Under Armour, Inc. HOVR Infinite 2.0Joshua O'RourkeMBA-560Milestone Three
Evaluation of SuccessWhen it comes to evaluating the success of a new product, there must be a means by which to determine if success has been met. To do this, Under Armour will implement the performance measurement process, by means of a five-step system used to set a goal and track the company’s progress towards that goal (Mullins & Walker, 2013). The goal will be specific and timely, as to make the bar of success clearly discernable.Standards of PerformanceThe main goal for the HOVR Infinite 2.0 would be to become the clear number one connected running shoe on the market. Since other brands have failed at connected shoes, and since technical aspects of the shoe is the most influencing factor in the buying decision, then Under Armour should strive to achieve to become the market leader in this type of running shoe (Runister). Given Under Armour’s reputation as being the innovation leader when it comes to athletic wear, it is reasonable to aim for one year after the release of the HOVR Infinite 2.0 for this goal to be realized. Because of the failure of other brands and the success of Under Armour’scurrent connected running shoe, the HOVR Infinite; Under Armour is essentially operating in a blue ocean when it comes to connected running shoes. This blue ocean environment gives Under Armour the opportunity to take control of a niche in the running market, improving the brands reputation in that market as well.Specifying Feedback DataHow specifically can any company claim be the leader of the connected running shoe segment? The only clear way to declare that is to sell more of that type of shoe than any other brand. This means Under Armour must have more units soldthen Nike, Adidas, Brooks, Puma, and all other running shoe brands. This technically means, that Under Amour must sell at least 1
one more HOVR Infinite 2.0 than all connected running shoes from another company. Not combined, not owning 50.1% of the market segment, but beating the competition head to head inunits sold. It is a simple quantitative key performance indicator (KPI) that Under Armour can measure without much difficulty.The reason it must be units sold and not a financial unit of measurement is because stats such as revenue, profit, or gross profit do not reflect market dominance. For example, Under Armour could outsell Adidas two to one; meaning twice as many runners are wearing Under Armour. But because Adidas’ shoe costs $300 to Under Armour’s $120 (×2 = $240), Adidas will always make more revenue than Under Armour despite Under Armour being more popular. This is why units sold is the specific data because being the leader in connected running shoes means being the most popular, not the most profitable. Rest assured one comes with the other.