Laggards in marketing comprise a group of consumers

 

1. Read the article Furniture you can Grow and determine which segment of the technology adoption life cycle it resides.

2. Laggards in marketing comprise a group of consumers who avoid change and may not be willing to adopt a new product until all traditional alternatives are no longer available. The group is mostly concerned with reliability and low cost and represents about 16% of the consumer population. Study the definition. Close your eyes and become a laggard. What 3 products do you see around you? Why do you still use them? Do not use product categories. Use specific products like a Nokia flip phone.

Read the optional article on Laggards: How Being a Laggard or Late Adopter of Technology Can Save You Money
https://www.moneycrashers.com/laggard-late-adopter-technology-benefits/

Sample Solution

Laggards in marketing comprise a category of consumers who avoid change and may not be willing to adopt a new product until all existing options are no longer available. The group is mostly concerned with reliability and low cost and represents roughly 16 percent of the consumer population. They are often uninterested in higher-quality information, preferring products and services that are credible, simply accessible, and simple to use. According to studies, laggards have a few distinct traits that a marketing team should be aware of while establishing a strategy. Laggards are those who have a low degree of education and a low level of income.

The second test to the case is named the Robot Reply. We are approached to envision a PC put inside a robot. The PC goes about as a working cerebrum, while a camera permits the robot to ‘see,’ and connected arms and legs would permit the robot to move about. This robot’s PC cerebrum wouldn’t only control images to create yield, yet it would permit the robot to eat, drink, and do other human-like things. It is contended that this robot would have “certifiable comprehension.” Since people gain comprehension of words through encounters and associations with the rest of the world, it appears to be generally sensible that a robot would be able, as well. The robot answer reflects the Chinese room as in since it appears to be coherent a robot can acquire understanding and join importance to words, the individual in the room who communicates with the climate would have the option to make this equivalent comprehension. Searle answers to this complaint by saying the robot’s common association is essentially language structure and no semantics. He offers a bend on the complaint, and requests that we envision the Chinese room being put inside the robot rather than a PC. The Chinese images the individual controls and gives out will mechanize the robot’s arms and legs. The individual has no clue about the thing he is doing by any means, and the robot is just moving a direct result of its wiring and programming. Since the individual is the one conveying these messages to the engine, the robot has “no purposeful states.”

The last complaint I will address is the Brain Simulator Reply. This protest proposes the possibility that the Chinese room is comparable to a mind and could repeat the specific neuron firings and cerebrum working as a local Chinese speaker. All in all, the machine can reproduce the reactions a cerebrum would. Since the cerebrum and the room are hypothetically working the same way, this answer raises the problem that assuming we reject that the machine has had the option to comprehend the language, we would likewise need to deny the local Chinese speaker having any comprehension of the language. Searle answers that this reaction doesn’t infer understanding. He raises the water pipe model, where it is made sense of that specific calves need to

This question has been answered.

Get Answer
WeCreativez WhatsApp Support
Our customer support team is here to answer your questions. Ask us anything!
👋 Hi, Welcome to Compliant Papers.