packing with this eventual end in mind would be something that the company would be losing money on in the short run. yet something that it was willing to doing order to both see to the needs of the environment as well as engage the customer with the idea that it was a primary focus of the brand to seek to develop a degree of sustainability. Naturally, as with any key decision, relevant and non-relevant costs both factors into such an implementation. As such, this brief analysis will consider the relevant and non-relevant costs associated with management’s decision with regards to aforementioned issue. The change mechanism which will be discussed herein took place over a period of two weeks during the beginning of September 2012.
Of course the relevant costs associated with such a change will necessarily be those associated with the differential between the cost of continuing to provide the old form of packaging as opposed to the new. With respect to this differential, as has been noted, it will be more expensive for the firm to engage in the new form of packaging due to the fact that it will require new and emergent technology to be utilized in seeking to reduce the overall amount of waste generated as well as seeking to ensure that the waste that is generated is both photosynthetically degradable as well as biodegradable in enhanced ways.
Similarly, the key non-relevant cost associated with this decision is the manner and degree to which the customer will readily embrace the new packaging and/or find themselves unhappy with the changes that have been wrought. This concern is of course highly relevant and important in an industry that is oftentimes subject to the dissatisfaction of consumers based on no other rational than a key component of expected value that they have grown accustomed to has changed or is slightly differentiated than before (Argawal et al 2011).