussion questions are provided for each of the cases.
Supplemental materials may be provided or posted electronically. Advance preparation and enthusiastic
participation in class discussions is an important part of the learning experience in this course and will be evaluated.
The course has been designed to allow flexible management of your time. There will be no quizzes or exams. Your
grade will be based on group and individual written assignments and your contributions to class discussions. These
assignments, their due dates and page limits, and their relative weights in determining your final grade are
summarized in the table below:
Length
Case Due Date Type (pages) Weight
WA-1. XM Satellite Radio (A) Sept 1, 2005 Individual (outline form) 4-5 10%
WA-2. net.Genesis, Inc. Sept 15, 2005 Group (outline form) 4-5 10%
WA-3. Proposal: New Venture Marketing Plan Sept 22, 2005 Group (outline form) 3-4 0%
WA-4. Warner-Lambert Ireland: Niconol Oct 6, 2005 Individual (outline form) 4-5 10%
WA-5. Mathsoft, Inc, (A) Oct 20, 2005 Group (outline form) 4-5 10%
WA-6. Amazon.com - 2002 Nov 3, 2005 Individual (outline form) 4-5 10%
WA-7. CardioThoracic Systems Nov 17, 2005 Group (outline form) 4-5 10%
WA-8. Wild Card Presentation (sessions 04, 07, 09, As assigned Group (outline form) + 4-5 10%
11, 13) Powerpoint Presentation
WA-9. Group Project: New Venture Marketing Plan Dec 1, 2005 Group (essay form) + 18-20 20%
Powerpoint Presentation
Class Participation Individual 10%
Overall Course Grade 100%

Wild Card Presentation. Each group will be assigned one or more “wild card” presentations (see course outline).
The group will prepare an outline form paper for the assigned case and lead the class discussion with a 25-30 minute
Powerpoint presentation of their analysis of the case.
Peer Evaluation. A peer evaluation process will be utilized to adjust individual grades on all group assignments.
The peer evaluation form (attached) should be completed individually, sealed in an envelope and turned in with the
final written assignment on December 1st .
New Venture Marketing Plan (WA-9)
As a major project for the course, each group will prepare a New Venture Marketing Plan for a startup technology-
based business. Guidelines are provided in a separate section below. Each group will submit a proposal (topic
selection) on September 22nd , prepare a 15-18 page Marketing Plan (due December 1st ) and will make a 15 minute
presentation of that plan to the class and a group of outside evaluators on December 1st .
Guidelines for Written Assignments
• Evaluation: Ninety percent (90%) of your grade will be based on group and individual written
assignments. Written assignments will be evaluated on multiple factors, including (a) fully addressing
the requirements; (b) critical evaluation and effective insights into the case situation; (c) demonstrated
ability to apply the course concepts and frameworks in your analysis; (d) logical conclusions; (e)
appropriate recommendations; and (f) effective communications. Particular care should be taken to fully

Dr. Joseph C. Picken 2

Revised: June 23, 2005
Printed: September 22, 2005
 MKT 6380
ENTREPRENEURIAL MARKETING

address the requirements for each paper as detailed in the assignment. A written evaluation and critique
will be provided on all graded papers.
• Format. Each written assignment should comply with the page length guidelines specified for the assignment.
The use of charts and exhibits is encouraged, to the extent that they help you make your points. Cover pages,
charts or exhibits, and lists of references will not be included in the page count. Charts and exhibits should be
numbered and appropriately referenced in the body of the document. A list of references should be attached as
required. The manuscript should use 11-12 point type, double-spaced, with 1” margins all around. Appropriate
titles and section headings should be used. Binders and report covers are neither necessary nor desired.
Number the pages, put the course number and your name(s) at the top of each page and staple in the
upper left corner.
• Outline Form Response. Some assignments specify an outline form response. I will expect a statement of the
question followed by a bulleted or numbered list of the key items in your response.
• Essay Form Response. Some assignments specify an essay form response. I will expect a well organized paper
that addresses the case questions and uses section headings, bulleted lists, charts and exhibits as appropriate to
clearly communicate your message.
• Electronic Submissions. If you submit a paper by email, the file name should identify the course,
assignment number and your name or group ID. For example, “MKT6380_2_JSmith.doc” would identify
John Smith’s written assignment #2.
• Due Dates and Late Paper Policy: Written assignments are due at the beginning of class on the date
assigned. Group assignments will not be accepted late. Individual late papers turned in within one week
after the due date will be graded, but 10 points will be deducted; papers turned in within two weeks will be
graded, but 15 points will be deducted. Late papers received more than two weeks after the due date will
receive a zero. Exceptions may be made if circumstances warrant.
Case Analysis Guidelines
Many of the written assignments and class discussions will require the analysis of case situations. Discussion
questions for each case are provided below to help you to focus your analysis. You are encouraged to work
together in your study groups to discuss the cases, including the individual written assignment cases, with the
understanding that individual assignments (including tables and figures) are to be prepared and written by
yourself. The following general approach to case analysis is recommended:
• Read the case quickly. Identify the key issues and decisions/actions required (the case preparation questions will
help you to focus on the key issues). Prioritize the issues in terms of urgency and importance.
• Decide what kind of recommendations should be made (and to whom)
• Choose appropriate analytical tools/frameworks from those introduced in the course
• Analyze the situation thoroughly using the frameworks and theoretical frameworks provided in the readings
• Draw logical conclusions based on your analysis
• Make specific recommendations for action in response to the questions posed in the case or the preparation
questions (what should be done, who should do it, when and in what sequence).

In general, there are no “right” or “wrong” answers for a specific case – different approaches and insights are
possible, depending on your individual perspective and approach. Regardless, I will expect you to draw logical
conclusions and (if appropriate) make recommendations that: (a) address the identified strategic issues; (b) follow
logically from your analysis and conclusions; and (c) make sense (are feasible) in the context of the case situation.
Class Participation
Ten percent (10%) of your grade will be based on the quality of your preparation and active participation in class
discussions and exercises. From time to time, it may be necessary to miss a class due to illness or personal business.
Please let me know in advance. Keep in mind that written assignments must be emailed by the due date, regardless. If
participation becomes an issue, your grade will be impacted.

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS FOR CASE ANALYSIS

The following discussion questions are provided to help you complete a structured analysis focusing on the key
issues in each case. It is important, in written assignments, to address each of these points.

Dr. Joseph C. Picken 3

Revised: June 23, 2005
Printed: September 22, 2005
 MKT 6380
ENTREPRENEURIAL MARKETING

Case: XM Satellite Radio (A) (HBS 9-504-009)

1. Following Chaston, identify the industry conventions (sectoral, performance, customer, critical success factors) and
conventional marketing strategies that characterized the broadcast radio industry in 1997.
2. Without considering the strategies of the individual competitors (SIRIUS and XM), how did the concept of satellite radio
challenge these conventions? How should these competitors incorporate the lessons of the Technology Adoption Life
Cycle (Moore) into their strategies?
3. Evaluate SIRIUS’ strategy and business model utilizing the concepts and frameworks provided in Chaston Chapter 3. Is
their strategy entrepreneurial? How does it challenge the established industry conventions?
4. How does XM’s approach challenge the established industry conventions? How does XM plan to differentiate its offering
from that of SIRIUS? What are the key marketing and positioning choices faced by XM? What do you recommend?
Case: Trexel (HBS 9-899-101)
1. Why has a technology invented in 1982 taken so long to get to market? What are Trexel’s distinctive competencies? What
are the competitive advantages (if any) of its technology? Given the history of Trexel’s development efforts, what barriers
remain to the effective commercialization of this technology?
2. Where would you place Trexel’s MuCell technology in terms of the Technology Adoption Life Cycle Model? Does Trexel
offer a “whole product” solution (see Moore – page 21)?
3. Define the key customer needs for each of the potential applications addressed at the end of the case. How well does
Trexel’s technology meet each need? How much technology development and/or ongoing support will be required, in each
case, to meet the needs (and close the deal)?
4. Develop a set of 5-8 criteria for evaluation of the potential applications (include size of opportunity; level of technical risk;
time to market, etc.). Evaluate each target market option according to your criteria and rank the five options in terms of
order of preference. Explain the logic by which you rank-ordered the opportunities.
5. Explain how your recommended option can be leveraged into a bowling alley strategy?
Case: net.Genesis.Inc. (HBS 9-500-009)
1. Where would you place net.Genesis on the Technology Adoption Life Cycle? Are they ready to cross the chasm or are they
in it? Justify your response in terms of the kinds of customers they are currently targeting, and the needs and requirements
of the principal users.
2. Does net.Genesis offer a “whole product” at the present time? It is entrepreneurial with respect to product form and function
(Chaston)? What are the key elements? What needs to be added to meet the needs of the mainstream customer? How does
the alliance strategy complement and extend the whole product concept?
3. Some of the customer comments reflect a need for more “hands on” customer interaction to use net.Genesis’ products, as
compared to their competition. Is this a plus? What would you recommend?
4. Should net.Genesis narrow its marketing focus to one or a few segments (see Exhibit 2 and consider various vertical market
options)? What are the risks and potential benefits? How would you position the company’s offering? What should the
whole product include? What would the value proposition be?
5. What segments should they pursue? What should the selection criteria be? Is there a logical bowling alley strategy that you
can recommend?
Case: Starbucks: Delivering Customer Service (HBS 9-504-016)
1. Service is one of three elements in Starbucks’ value proposition. How important is “service” relative to the other elements in
defining the “whole product” for Starbucks’ customers? How easy (or difficult) is service to manage and control, as
compared to the other elements?
2. Starbucks has four “basic service” measures. How, if you were a store manager, would you ensure a consistently high level
of performance with respect to each?
3. Based on the information in Table A, does Starbucks compete directly with the Independents, or does the company serve a
different market segment? Does the brand meaning attributed to Starbucks reflect its business strategy and the elements of
basic service it emphasizes? Does it make sense for Starbucks to modify its approach to appeal to a different set of
customers? What risks does this suggest?
4. Davidow cites four lessons about delivering good service: (a) a service-oriented attitude will not assure good service; (b) if
you eliminate the need for service, you are giving good service; (c) infrastructure is essential; and, (d) service is a strategic
issue. How does this case illustrate each of these points?
5. Is Starbucks’ strategy internally consistent? Are there some elements of the strategy that make excellent customer service
more difficult? Does Day’s plan address the key customer service issues? Do you think it will solve the problem?
Case: Dell Online (HBS 9-598-116)
1. Dell’s direct distribution model accounts for about 20% of US sales, with the remainder being sold through various non-
direct channels (see Table B). Consider the unique needs and requirements (the “whole product”) of each of the four major

Dr. Joseph C. Picken 4

Revised: June 23, 2005
Printed: September 22, 2005
 MKT 6380
ENTREPRENEURIAL MARKETING

target customers for PCs: large corporations, governments, SME’s and consumers (home computing). Develop a table that
compares and contrasts the needs of these markets and the relative advantages and disadvantages of each of the four
distribution channel alternatives in addressing these needs.
2. How does the direct model challenge industry conventions? Customer purchase conventions? Given the apparent cost
advantages of the direct model, why haven’t the other major players (Compaq, Packard-Bell, IBM, HP and Gateway)
embraced this channel? Why have those who have tried (Compaq and Gateway) struggled with implementation?
3. Does direct distribution over the Internet represent a fifth distribution channel alternative? It appears that Dell has made the
move with relative ease. How did Dell address the “whole product” needs of the various market segments in their online
offering? Why have the other major competitors struggled in their attempts to emulate Dell’s online channel success?
Case: Warner-Lambert Ireland: Niconol (HBS 9-593-008)
1. The decision to include 14 Niconol patches in each consumer package has been made – but as a compromise with marketers
in Western Europe. Does this decision make sense for the initial launch in Ireland? What are the pros and cons of that
decision?
2. Davidow would consider the Niconol patch a “device”. What other elements are required to deliver the “complete product”?
Can the delivery of the complete product be controlled by Warner-Lambert Ireland (WLI)? What issues are raised? Who
else is involved? Are the incentives of the other parties aligned with those of WLI?
3. How important do you think the support package is to the ultimate success of Niconol? How would you price and deliver
that package? What opportunities or constraints are created by the separate delivery and pricing of the support package?
4. Pricing appears to be a major issue. How would you price Niconol (consider consumer expectations, cost and margin goals,
various competitive benchmarks, value in use, and other factors in your analysis)?
5. Recommend an initial launch strategy for Niconol in a 14 unit package, addressing the essential elements of the complete
product, pricing and delivery strategies, and communications and promotional strategies. Justify your recommendation as
compared to alternative approaches.
Case: Documentum, Inc. (HBS 9-502-026)
1. Where would you place Documentum, Inc. along the Technology Adoption Life Cycle? Do they currently have a complete
product? If not, what is missing?
2. From the company’s perspective, what are the pros and cons of a horizontal market strategy? Of a vertical market strategy?
3. If the company decides to pursue a vertical market strategy, which of the five vertical market segments makes the most
sense for Documentum? Consider at least three perspectives: the ability to leverage current customers as references; the
additional effort required to develop a complete solution; and, the ability to leverage an initial success into adjacent market
segments (bowling alley strategy). Explain and justify your recommendation.
4. How can Documentum use partnerships to leverage a complete solution for their customers? Can the right partnerships
allow them to successfully pursue multiple markets simultaneously (moving toward a horizontal market strategy)?
5. How should Miller respond to the prospective opportunity with Marsh & McClennan? Outline the pros and cons of pursuing
this opportunity. Consider both short term and long term implications.
Case: Mathsoft, Inc. (A) (HBS 9-593-094)
1. Analyze Mathsoft’s current sales and marketing approach (consider pricing, sales, distribution. advertising and sales
promotion). What is working? Where are they falling short? Are the various elements of the marketing mix complementary
or are they conflicting?
2. Does Mathsoft have a coherent and consistent marketing communications strategy? Do each of the elements of the
marketing mix work together and reinforce each other? How would you recommend that the company improve the
productivity of its marketing mix (without spending any more money)?
3. Table 3 suggests that the 30,000 MathCad units sold to date are scattered across more than 1000 large customers – a
relatively low penetration rate suggesting a “try it, you’ll like it” selling approach – or perhaps a failure to “get the word
out” to a sufficient number of customers.
4. Is Mathsoft’s product development strategy part of the problem? Are they delivering a “device” or a “complete product”? To
what extent have specific customer requirements been taken into account in product design and development?
5. How might the ideas of Guerilla Marketing, Viral Marketing or Buzz Marketing be used to positive effect?
6. What changes in strategy would you recommend to help Mathsoft “cross the chasm” into the mainstream marketplace?
Case: The Browser Wars, 1994-1998 (HBS 9-798-094)
In Moore’s introduction to Inside the Tornado, he relates the story of the first Internet tornado, in which “Netscape Navigator
was virtually a gorilla at birth, skyrocketing to more than 80 percent market share in the hypergrowth market”. He then
describes how Microsoft undermined Netscape’s advantage and emerged as the winner.
1. Was the hypergrowth of the Internet browser market a true “tornado”? Did it fit the patterns described in Moore’s Ch.4?
2. Analyze Netscape’s strategy in terms of the “lessons” summarized in Ch. 4. What did they do right? What mistakes were
made?

Dr. Joseph C. Picken 5

Revised: June 23, 2005
Printed: September 22, 2005
 MKT 6380
ENTREPRENEURIAL MARKETING

3. Analyze Microsoft’s strategy in terms of the “lessons” summarized in Ch. 4. How did they undermine Netscape’s dominant
position?
4. What additional lessons would you include in the next revision of Moore’s book, based on the Browser Wars?
Case: Amazon.com – 2002 (HBS 9-803-098)
1. In many ways, Amazon is the prototypical Internet marketing company. Trace the evolution of the company’s strategy and
business model from its founding in 1995 to the end of the case in 2002. How has the model evolved? What has remained
the same? What changed in response to market demands? What changed to accommodate shifts in strategy?
2. Does Amazon’s growth fit the “Tornado” model? How? In what ways is it different? Did Amazon trigger the start of the
online retailing tornado, or is it just taking advantage of the phenomenal growth of the Internet?
3. What are the common characteristics of the products sold by Amazon in the retail model? In the marketplace model? What
are the differences? Do you see potential problems in combining the two in the single store model? What are the
implications?
4. Can Amazon continue to expand its categories indefinitely? Does it make sense to do so? What are the logical limits to the
company’s growth? Are there product categories that cannot effectively be sold online? Why?
5. Will competition from eBay ultimately stop Amazon in its tracks? Why?
Case: First USA and Internet Marketing (9-500-043)
1. Evaluate the Internet as a distribution channel for First USA. What are the advantages/disadvantages of this channel as
compared to its traditional channels (direct mail, telemarketing, event marketing)? Consider separately the implications for
acquisition and portfolio marketing.
2. How important is the role of a “trusted agent” in First USA’s current use of the Internet channel? How important is the
company’s data mining capability?
3. How will the company’s use of the Internet channel change in the planned rollout of Wingspanbank.com?
4. Taking into account the information contained in this case, Dell Online and Amazon.com, evaluate the Internet as a
distribution channel. What are the strengths and limitations of this channel as compared to traditional distribution channels.
How do differences in the nature of the product/service offered, the level of customer interaction/customization required,
and the level of aftermarket support affect the suitability of the channel?
Case: CardioThoracic Systems (HBS 9-899-281)
1. What does the disparity in the initial market valuations of the IPOs of Heartport and CPT, respectively suggest about the
value of reputation, image and effective public relations?
2. Can you recommend a lower-cost way to inform the doctors about the new procedure and pre-qualify the surgeons who
actually attend the demonstrations in order to increase the cost-effectiveness and productivity of the training sessions?
3. It appears that the benefits of the beating heart procedure do not translate into factors that the heart surgeons are concerned
with. Are there other players who would be more interested in the benefits and cost savings (patients, hospital
administrators, third party payers)? Could CTS get these interested parties to influence the cardiac surgeons to adopt the new
procedure? How could CTS modify their approach to leverage this strategy?
4. How might the ideas of Guerilla Marketing, Viral Marketing or Buzz Marketing be used to positive effect?
5. If CTS has achieved a 50% market share, despite being significantly under-resourced relative to some of its larger
competitors, it must be doing something right. Or is it? Shouldn’t the marketplace “gorilla” be concerned about the “#1
Chimp” in second place?
6. It is not clear that all of the identified competitors (including CTS) offer a complete solution. Does a partnering strategy
(CTS with one of the major medical device companies) make sense to gain access to their significantly greater credibility,
brand image and marketing clout? How? Or could you pursue an exit strategy by selling out to one of the majors? Why
might this make sense?

NEW VENTURE MARKETING PLAN

The group project for this course will be the development of a new venture marketing plan. Guidelines
and topic outlines are posted in a special “Marketing Plan” section of WebCT. Each group will be
responsible for the following:
§ Selection of a topic (a new venture product/service idea). A number of topic suggestions are posted on
WebCT. You may choose one of these (first come, first served), or may propose a topic of your own
(subject to approval). Criteria for topic selection should be: (a) a topic that is of interest to your group; (b) a
new product/service idea not currently established in the marketplace; (c) of sufficient rigor and complexity
to present an appropriate challenge for the group.
§ Development of a New Venture Marketing Plan proposal (WA-3 due September 22, 2005). Guidelines for
the proposal are posted on WebCT.

Dr. Joseph C. Picken 6

Revised: June 23, 2005
Printed: September 22, 2005
 MKT 6380
ENTREPRENEURIAL MARKETING

§ Preparation and submission of a complete and comprehensive New Venture Marketing Plan (sugges ted
content outline posted on WebCT). The New Venture Marketing Plan will be submitted as WA-9 on
December 1, 2005.
§ Preparing and presenting to the class a 15 minute presentation of the New Venture Marketing Plan on
December 1, 2005. This will be a formal presentation and will be graded; use of MS Powerpoint is
recommended.
§ Evaluation criteria for the New Venture Marketing Plan are posted on WebCT.
These requirements will be further detailed and discussed in class during the first two weeks of the
course.

COURSE OUTLINE

Session/Date Topic Assignment

1 The Challenge of Entrepreneurial Marketing
8/18/05 Readings:
§ Chaston: Entrepreneurial Marketing: 1-18, 170-187
§ Moore: Inside the Tornado: Introduction
2 Understanding the Context: The Technology Adoption Life Cycle; Market Structures
8/25/05 Readings:
§ Davidow: Marketing High Technology: Introduction; 1-11
§ Moore: Inside the Tornado: 3-26, 201-217
3 Entrepreneurial Marketing: Challenging Conventions WA#1
9/1/05 § Chaston: Entrepreneurial Marketing: 19-58; 129-151 (Individual)
Case Study: XM Satellite Radio (A) (HBS 9-504-009) Outline Form
(4-5 pp)
4 Defining the Target: Segmentation, Positioning (lecture based on Moore: Crossing the WILD
9/8/05 Chasm: 107-161) CARD #1
Readings:
§ Davidow: Marketing High Technology: 12-36
§ Moore: Inside the Tornado: 27-61
Case Study: Trexel (HBS 9-899-101)
5 Defining the Product: The Whole Product; Value Proposition WA#2
9/15/05 Readings: (Group)
§ Chaston: Entrepreneurial Marketing: 102-128 (4-5 pp)
§ Davidow: Marketing High Technology: 37-52, 133-146
Case Study: net.Genesis,Inc. (HBS 9-500-009)
6 The Role of Services in Entrepreneurial Marketing WA#3
9/22/05 Readings: Project
§ Chaston: Entrepreneurial Marketing: 188-209 Proposal:
§ Davidow: Marketing High Technology: 53-70 New Venture
Case Study: Starbucks: Delivering Customer Service (HBS 9-504-016) Marketing Plan
7 Reaching the Customer: Channel Choices WILD
9/29/05 Readings: CARD #2
§ Davidow: Marketing High Technology: 71-88
§ Chaston: Entrepreneurial Marketing: 93-101
Case Study: Dell Online (HBS 9-598-116)

Dr. Joseph C. Picken 7

Revised: June 23, 2005
Printed: September 22, 2005
 MKT 6380
ENTREPRENEURIAL MARKETING

8 Pricing: Choices and Strategies WA#4

10/6/05 Readings: (Individual)
§ Davidow: Marketing High Technology: 102-117, 184-185 Outline Form
§ Chaston: Entrepreneurial Marketing: 81-92 (4-5 pp)
Case Study: Warner-Lambert Ireland: Niconol (HBS 9-593-008)
9 Marketing Strategy: Initial Launch and Product Rollout WILD
10/13/05 Readings: CARD # 3
§ Moore: Inside the Tornado: 13-61 (review); 153-174
§ Moore: Crossing the Chasm: 63-71, 89-106 (handout)
§ Davidow: Marketing High Technology: 179-183
Case Study: Documentum, Inc. (HBS 9-502-026)
10 Creating Awareness: Advertising, Promotion and Public Relations WA#5
10/20/05 Readings: (Group)
§ Chaston: Entrepreneurial Marketing: 59-80 (4-5 pp)
§ Davidow: Marketing High Technology: 89-101
Case Study: Mathsoft, Inc. (A) (HBS 9-593-094)
11 Marketing Strategy: Driving for Market Leadership WILD
10/27/05 Readings: CARD #4
§ Moore: Inside the Tornado: 63-100, 175-200
Case Study: The Browser Wars, 1994-1998 (HBS 9-798-094)
12 Marketing Strategy: Sustaining a Leadership Position WA#6
11/3/05 Readings: (Individual)
§ Moore: Inside the Tornado: 101-149 (4-5 pp)
§ Chaston: Entrepreneurial Marketing: 152-169
Case Study: Amazon.com – 2002 (HBS 9-803-098)
13 Entrepreneurial Marketing: Exploiting the Internet WILD
11/10/05 Readings: CARD #5
§ Chaston: Entrepreneurial Marketing: 73-76
Case Study: First USA and Internet Marketing (HBS 9-500-043)
14 Building Strong Brands and Strong Entrepreneurial Companies WA#7
11/17/05 Readings: (Group)
§ Davidow: Marketing High Technology: 118-132, 147-178 Outline Form
§ Chaston: Entrepreneurial Marketing: 229-251 (4-5 pp)
§ Moore: Inside the Tornado: 219-238
Case Study: CardioThoracic Systems (HBS 9-899-281)
15 Group Project: New Venture Marketing Plan – Paper & Presentation WA#9
12/1/05 (Group)
Essay Form
(18-20 pp)

Dr. Joseph C. Picken 8

Revised: June 23, 2005
Printed: September 22, 2005
 MKT 6380
ENTREPRENEURIAL MARKETING

PEER EVALUATION FORM

INSTRUCTIONS
The peer evaluation process is intended to provide group members with an opportunity to contribute to the evaluation of
the performance of your team members on group activities. On the form below, you may rate the performance and
contributions of your team members (including yourself) in the preparation of the group assignments. Instructions
follow:
1. Enter the names of your group members (alphabetically by last name). Include yourself.
2. Evaluate each assignment separately. Each team member will begin with 100 points on each assignment.
3. You may reallocate the total number of points among team members within a range of 80 to 120 points for each individual,
based on their contributions to t he group effort on that assignment.
4. The total number of points allocated on any single assignment must equal 100 times the number of members of the team. If
you have four members on the team, the total for each column should be equal to 400.
5. I will calculate an overall assessment as a weighted average of the individual ratings, using the percentage weights
indicated below.
Please sign the evaluation, place it in a sealed envelope, and turn it in with your final group assignment on December 1st .

PEER EVALUATION
WA-2 WA-5 WA-7 Wild Card WA-9
Group Member (list alphabetically) 9/15/05 10/20/05 11/17/05 As assigned 12/1/05
15% 15% 15% 20% 35%
1

Total

COMMENTS
Group
Member Comments (please support and justify any assessment below 90% or above 110%) Continue on reverse if necessary.
1

Signature : ____________________________________
Print Name: ____________________________________
Dr. Joseph C. Picken 9
Revised: June 23, 2005
Printed: September 22, 2005