Pepsi Refresh Project case study In 2010, the Pepsi Co. launched a campaign that most would think was very inspirational. The campaign involved consumers from all over the country applying for grants ranging from $5,000 to $250,000. Each consumer that applied for a grant had to come up with an idea that would help the world. Each idea could fall under six areas: health, arts and culture, food and shelter, the planet and neighborhoods and education. In total, for every application that was submitted Pepsi Co. said they were going to give $20 million dollars in grants to organizations and individuals that had ideas to make (refresh) the world a better place. Consumers would go onto the refresheverything.com website and vote for their favorite ideas — the winners received the grants from Pepsi. The entire goal of the campaign was to build awareness and cultivate a long-term relationship with consumers. Shiv Singh, head of digital for PepsiCo Beverages America said, “This (campaign) was using brand dollars with the belief that when you use these brand dollars to have consumers share ideas to change the world, the consumers will win, the brand will win, and the community will win. That was a big bet. No one has done it on this scale before.” The objectives of the campaign were to raise awareness and interest in the Pepsi Refresh Project/position Pepsi as the optimistic catalyst for idea creation with consistency and alignment of program messages across all media channel, generate a steady stream of national, local and online media buzz to support business and brand goals and drive Americans to RefreshEverything.com to register and submit their ideas or vote and promote ideas that they care about. Pepsi hoped to achieve this through their campaign’s complex strategic planning. The strategies included creating intellectual capital around “where ideas come from”, positioning Pepsi as a credible motivator to empower the everyday American to be the next social entrepreneur, casting a national spotlight on the implementation of ideas for refreshing change by announcing the diversion of funds to implement the Project, collaborating with employees, bottling and retail partners to generate local news angles, drive awareness, raising awareness and increase participation at grassroots level through Hispanic and English language press, promoting RefreshEverything.com as the online destination, encouraging individuals to submit ideas and vote, encourage online engagement with the Project on Facebook or on Twitter and developing national partnerships to raise broad awareness of the Project to tell stories of Project impact and reach. Singh also said the project allowed the company to understand and learn the priorities of its customers. “There have been 120,000 ideas submitted,” he said. “It gives us a strong sense of what matters to them and what is exciting to them.” The target audiences for the Pepsi Refresh Project were Millennials, Gen Y. and Boomer men and women. Millennials are people reaching young adulthood around the year 2000 — teenagers. Gen. Y is the generation of people boring during the 1980s and early 1900s — 20 to 30 year olds. Boomers are people born during the baby boom — approximately 75 years old. These groups of people believe positive change is very important to them, therefore Pepsi tried to target them the most. When creating Pepsi Refresh, the Pepsi Company was faced with the challenge of finding a way to give to charity that today’s consumers would actually show an interest in. The Holmes Report, a Public Relations news circle, gave statistics that showed why Pepsi Refresh was an initial success. 84% of consumers would like to select their own charitable causes, and 83% of them want the causes to be something that they feel needs addressed. 94% of these consumers said that optimism was the key to a good idea, and 66% stated that they would like to see their ideas come to life. Based on the material listed above, Pepsi came up with the Pepsi Refresh Project, which brings all of these stats together into one program. In order to spread the word, Pepsi would often do things called “Refresh Challenges” in which they worked with celebrities who had come up with their own ideas to spread the word. Pepsi signed contracts with the NFL, the MLB, the U.S. Men’s National Team, and NASCAR. Out of all of these athletic organizations, certain stars in the sport were told to create a challenge. People could then vote on these challenges and pick their favorite athlete to win. The New Orleans Saints’ quarterback Drew Brees won, and Pepsi gave $100,000 grant to benefit Hope Lodge, a New Orleans’ based center that gives cancer patients rooms for them and their caregivers. Because of these actions, Pepsi was one of the most talked about brands at the 2010 Super Bowl, despite the fact that they pulled their advertisements in order to save money for the Pepsi Refresh Project. Pepsi’s image improved even more when in July of that same year, the soda company announced that it would give $1.3 million in grants to help clean up the Horizon Gulf Oil Spill in Texas, Louisiana, Florida, Mississippi, and Alabama. At this point, the Refresh Project was going well, and the recognition for Pepsi was beginning to grow. The initial results of the Pepsi Refresh Project were great. The campaign launched in January of 2010, and by May 2011 it had funded over 12,000 projects and had more than 76 million votes on the multiple projects listed on the website. As far as the Pepsi Refresh Project gaining awareness and interest from the public, at its peak, 37% of Americans were aware of the project, and of those 37%, 25% had the proper knowledge of what the project was all about. Pepsi had certainly generated a good amount of media buzz, greatly surpassing the impression the campaign had hoped to make. There were 3 billion audience impressions in the first 8 months. By May 2011, there were more than 140,000 tweets on the topic. Around this same time, the “likes” on Pepsi’s Facebook page had gone up by 600% since the start of the campaign, with 2 million “likers.” Now, five and a half years after the launch of the campaign, Pepsi has over 33 million “likes.” By creating the interactive website refresheverything.com, Pepsi was able to gain millennials trust, favorability, and intent to buy. In the first 11 months of the campaign, 18 million people visited refresheverything.com. Overall, Pepsi was a success. The media ate up the Refresh Everything Project, praising Pepsi for its good deeds. However, on January 6, 2011, The New York Times published an investigation on the project. Many members of the contest were accused, by other participants of the contest, of cheating the system and getting more votes than they deserved. Participants in the contest said that Pepsi would dodge their calls and emails, skirting around the complaints and pretending that nothing was wrong. Pepsi denied these claims, saying that they had systems in place that could seek out and destroy fraudulent activity. Pepsi also stated that they would complete an investigation and act on it accordingly. By the end of January 2011, Pepsi capped all of its grants at $50,000, and decided to focus on the Arts and Education category of the contest. In February, Pepsi advertised in the Superbowl. In March 2011, when Diet Coke passed Pepsi as being the number 2 beverage, Pepsi began to get a lot of criticism that the Refresh Project was not driving any sales. By December of 2011, the project had died out, and the last round of voting occurred. In March of 2012, refresheverything.com went blank. Overall, Pepsi Refresh did a very good thing not only for communities, but also for the Pepsi brand. Pepsi was one of the first companies to be interactive with its consumers over social media, and today almost every company takes this approach. Of course there was going to be a voting scandal. Allison Fine, an expert on non-profit social media, told the New York Times “I don’t think I’ve heard about any of these contests where gaming isn’t an issue.” And, like everything in this fast-paced world, the program’s popularity died out and it came to an end. At least Pepsi was doing a good thing for non-profits while Refresh Everything was still popular. Pepsi managed to address a problem and sell a product at the same time. While giving grants to organizations that worked for the greater good of the community, Pepsi Refresh was able to put the Pepsi Company in the social spotlight, branding itself to be a drink that sparks innovation and makes the common person an entrepreneur. Pepsi’s sales went up drastically during this time. In 2010, Pepsi’s revenue was at about $45 billion, and by 2012, it had reached $65 billion. Before Pepsi Refresh, Pepsico’s revenue had sat stagnant at $45 billion since 2008. The Pepsi Refresh campaign was an excellent idea that strived to make those who learned about it envision Pepsi in a positive manner. In giving back to the community, Pepsi attempted to instill a positive message in the mind of those who knew about the Refresh Project. Pepsi wanted to make people believe that they were a charitable company. When Pepsi started this project they wanted to convince everyone who already knew the name “Pepsi” that the company was one that gives back to others rather than just another company, such as Coke, that takes your money for their own benefit. The focus of the Pepsi Refresh campaign was to give Pepsi a better image in the community while building the Pepsi brand at the same time. This was a real life example of branding, which is a technique used to promote a company in a positive way towards the audience or consumer. Pepsi also wanted people to have a say in who won the Refresh contest, so they let the common person vote and choose the winner. This tactic made people think that since they had a say in who would win, they were a vital part of the company, even though they were not actually associated in any way. The contest was also appealing because people could get rewarded with money for their non-profit if their idea was the best and it won that round of the contest. Overall, the focus of the Pepsi Refresh project was an attempt to have the image of the Pepsi brand improved in a way that would attract more people to buy their products rather than opponents’ products. The Pepsi Refresh project as a whole brought a lot of positive and negative attention to the company itself. Although they were trying to do a good thing and help people share their ideas,the flaws in the system concerning voting had a lasting impact on the entire campaign and gave the company bad press. The Pepsi Refresh Project was revolutionary in many ways. Not only did it take charity to a whole new level, but it also brought social media into the picture as a way for producers to interact with consumers. The Pepsi Refresh Project did a great service for the many non-profits and the people that they help, as well as for the branding of PepsiCo. Although the Pepsi Refresh Project had to come to an end, the project was able to quench the thirst of many needy people MSPM 6140: Enterprise and Project Risk Management Pepsi Refresh Project Risk Management Scenario Scenario Background Company: • Pepsi Pepsi’s Product Portfolio • Fun for you • Better for you • Good for you Pepsi’s Target Markets • Millennial • Generation X • Baby Boomer Internal Environment • Board of Directors o • Risk management director at board level Multiple levels of corporate management o Chief risk officer at corporate management level • Multiple divisions • Multiple management levels within divisions o Executive risk manager at divisional level • Wholly owned subsidiaries • Multiple divisions within subsidiaries • Multiple management levels within divisions ©2015 Walden University 1 MSPM 6140: Enterprise and Project Risk Management External Environment • Bottling companies • Distributors • Point of sale locations • Community relations • Strategic alliances • Competitors Risk Environment • • • Appetite o High degree of risk acceptance for marketing programs o High degree of risk acceptance related to return on investment timeline o Moderate degree of risk acceptance for distinction between lines on product portfolio o Low degree of risk acceptance regarding company reputation Tolerance o High tolerance for risks related to relations with bottlers and distributors o Moderate tolerance for community relations o Low tolerance for risks related to brand image Threshold o Defined by risk policies and procedures at the corporate and division levels ©2015 Walden University 2 MSPM 6140: Enterprise and Project Risk Management Scenario Pepsi has concluded that continuing the Pepsi Refresh Program will, in fact, be profitable in the mediumterm and is worth the investment outlined in the board’s subcommittee report. The board has directed the company executives to execute a pilot that will roll out the redesigned program for a period of 1 year. After 1 year, the board will analyze the results and make a determination on continuing, tweaking, or halting altogether the program. The initial plan was to reduce focus on social media and focus more on traditional and sports marketing vehicles; however, the board received an industry report that shows companies are realizing increased revenue through increases in earned media value, and companies increase earned media value by combining traditional marketing vehicles with social media. Pepsi will increase focus on this one area during this 1-year pilot. The chief executive officer (CEO) assigned a program manager to implement the redesigned Pepsi Refresh Program and a project manager to focus on the combination of traditional marketing vehicles and social media. The project manager assembled a project team with a project risk management professional (RMP) to manage project risks. The RMP will develop a project risk management plan that will integrate with the program risk management plan of the pilot program. The risk management plan will define procedures to identify risks throughout the phases of the project. The plan will lay out the major categories of risks associated with the project, how each category will affect the project's stakeholders, and how stakeholders will be engaged in the risk management process. The risk management framework, detailed in the strategic plan, will serve as the foundation for the risk management plan employing corporate and division policies and procedures to manage risks to the project schedule, budget, and scope. The RMP will detail the risks to organizational assets and outline the environmental factors that the program and project managers should consider as they plan, execute, and monitor the project. Risk impacts and probability scales must show alignment with the organization’s risk appetite and tolerance and must set thresholds used to manage monitoring and response strategies. These strategies must allow for responses leveraging both external factors and relationships and internal corporate and divisional resources. ©2015 Walden University 3 Enterprise and Project Risk Management Project Risk Management (Project Name) Student Name Date i Enterprise and Project Risk Management Table of Contents Project Risk Management Approach .............................................................................................. 1 Project Risk Management Process.................................................................................................. 1 Project Risk Identification ............................................................................................................... 1 Project Risk Assessment (Qualitative) ............................................................................................ 1 Project Risk Assessment (Quantitative) .......................................................................................... 2 Project Risk Response ..................................................................................................................... 2 Risk Monitoring and Control ........................................................................................................... 2 Risk Register .................................................................................................................................... 3 ii Enterprise and Project Risk Management Project Risk Management Approach Project risk management planning involves deciding how risk management activities will be conducted over the life of a project. The output of project risk management planning is the project risk management plan. Risk management is an iterative process. The risk management plan should be updated when any substantial changes to the project are made and/or when a risk event occurs. • Describe the purpose of the project risk management plan. • Explain how risk management will be approached for the project. Project Risk Management Process The contents of a Risk Management Plan can be found in the PMBOK (PMBOK® Guide), in section 11.1.3.1. Project Risk Identification Once the approach and process for managing project risks have been determined, it is time to identify potential project risks and document them in a risk register. It is helpful to think about possible sources or categories of project risks as a way to organize the risk list. It may not be possible to identify every risk that could occur during the project, but risk management is an iterative process. Over the life of the project you will review risks often, and you will update the risk register as needed. • Describe the process you will use to identify risks. Who will you include? When will you conduct these activities? How will you document the results? • Describe the types of risks you will define, such as operational, technical, regulatory, etc. • Describe the source of project risks that you plan to use, such as weather, vendor, staffing, technology, etc. • Document project risks in the risk register in Columns A–F. Project Risk Assessment (Qualitative) Once project risks have been identified, the project team must analyze them to try to determine the likelihood (probability) of occurrence and the effect to the project (impact) should a given risk event occur. All risk analysis begins with qualitative analysis. To ensure accuracy and completeness, the project team should study both the risk event itself and the interactions between risk events. • Explain how risk measurement scales will be developed. Will you use a standard organizational set of measurements or define your own? • Explain how risks will be prioritized based on the defined qualitative measurement scales. • Document risk measurement scales and their meaning in the project risk register in Columns H–J. For example: 1 Enterprise and Project Risk Management o What does a “2” mean for probability? Is that 20% or 20–40%? o What does a “4” mean for impact? Is that “project fails to meet one objective” or “project exceeds budget or timeline by 20%”? Project Risk Assessment (Quantitative) Once project risks have been qualitatively assessed, the project team must review those with the highest risk factor scores (probability x impact) and further analyze them using quantitative risk analysis methods. • For this project, use expected monetary value (EMV) as your quantitative method. • Explain how risks will be prioritized based on the EMV method. • Document the EMV risk measurement information in the project risk register in Column K. Project Risk Response Document risk response strategies (plans) for each risk in the project risk register in Columns L–M. The risk response strategies should be derived from the ten strategies in the PMBOK (PMBOK® Guide) in sections 11.5.2.4 and 11.5.2.5. Risk Monitoring and Control Risk monitoring and control is about ensuring that you are responding to risks as planned, identifying and planning responses to newly identified risks, and reviewing and updating all contingency reserves (time and money). Your risk management plan should include the steps, processes, or procedures that you will use to continually monitor and update the risk register throughout the life of the project. • Describe the method(s) you will use to monitor if risks are being triggered. • Describe the method(s) you will use to identify and plan responses to newly identified risks. • Describe the method(s) you will use to review and update any contingency reserves. • Describe the timing on all of the above. For example, some you may do daily, others weekly, others monthly. Perhaps these tasks will be done as part of your regular status meetings or at special meetings to discuss risk. 2 Enterprise and Project Risk Management Risk Register Note: The first line is an example. Delete it when creating your own risk register. A B C D E Risk No. Risk Name Risk Event Description Risk Impact Description Risk Type X Rain Rain on the day of the picnic reduces the number of attendees resulting in a less festive event, reduced employee morale, and costs that can’t be reimbursed. Other F G H I J Risk Impact Prob. Risk Risk Facto Score Score Source Trigger r 1 to 5 1 to 5 P*I Weather Chance 4 2 8 of rain ≥30% forecast ed seven days prior to picnic. K L M EMV* Respon se Type Response $20,000 Mitigate Set up enough large tents to house all scheduled attendees. In addition to outdoor activities, plan indoor events or activities in tents. Encourage everyone to come rain or shine. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 *EMV = probability of risk event * cost/impact if it does occur. Example: If it rains and we do nothing, people will not show up and we will lose the $100,000 that is due to caterers, event planners, etc. With a 20% chance of it raining, the EMV can be calculated as follows: $100,000 * 20% = $20,000. If we can mitigate the impact for less than $20,000 by implementing the response plan, it may be considered a good investment to do so. 3
Purchase answer to see full attachment