Smooth is the market leader in the market for hygienic products. Consumers believe the secret of the success of the product lies in the formula of the product. Therefore, the company would be privileged to receive an application from the chemist who developed the formula for the product. The company should hire the chemist out rightly. Since the chemist developed the most successful product in the market, he would greatly help in improving the quality of Virile. The company should place the chemist in the quality control department. He would help in detecting certain defects in Virile and propose changes that would help improve the quality of the product (Sanghera, 2008, p. 229).
The Chemist would greatly help the quality control group. He would provide the group with ideas that would help in improving the quality of Virile. The chemist would help in increasing the quality of Virile by incorporating some compounds found in Smooth, the market leader. He may even alter the formula of Virile to make it resemble that of Smooth since he did not sign a non-disclosure agreement with Smooth. Lack of a non-disclosure agreement makes the chemist be at liberty to reveal the formula of Smooth to the company (DeMatteis, 2004, p. 259). However, the company should sign a non-disclosure agreement with the chemist to prevent him from disclosing the formula to other parties in the future should he leave the company.
It is logical that team members would ask the chemist questions on Smooth, out of curiosity, as the product is the market leader. However, it is unethical for employees to ask very specific questions on Smooth. Employees should concentrate on how they can improve the quality of Virile. Concentrating on Smooth may derail the efforts of the company to improve the quality of Virile. The company should strive to differentiate Virile from Smooth to portray Virile as being of higher quality. The company may use a combination of quality and price to differentiate the product (Gupta, Gollakota & Srinivasan, 2005, p. 63). The company should use the quality of Virile to justify its price.
Altering the formula for Virile to make it resemble that of Smooth, would cause untold damage to the company. Therefore, the company should not market the new improved Virile. The company should look for a way of improving Virile without copying Smooth. The company risks litigation from Smooth, due to copyright infringement of its product should it market the new improved Virile. In addition, the new improved Virile makes the company lose its brand identity by copying Smooth. This may make the company lose its unique selling advantage (Tur, 2011, p. 77). Making an exact copy of Smooth would actually be damaging to the company. It shows that Smooth is of high quality than Virile. This may in fact increase the competitiveness of Smooth, instead of reducing its competitiveness (Staake & Fleisch, 2008, p. 142). By the chemist making an exact copy of Smooth; it is evident that he lacks creative ideas. The company should ensure that the chemist only improve the quality of Virile without copying Smooth. Should the chemist fail to achieve this, the company should relieve him of his duties.