Case Analysis of “pennzoil-Quaker State Canada: The one-To-One Decision (a)”

Case Analysis of “Pennzoil-Quaker State Canada: The One-To-One Decision (a)”

The case “Pennzoil-Quaker State Canada: The One-To-One Decision (a)” (2003), introduced the significant challenge that PQS Canada was facing: how to improve customers’ motor oil change frequency (Deutscher & Spalding, 2003). In other words, the company needed to figure out how to appeal to non-users, who barely have the willing to change their motor oil.

As the case indicated, PQS was one of the successful motor oil brands in Canadian market (Deutscher & Spalding, 2003). Despite its success, the company was facing the increasing decline of product consumption like all the other competitors in the market (Deutscher & Spalding, 2003). One of the essential reasons for the decline was that consumers has apathy about changing their motor oil because it was difficult for them to realize the benefit of changing the oil. In regards to dealing with this problem, four alternative solutions were proposed. PQS could pay a monetary incentive to encourage its installers’ participation in Roadside Assistance and Engine Warranty programs; the company also had the option to put an end to Roadside Assistance and Engine Warranty programs; Additionally, PQS could choose to do nothing; last but not the least, the company could implement the One-to-One promotional program. According to the case, One-to-One program was designed to generate close relationships among consumers, retailers and the company (Deutscher & Spalding, 2003). Based on the information in the case, compare with other alternative promotional programs, One-to-One was the best option.  

PQS should adopt the One-to-One program because it could appeal to quick lube.

Quick lube was the most effective influencer to encourage nonusers to consume the change motor oil. First of all, this format of installers had the ability to compete with new car dealers and was growing quickly in Canada (Deutscher & Spalding, 2003). More importantly, compare with other forms of installers, quick lube relied almost entirely on LOF service for margin (Deutscher & Spalding, 2003). Thus, quick lube would sell higher-grade motor oil as much as possible to increase its profit margin, and this was how manufactures like PQS increase their margin.