Chat with us, powered by LiveChat question |




Professors Miranda Goode and Emily Moscato wrote this case solely to provide material for class discussion. The authors do not
intend to illustrate either effective or ineffective handling of a managerial situation. The authors may have disguised certain names
and other identifying information to protect confidentiality.

This publication may not be transmitted, photocopied, digitized, or otherwise reproduced in any form or by any means without the
permission of the copyright holder. Reproduction of this material is not covered under authorization by any reproduction rights
organization. To order copies or request permission to reproduce materials, contact Ivey Publishing, Ivey Business School, Western
University, London, Ontario, Canada, N6G 0N1; (t) 519.661.3208; (e) [email protected]; Our goal is to publish
materials of the highest quality; submit any errata to [email protected]

Copyright © 2020, Ivey Business School Foundation Version: 2020-08-24

Mohammed Ashour, chief executive officer (CEO) and co-founder of Aspire Food Group (Aspire), was in
Boston to attend the 2017 Forbes 30 Under 30 event and had a half-hour coffee meeting with a colleague
on his calendar. He was meeting with Greg Sewitz, co-CEO and co-founder of the protein bar company
Exo, who had also made the Forbes list in 2016. Aspire and Exo were in the same small but growing sector
of the food industry: edible insects. Still in its infancy in North America, the edible insect market involved
players who were open and willing to share information. Because the idea of insects as food was not the
easiest concept to sell to Western palates, those in the business knew that the category as a whole needed
promotion and acceptance in order for their companies to succeed.

The meeting with Sewitz was not what Ashour had expected: during a two-hour walk around downtown
Boston, Ashour learned about an opportunity to acquire Exo, makers of cricket-based protein bars.
Although Exo was growing at a good pace, its board had decided to find a buyer who would focus on
developing the consumer packaged goods side of the business. Aspire’s own consumer brand, Aketta, did
not have the same brand recognition as Exo, and Ashour saw the acquisition as a two-for-one deal that
offered both Exo’s brand equity and its development of a

MKT 5125: Marketing Decision Making/ Case Analysis Framework

Dr. Art Weinstein, September 2016 (revised)

PACADI Approach

Marketing Decision Making/ How to Do Case Analysis

Situation analysis (including SWOT), initial market research – generally, this is the starting point but given the abbreviated strategic analysis, we will

skip this step *


roblem definition – major challenge or key opportunity (while there may be more than one, focus on the most important one for the purpose of this analysis)


lternatives – identification and discussion of alternative decisions to address problem definition (generally 3-5 alternatives)


riteria – list of key factors, rationale, and weights that is used in the analysis and impacts how the decision is made


nalysis – how you made your decision (brief analysis of each of the alternatives)


ecision – your proposed solution to the problem (why the decision made is the best fit for the organization based on above steps)


mplementation plan – recommendations, expected competitive reaction, budget, actions, timetable, metrics, etc.

*For the purposes of case studies — where the facts are given to us — we will not conduct a formal situation analysis which is a critical first step. In reality,
marketers must know their market! Your task is to provide an
approximate 2-3 page, single-spaced PACADI critique (there is a 3 page maximum, excluding appendices; a single page will not get it done). Note: any figures or tables shown in an appendix should be original material or analysis not an exhibit extracted from the case. Further guidelines – see case rubric on p. 14 of the syllabus.

PACADI Analysis

Jamall Singleton

Nova Southeastern University

Professor Weinstein

MKT 5125


PACADI Analysis

PACADI is very important in improving the students’ learning skills by aiding them in understanding the solving of business problems. The students are facilitated to understand how to make the decisions and develop alternative strategies for the products. The decision-making process in any business is very critical since it is the idea that breaks down the silo and improves the performance of the business. Marketers have always had to build a brand based on the market’s demand. The plan also helps the companies earn customers’ loyalty and ensures that the business prospers. The study will be based on the general PACADI critique and the required analysis.

Problem Definition

The problem to be included in the study should include the basic issues which affect the organization. The problem definition can be based on the questions and other issues which affect the organization. The problem definition defines the main challenge affecting the organization (Kiker et al., 2005). The problem can also be identified as an opportunity the organization is willing to achieve within a stipulated time. The problem should be based on the organization’s decisions to ensure its success.

Alternatives in Decision Making

The alternatives in the decision-making do not include a single ideology that includes the set of actions. The alternatives include elements that provide a comprehensive approach to the decision situation. The alternatives selected for the study should always be based on the business’s goals and objectives. The alternatives should also match the current assessment of the strengths associated with the business (Velasquez & Hester, 2013). The opportunities available in the market should also be associated with the alternatives provided to ensure the organization’s success (Kiker et al., 2005). The product should be able to be made efficient and effective. The alternatives should always be a close solution to the problem indicated in the analysis.

Creating alternative solutions includes initially postponing the evaluation of the alternatives (Velasquez & Hester, 2013). The involved individuals are included in generating the alternatives in an organization. The alternatives should be specified as consistent with the goals presented by the organizations. The alternatives are presented to facilitate the organization’s success by achieving the set goals. The alternatives sought should be ideas that may be used to solve the problem within the organization.


The criteria in decision-making include the




Criteria (Possible Points)




Very Good



Problem (5)
Alternatives (5)

Criteria (10)


Does not provide an analysis of

P-A-C (0)

Provides a limited analysis of

P-A-C (14)

Provides a basic analysis of



Provides a comprehensive analysis of

P-A-C (18)

Provides a well written, comprehensive and insightful analysis of

P-A-C (20)

Analysis (15)
Decision (5)


Does not provide a strategic analysis (0)

Provides a limited strategic analysis (14)

Provides a basic strategic analysis (16)

Provides a comprehensive strategic analysis based on relevant data (18)

Provides a well written, comprehensive, data-based, and insightful strategic analysis (20)



Does not provide an implementation plan (0)

Provides a limited implementation plan (7)

Provides an implementation plan (8.25)

Provides a thoughtful and reasonable implementation plan (9)

Provides a well written, in-depth, and strategically sound implementation plan (10)


(50 points max.)

error: Content is protected !!