What do Yao Ming, LeBron James, and Earl R. Dean have in common?The first two are professional basketball stars, of course, butwho?s Earl R. Dean? He happens to be the person who designedCoca-Cola?s familiar ?contour bottle,? the shapely container with amiddle diameter that?s larger than its base. That was back in 1915.How do Yao and LeBron fit in, you ask? They too designed Coca-Colabottles, but more recently, in 2008 to be exact. Now, before youstart thinking that only celebrities such as Yao, LeBron, and thenow-departed Earl get to do such cool things, you too could havedesigned your own bottle. In fact, in conjunction with the OlympicGames in Beijing and Vancouver, tens of thousands of people fromaround the world visited Coca-Cola?s Web site, where, with the aidof a drawing application, they put stunningly beautiful finishingtouches on classic Coke bottles.

Why did Coke bother with this? The answer is simple: Coca-Colahas been in the process of deciding on a new bottle design and theystand to get great ideas from the submissions. And because visitorsto the site are asked to vote on the various designs submitted,company officials can get a good sense of what consumers like.

But designs by consumers were only one source of inspiration.The head of Coca-Cola?s design team was charged with creating aconsistent new look for the company?s products and needed as muchinput as possible. That was the same situation a century ago, whenCoca-Cola officials turned to its bottle suppliers for suggestions.They wanted a bottle that people enjoyed using and that was soeasily recognizable that it could be identified if felt in thedark, or even if it were broken into pieces. That?s when our hero,Earl R. Dean, bottle designer at the Root Glass Company, came upwith the winning deign, earning him a prize of a lifetime job withthe company.

Today, with 450 different brands, more than 300 different modelsof vending machines, and different design standards being usedthroughout the world, the design task is a bit larger in scope. Butlike a century ago, clear criteria are being used to specifyexactly what the company is trying to achieve. Today?s design teamidentified three considerations. The design had to identify thebrand clearly; it should create a good experience for the user; andthe container should be made from environmentally friendlymaterials. Interestingly, the first two criteria remained unchangedfrom 100 years ago.

With these considerations in mind, and with the Root GlassCompany long gone, the job was turned over to design staff at thebranding and packaging firm Turner Duckworth. Their new design wasan aluminum contour bottle in traditional Coke red with the whitescript logo wrapped prominently around the middle. It was a sexier,updated version of Mr. Dean?s Coke bottle?immediately recognizablebut up-to-date. And being made of aluminum instead of glass, thecontainer feels colder when held, is lighter to ship, is much lessexpensive to produce, and is eco-friendly. In fact, the bottle ismade of recycled aluminum that, itself, can be recycled. So highlyregarded was the design that it won the prestigious Grand Prix atthe Cannes Lions advertising festival.

Although this bottle is in only limited use, such as in a fewupscale clubs, its success has inspired Coca-Cola to redesign theremaining products in the company?s vast portfolio. As overwhelmingas this may seem, with a consistent look and design strategy toguide them, these decisions promise to be a little lesschallenging. Too bad Earl R. Dean isn?t here to help this timearound.

Figure 10.1

1. How do you think the analytical model of decision making (seeFigure 10.1, page 335) might have been applied by Coca-Cola whendesigning new bottles? What specific tasks might have been done ateach step in the process?

2. What errors or biases might have contributed toless-than-perfect decisions in this case? How might they have beenovercome?

Transcribed Image Text:

Problem Solved If a solution is not found (e.g., funds still not available) 8. Follow up If a solution is found (e.g., funds available) 7. Implement choice (e.g., do I now have sufficient funds?) (e.g., raise prices slightly and sell excess inventory) 1. Identify the problem 6. Make a choice (e.g., insufficient funds to meet payroll obligations) (e.g., decide to raise prices slightly and sell excess inventory) 2. Define objectives (e.g., increase cash flow) 3. Make a predecision (e.g., decide to solve this problem alone) 4. Generate alternatives (e.g., raise prices, lay off workers, liquidate equipment, etc.) 5. Evaluate alternatives (e.g., higher prices may lower sales, laying off workers will slow production) Problem Solved If a solution is not found (e.g., funds still not available) 8. Follow up If a solution is found (e.g., funds available) 7. Implement choice (e.g., do I now have sufficient funds?) (e.g., raise prices slightly and sell excess inventory) 1. Identify the problem 6. Make a choice (e.g., insufficient funds to meet payroll obligations) (e.g., decide to raise prices slightly and sell excess inventory) 2. Define objectives (e.g., increase cash flow) 3. Make a predecision (e.g., decide to solve this problem alone) 4. Generate alternatives (e.g., raise prices, lay off workers, liquidate equipment, etc.) 5. Evaluate alternatives (e.g., higher prices may lower sales, laying off workers will slow production)

Answer rating: 100% (QA)

SOLUTION log 273 log 55 ... View the full answer