There are the many types of construction equipment necessary for modern construction techniques. The most versatile and most often purchased of these is the loader backhoe.

How do engineers identify design advancements for the backhoe to keep the product line fresh and responsive to market needs? How do they make sure the design advancements are appropriate for the varied needs of a global marketplace? And how does marketing research pave the way for success in global construction equipment markets?

Corporate mergers, acquisitions, and joint ventures have brought Case together with other famous names in construction and agricultural equipment: New Holland, Kobelco,

Hitachi, and Fiat—each brand a market success on its own. Recently these successful brands were given a new corporate identity in the form of CNH Global, which sells equipment in nearly every country in the world.

A frequent result of corporate mergers and acquisitions is that the newly merged corporation has multiple products competing in the same market. CNH Global is no exception. In particular, CNH Global has three strong brands competing in the global loader backhoe market.

The first step was qualitative research, but traditional interviews or focus groups would not suffice. CNH chose field tests of each of five leading brands as the best way to level the playing field for brand experience and made the field tests grueling so that any real performance differences would be detected by equipment operators.

The field tests were also used to customize and pretest scales for later use in the quantitative stage of the marketing research. The intent was to develop scales that reflect the way operators think about loader backhoe performance. Researchers who routinely use symmetrical seven- or nine-point scales will be surprised by the findings.

The results had a huge impact on advancing the engineering design of CNH loader backhoes. Operators indicated clear differences in performance among the brands. These findings are being used not only to better differentiate CNH brands from competitor brands but also to differentiate among the CNH brands.

1. In addition to satisfaction-itemized rating scales, what other scales could have been used in the CNH marketing research?

2. Do you think that the decision to use an asymmetrical satisfaction scale was the right choice? Why or why not?

3. This study was conducted in many countries. Can scales be interpreted in the same manner around the world? For example, is a 2.1 the same in China as it is in Costa Rica?

4. Should purchase intent have been part of this questionnaire? Why or why not?