GB530 Unit 5 Positioning Statement Example

Two Perceptual Maps and One Sentence: A Unit 5 Positioning Statement for an Independent Roof Survey Firm

[Student Name]

Purdue University Global

GB530: Marketing Management

Unit 5 Positioning Statement

[Instructor Name]

[Date]

The firm, its competitors, the buyer ratings and every figure are composite and illustrative; the sources cited are real.

The Data

In the Unit 3 interviews and a follow-up call with thirteen more asset and facility managers, thirty-one buyers rated five roof-checking options on several seven-point scales, where 7 is the most favorable. The five options were contractor free inspections, a national photo-only drone network, the owner's own facility staff walking the roof, core-cutting roofing consultants and Scioto Thermal Imaging.

Exhibit 1: The First Map

The first map plots independence from repair sales on the horizontal axis against depth of evidence below the membrane on the vertical axis, using mean ratings:

Contractor free inspections: independence about 2.1; depth about 3.0.

Photo-only drone network: independence about 5.2; depth about 1.8.

Facility staff walks: independence about 6.5; depth about 1.5.

Core-cutting consultants: independence about 6.1; depth about 6.0.

Scioto Thermal Imaging: independence about 5.9; depth about 5.6.

On this map Scioto sits close to the consultants in the upper right, the most favorable quadrant. That is reassuring, since buyers see the firm as independent and thorough, but it gives no position of its own. A buyer who sees the two as similar will choose the established consultant, or the cheaper option, without a reason to prefer Scioto.

On the dimensions buyers named first, the firm looks like a slightly weaker version of the consultants, which is a place to compete on price rather than a position.

Exhibit 2: The Second Map

Interviews suggested two further dimensions that buyers care about but had not been asked to rate: how much of the roof the evidence covers, and how fast and cheaply it arrives. The second map plots coverage of the whole roof against cost and time to results.

Core-cutting consultants: coverage about 3.0, since cores sample a few dozen points; cost about six cents a square foot; results in about fifteen days.

Photo-only drone network: coverage about 5.8 for the surface, but nothing beneath it; cost about one cent; results in about two days.

Contractor free inspections: coverage about 3.4; no direct cost; results in about a week, usually with a replacement proposal attached.

Facility staff walks: coverage about 3.9; no outside cost; results whenever staff file a note.

Scioto Thermal Imaging: coverage about 6.4, since the thermal map covers every square foot and cores confirm it; cost about 3.2 cents; results in about four days.

On this map Scioto stands apart: no other option combines whole-roof coverage below the membrane with moderate cost and fast results. The consultants are slower and more expensive and sample only part of the roof; the photo network is fast and cheap but cannot see wet insulation.

The Gap and Its Value

The gap is whole-roof moisture evidence, verified, at about half a consultant's cost and in under a week, from a firm that does not sell repairs. Anderson et al. (2006) argue that business customers respond best to a value proposition that focuses on the one or two points of difference that matter most to them, stated in terms they can measure. For asset managers, the measurable points are coverage, cost and time.

The Positioning Statement

For asset managers of industrial and logistics portfolios who must document roof condition for insurers and lenders, Scioto Thermal Imaging is the independent roof moisture survey that maps wet insulation across every square foot of a roof, verified by cores, at about half the cost of core-cutting consultants and with results in four days, because it sells no repairs.

Testing the Statement

Ries and Trout (2001) argue that a position must be simple, credible and different from what competitors already own in buyers' minds. The statement passes each test.

Simple: it names one buyer, one benefit and one reason.

Credible: each claim can be shown with a sample report, a price and a delivery record.

Different: consultants own depth, the photo network owns speed and price, contractors own convenience; no one owns whole-roof evidence at moderate cost.

What the Statement Requires of the Firm

The position is credible only if the firm stops selling through roofing contractors, as the Unit 1 post argued. It also requires consistent delivery in four days, which depends on crew scheduling and weather, and reports clear enough for asset managers to use with insurers. Kotler and Keller (2016) note that a positioning statement commits the whole marketing mix, and the product, price and channel units that follow must deliver this one.

Limits

Thirty-one buyers is a small sample drawn largely from the firm's own contacts. The second map's dimensions came from interviews after the first ratings, so they should be measured directly in a larger survey before the statement is used in advertising. The four-day promise should also be checked against a full season of delivery records, since rain and wind can delay flights for days at a time.

References

Anderson, J. C., Narus, J. A., & van Rossum, W. (2006). Customer value propositions in business markets. Harvard Business Review, 84(3), 90-99.

Kotler, P., & Keller, K. L. (2016). Marketing management (15th ed.). Pearson.

Ries, A., & Trout, J. (2001). Positioning: The battle for your mind (20th anniversary ed.). McGraw-Hill.