MKT 3350 Module 1 Case Study: New Coke and the Strategy Behind New Products Example

Reviewed by Edgar Pennington, MBA Thomas Edison State University Updated October 2026

This MKT 3350 Module 1 example is a case study written assignment in New Product Development and Marketing, a course in TESU's Bachelor of Science in Business Administration in Marketing, taught from Crawford and Di Benedetto's New Products Management. MKT-3350 opens with strategic product development: how firms decide which new products to pursue, how a product innovation charter links projects to strategy and why so many new products fail. The paper analyzes one of the best-known product decisions in business history, Coca-Cola's 1985 replacement of its century-old formula with New Coke. It traces the decision through the new products process, applies the idea of a product innovation charter and draws lessons about the difference between what customers taste and what they value.

CourseMKT-3350 New Product Development and Marketing
ModuleModule 1
Paper typeModule 1 case study: introduction to strategic product development
LengthAbout 469 words, 4 pages
FormatAPA 7 student paper
SchoolThomas Edison State University
ProgramB.S.B.A. in Marketing
UpdatedOctober 2026

Free sample paper for MKT 3350 Module 1

1

Winning the Taste Test, Losing the Customer: New Coke and Strategic Product Development

Student Name

B.S.B.A. in Marketing, Thomas Edison State University

MKT-3350: New Product Development and Marketing

Mentor Name

Month Day, Year

What this page is doingThe title states the case's paradox, a product that research said was better and customers rejected.
2

Winning the Taste Test, Losing the Customer: New Coke and Strategic Product Development

The Case

In the early 1980s, Coca-Cola was losing share to Pepsi, whose advertising featured blind taste tests in which consumers preferred Pepsi's sweeter flavor. Coca-Cola developed a sweeter formula and tested it with about 200,000 consumers; in blind tests, most preferred it to both the old Coke and Pepsi. On April 23, 1985, the company replaced its original formula with the new one. Consumer reaction was intense: angry calls and letters, protests and hoarding of old Coke. On July 11, 1985, 79 days after the launch, the company brought back the original formula as Coca-Cola Classic.

The New Products Process

The textbook describes the new products process in phases: opportunity identification and selection, concept generation, concept or project evaluation, development and launch (Crawford & Di Benedetto, 2021). Coca-Cola executed several phases well. It identified a real threat, generated a new concept and evaluated it with extensive taste testing. Its failure came in what it evaluated. The taste tests asked which drink tasted better, not how people would feel if the original Coke were taken away.

The Product Innovation Charter

The textbook recommends a product innovation charter, a statement of strategy for new products that defines the focus, goals and guidelines of a firm's innovation, including what the firm must protect. A charter for Coca-Cola would have identified the brand's meaning, its connection to American identity and personal memory, as an asset to protect. Replacing the formula treated Coke as a taste rather than a brand. A charter would have directed the company toward a new product alongside the old one, which is in effect where it ended up.

What this page is doingApplying the product innovation charter to the case shows that the error was strategic, a failure to define what must be protected, rather than a failure of research technique.
3

Why New Products Fail

Montoya-Weiss and Calantone (1994) reviewed research on new product performance and found that strategic factors, such as product advantage and fit with the firm's strengths, along with market knowledge and process proficiency, distinguish successes from failures. Henard and Szymanski (2001) found in a meta-analysis that product advantage, meeting customer needs and the market potential were among the strongest predictors of success. New Coke had a measured taste advantage, but it did not meet the need customers cared about most, continuity with a brand they loved.

Lessons for Strategic Product Development

First, test what matters to customers, not only what is easy to measure. Second, write down, before development, what the firm's existing products mean to customers and must not be lost. Third, consider adding new products alongside existing ones before replacing them. Fourth, be ready to reverse quickly; Coca-Cola's fast reversal limited the damage.

Conclusion

New Coke won the taste test and lost the customer because the company evaluated a product attribute while ignoring a brand's meaning. A product innovation charter that defined what to protect would have pointed toward a different decision.

References

Crawford, C. M., & Di Benedetto, C. A. (2021). New products management (12th ed.). McGraw Hill.

Henard, D. H., & Szymanski, D. M. (2001). Why some new products are more successful than others. Journal of Marketing Research, 38(3), 362-375. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkr.38.3.362.18861

Montoya-Weiss, M. M., & Calantone, R. (1994). Determinants of new product performance: A review and meta-analysis. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 11(5), 397-417. https://doi.org/10.1016/0737-6782(94)90029-9

Reading the MKT 3350 Module 1 assignment instructions

MKT-3350 grades six written assignments, which are case studies worth 36 percent together, five discussions and a four-part new product development project worth 49 percent including a final submission. The first case study introduces strategic product development: the new products process, product innovation charters, strategic fit and the reasons products succeed or fail. Analyze the case through these concepts rather than retelling it. Use the textbook and research on new product success, and end with lessons a product developer could apply. Cases in this course may come from the textbook or be assigned by your mentor; whichever you analyze, keep the facts brief and accurate. Name the phase of the new products process where the key decision was made, and judge it against the concept the module emphasizes. Close with lessons that a product team today could use.

How the MKT 3350 Module 1 example is put together

The paper summarizes the documented facts of the case with dates. A section traces the decision through the phases of the new products process and identifies where it went wrong. A section applies the product innovation charter to show the strategic error. A section uses research on new product success to explain the failure. It ends on four lessons for product teams and a two-sentence statement of the paradox. The case's dates and figures are given once, briefly, and every later section analyzes rather than retells. The charter section shows what the firm should have written down before development, and the research section explains the failure in terms that apply to other products.

Reading the MKT 3350 Module 1 grading rubric

Mentors grade case studies on accurate facts, application of the module's concepts, depth of analysis and well-cited prose. Case answers that locate the failure in a specific phase of the process, and that explain why, show understanding. Applying the product innovation charter to a real decision demonstrates command of a key textbook concept. Research on what predicts new product success adds depth and supports general lessons that go beyond the single case. Mentors also value balance: recognizing what the company did well, such as extensive testing and a fast reversal, alongside what it got wrong. Clear organization and accurate citations complete the analysis.

MKT 3350 Module 1 help from the desk

Marks fall when New Coke's story is retold without analysis, by blaming the failure on bad research without saying what the research missed or by drawing lessons unconnected to the textbook. Others misstate dates or figures. Keep the summary short. Use the new products process to locate the problem. Apply the product innovation charter. Draw lessons that a product team could use. Avoid hindsight bias; explain what the company could reasonably have known at the time. Verify famous figures and dates in a reliable source before you cite them in the case. A free first sample on your own MKT-3350 case study is available on request.

Write yours, or have the desk draft it

This paper is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Thomas Edison State University document. Read it for the moves, then write your own to the instructions in your classroom. If you want one built to your exact prompt and rubric, the first custom sample is free and arrives in 24 to 48 hours.

Request this one custom, free All MKT-3350 module samples

More MKT 3350 and B.S.B.A. in Marketing sample papers

MKT 3350 Module 1 questions, answered

Where can I find a free MKT 3350 Module 1 sample paper?

Coca-Cola's 1985 New Coke decision, analyzed through the new products process and the product innovation charter, is the case study above.

What is a product innovation charter?

A statement of strategy for new products that defines their focus, goals and guidelines, including what the firm must protect.

What are the phases of the new products process?

Opportunity identification and selection, concept generation, concept evaluation, development and launch.

Why did New Coke fail?

It won blind taste tests but ignored what the original brand meant to customers, who rejected losing it.

What predicts new product success?

Research points to product advantage, meeting customer needs, market potential and fit with the firm's strengths.