I'm with you there Barbara! It's a fast-paced world in which we operate and things shift around more rapidly than ever before. Think back to when Arrow was making so many acquisitions and at one time had to deal with Capstone, Schweber, Zeus, etc. While the company retained these names for quite some time, I'm willing to bet that we wouldn't see the same gradient today.
Although they didn't specifically mention it, I know Newark and the Premier Farnell companies well enough to know that research was conducted before coming to this decision. I think going with a related name--element14--is the right way to go rather than either legacy brand, as valuable as they are. The fact is, neither Newark or Farnell are perceived as global compnaies, even though they are. Keeping the brands and companies separate worked well after Premier Farnell acquired Newark--both Newark and Farnell have loyal followings in their geographies. But as a single, global entity, both brands gain products and service that currently are offered separately...I also think customers win. The key is execution--as long as the service and support is maintained, i don't think customers ultimately care what their supplier is called as long as they continue with the same quality and service.
I'd think so too. It's painful when clients we work with refuse to survey ahead of their marketing, and then gripe about results later on. Perhaps we'll see how this affects Newark in future EBN customer evaluation studies!
Oh, I agree the name "Element 14" has some very intriguing aspects to it. I'm appropriately wary of the theme without having seen any survey data to support it. If the organization polled the idea among members of its target audience and they pulled in very positive feedback, then I say go for it. If not, then you are absolutely correct in saying it will take a massive amount of educating to get the point and value proposition across.
Having been in many similar situations myself, I can tell you nothing beats survey data.
Agree with tirlapur. It might have been a little tricky to rebrand to an existing brand. "Newark is now Farnell" might have sounded a little odd and off putting to the traditional Newark user and vice versa. Another consideration is the creation and integration of the community. It would have been hard to merge the online operation/profile/look/feel of one into another seamlessly. In this light, "newark/farnell is now element14 makes a lot of sense. Of course, it would require an immense exercise in customer education, but already I can see the efforts that they have put.
Personally, I like the name element14. It is cool, intelligent and likely to attract the younger generation of engineers.
I agree with you that it will solve half of the problems but the question is which one do you choose because as Barbara pointed out "Executives from Newark, in particular, are sensitive to the legacy that comes with the Newark name" may be this is the same case with Farnell executives. So i guess its better to choose some neutral name rather than existing ones.
EBN Dialogue enables and encourages you to participate in live chats with notable leaders and luminaries. Not only editors and journalists, but the entire EBN community is able to comment and ask questions. Listed below are upcoming and archived chats.
Thailand Stages a Comeback Join EBN contributor Jennifer Baljko on Thursday August 23, 2012, at 11:00 a.m. EST for a live chat on how electronic manufacturers in Thailand have shored up their supply chain to reduce the impact of future natural disasters.
Microsoft Surface: Potential Winners & Losers What are the implications for the electronics industry supply chain of Microsoft Corp.'s decision to launch its own tablet PC? Join industry veteran and EE Times' systems and OEM expert Rick Merritt on Tuesday, July 3, at 12:00 pm EDT for a Live Chat on this subject.
Join EBN contributor Jennifer Baljko on Thursday August 23, 2012, at 11:00 a.m. EST for a live chat on how electronic manufacturers in Thailand have shored up their supply chain to reduce the impact of future natural disasters.
Peter Drucker famously said "Trying to predict the future is like trying to drive down a country road at night with no lights while looking out the back window." Yet in the razor's-edge world of electronics—with a lean supply chain and just-in-time demands—the need to know the future is vital.
While no one really can accurately predict the future, we can take guidance from another Drucker saying which is the best way to predict the future is to create it.
You've heard the saying "the No. 1 supply chain risk is your people." That hasn't always been the case. But today's complex global supply chain requires a new type of multitalented employee. It's one who understands, finance, marketing, economics, is savvy with technology, graceful with relationships and can think analytically.
Where are these people? Are universities properly preparing the next generation supply chain professionals? How do train your existing workforce for these new, demanding positions?
Brian Fuller, editor-in-chief of EBN, will lead a 60-minute Avnet Velocity panel discussion that will ask and answer these and other questions swirling around today's supply-chain talent challenges.