EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

PROCESS DOCUMENTATION

Empathize

Define

Ideation

Prototype

Test

SUMMARY REFLECTION

HASBRO TOY BOX

Product Description

4Ps Analysis

LIVING PRINCIPLES RE-ANALYSIS

WORKS CITED

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1

2

3

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

3

Founded in 1923, Hasbro is one of the world’sbiggest toy producers. It is widely admired for itsproduct branding; examples include G.I. Joe, Nerf,Transformers, and My Little Pony, and thatdiversification enabled Hasbro to enjoy over $4.07billion in revenue and $375 million in net income in2009. Hasbro is particularly well known for itsability to expand its brands beyond physical toys;Transformers has gone from a simple toy line to amovie franchise with billions in box office revenue.There are also video game and television animationsubsidiaries in the Hasbro family of products.

Hasbro competes in the highly mature toy marketand currently stands as the third largestmanufacturer, behind Mattel and LEGO. Thatposition actually represents a drop, as Hasbro waspreviously second. In consumers’ minds, Hasbro isperceived as a well-established toy maker, thoughmuch like Mattel, it lacks LEGO’s immediate brand-to-product connection. Competitive advantages inthe market primarily come from desirable licensingagreements, such as Hasbro’s recent agreementwith Disney to produce Frozen toys.

However, at this point, none of the large toy Few

However, few toy producers have pursued asignificant sustainability initiative, but doing sorepresents a potentially enormous advantage. Thisis where the Hasbro Toy Box comes in; it will be aself-serve toy rental service kiosk. Building onHasbro’s existing brand equity, inventory, andshifting cultural trends (emphasizing sharing), theToy Box will enable children to rent the toys theydesire at a fraction of the cost, thus fulfillingmultiple needs for both the children and theirparents. And as these children grow up consistentlyusing the kiosk and participating in a personallyrelevant sharing economy, the hope is they willeventually become more educated and sociallyresponsible global consumers.

The Hasbro Toy Box was developed with LivingPrinciples (LP) Analysis attributions in mind, andwith its introduction, Hasbro’s vision forsustainability will become much more far-reachingthan it is currently, and the hope is that the Toy Boxwill shift consumers’ behaviors in a moresustainable direction while simultaneously buildingcommunal trust.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1

The Empathize mode starts the design process byidentifying the target market and gain valuableconsumer insights on the thoughts, attitudes, andemotions underlying consumer need.

We began the process by each gathering someinitial media and consumer reports on Hasbro.Hasbro’s media representation is generally verypositive, and the reports we found featured storieson Hasbro signing licensing agreement with Disneyto produce Frozen toys and using 3D printingtechnology to put children’s faces on action figures(Grant, 2014; Townsend & Palmeri, 2014). In theLiving Principles Analysis we came to theconclusion that Hasbro is generally doing a goodjob in terms of sustainability but is not publiclyvocal about its efforts, i.e. Silent Good. To gain adeeper understanding of our customers and howwe can develop a sustainable product or service forthem, we used the Empathy Map to help usorganize the information we have.

We have identified our first customer segment asboys aged 5-12. Boys at this age are exposed to TVprogramming, games, movies, commercials andinternet advertisements that urge them to demandthe latest toys. They compare and compete withfriends, and they want recognition for getting thecool toys before everyone else. The biggest painthe boys feel is risk of not fitting in their groups offriends. This is followed by their inability topurchase the toys themselves and the fact thattheir parents won’t buy everything they want.

Another target segment that we have identifiedwas the parents of boys aged 5-12. The parentstypically don’t have a large discretionary toybudget to get every toy their kids want. Similarly,they are very likely to be frustrated that the kidswill only play with a toy for a limited time andasking them to buy new toys for them.

EMPATHIZE

BOYS 5-12• Desire power within friend group• Always want new stuff – and need it

earlier than their friends• Unhappiness with inability to purchase

the toys themselves• Knowledge that parents will not buy

everything they want• Very little awareness of sustainability• See toys as infrequent rewards

PARENTS OF BOYS 5-12• Possess limited budget for toys• Overwhelmed and confused by the

changing trends for children• Limited storage space in home• Limited access to recycling, time to be

socially responsible• Always in need of distraction for

children (to devote time to other tasks)

2

After the Emphasize stage, we moved on to definingour problem.

Based on the LP analysis, our overall feelingstowards Hasbro were that as a company, they hadtaken significant steps towards changing theiractions to be more sustainable. However, they weremissing the connection between their sustainableactions and the sustainable actions of theircustomers. We realized that Hasbro was in theunique position where their target market wasalmost split between kids age 5-12 and parents ofthose children. We kept this in mind as we though tabout defining our problem.

Before we began, we asked Professor Luchs aboutsomething confusing about our LP Analysis. We hadstated that because Hasbro was so heavily basedon physical products, toys, it would be nearlyimpossible to change from a product to servicemodel, and when we were generating ideas w ewere struck on the assumption that the service hasto be something Hasbro is directly providing.However, he had commented on our paper that thiswas was actually a big opportunity. When we askedfor clarification, he introduced us to the idea of atoy library. The moment after he explained what itwas, we all felt that the Product to Service elementwas definitely one that needed to be considered.

Individually, each member of our group wrote downtwo categories of the LP analysis that they wantedto focus on. We had a lot of overlap and betweenthe four of us only had six categories. With a roundof voting, we were able to narrow it down to four:visions, disassembly, behaviors, and product toservice.

From there, we individually developed “How MightWe” (HMW) statements for each of the individualcategories. For each category, once we had a boardfull of “HMW” questions, we each voted for our topthree. We continued to vote until we narrowed itdown to one statement. Ultimately, we concludedthat the “HMW” question for vision wasencompassed in the three other categories. In theend, addressing Hasbro’s vision was our goal andthe three other questions presented differentopportunities towards reaching that goal.

HMW Outcomes:1.Vision: “HMW convey our vision aboutsustainability”?2. Disassembly: “HMW re-use parts of toys”?3. Behaviors: “HMW encourage kids to recycle”?4. Product to Service: “HMW promote communityengagement”?

Key Insights/Take Aways:As this was our first real attempt at the designthinking process, we were initially hesitant. We didnot have a concrete empathy output like theannoying child at the airport example. The customerinsight we started with was not specific enough togenerate targeted HMW questions, and the initialstatements we came up with are similar low-hanging fruit-type questions. Only one of ourmembers had experience with the process, so itwas mostly new and unfamiliar. We had the easiesttime coming up with questions for the Visionelement, which was what later lead us tounderstand the relationship between Vision and ourother three elements. We left this stage with many“HMW” statements that we felt could all best beanswered by the implementation of a toy library orsomething similar. We looked forward to theopportunity to further think and elaborate in theIdeation stage.

DEFINE

3

To begin the Ideation phase, we started with thequestion: “How might we encourage sustainablebehaviors in kids?” To answer this question, weused a multi-step process. The first phase of theprocess had three steps. First, our team individuallywrote possible ideas and solutions on yellow stickynotes and put them up on the board. After aboutfive minutes, we moved onto the next step, whichinvolved individually writing outlandish ideas onpink sticky notes. Finally, we again used the yellowsticky notes to try to turn any of the outlandishideas into practical solutions. We removed all ofthe pink sticky notes at the conclusion of the firstphase.

In the next phase, we organized all of our stickynotes into a matrix. Along the x axis was “ease ofconsumer use” and along the y axis was“sustainability”. This was to determine howsustainable compared to how customer friendlythe idea was. The last stage involved us groupingthe sticky notes with the same general idea intogroups. This resulted in four main nodes: Ideas to

make sustainability playful, Incentives and rewardsto encourage sustainability, Ways to track customerpurchases and habits, and Ways to up-cycle.

Next, we followed the same process except withthe question “How might we create sustainablecommunities through the use of toys?” Overall, ourgroup found this question much more interestingand was able to generate a lot more possiblesolutions. The final sticky notes were againgrouped based on commonalities and the followingcategories resulted: community events promotingsustainability, incorporation of sustainability intoeducational aspects, incentives for the communityto recycle, and programs to share resources. Withinthe category of sharing resources was the idea for atoy library. This was an idea that we discussed earlyon and one that we felt both solved improvedHasbro’s company from a sustainability aspectwhile directly aligning with their mission. We hadbeen doing our best to keep an open mind;however, after looking at all of our ideas for both“HMW” questions, the toy library still seemed likethe best idea.

IDEATION

4

We began discussing how toy libraries worked andhow it would work for a library if it were to offeronly Hasbro toys. Discussion around the idea ofrenting led us to consider other rental services andhow they worked. One such service was Red Box,and soon enough we had come up with the idea tocreate our own “Red Box for toys.” This idea wassimilar to the toy library but overall seemed moreplausible, more modern, and more exciting. Someof our initial ideas were that it would be placedoutside grocery stores, and it could operate like anarcade game where there is a claw to grab the toy.With the Toy Box idea we saw the potential tocombine different categories of ideas such assharing a service, localized distribution, andincentives for sustainability. Our initial concernswere how we would address competitors such asToys R’ Us.

Summary Outcomes:1. Brainstormed solutions to “HMW encouragesustainable behaviors in kids through toys”?2. Brainstormed solutions “HMW create sustainablecommunities through the use of toys?”3. Analyzed all solutions by how sustainable andhow customer friendly the ideas were4. Decided to bring the idea of a toy Red Box intothe prototyping stage.

Key Insights/Take Aways:Our group found the structure of the Ideationworkshops to be extremely productive because itpromoted both individual and group thinkingsimultaneously. Having group members individuallypost sticky notes with answers to the “how mightwe” questions promoted diversity and deferreddiscussion and critique in the idea generationprocess.

IDEATION

Coming together afterwards to discuss all theideas led to a very robust discussion whereeveryone had equal input. We left this stage veryconfident in the idea we were bringing intoPrototyping. The idea for a toy library had been inthe back of our minds since the Define stage. Thefact that we were able to keep an open mind andfurther develop other potential ideas is how Ibelieve we were able to improve upon the idea ofa toy library (something that already currentlyexists).

This idea was similar to the toy library but overall seemed more plausible, more modern, and more exciting.

5

While we did leave the Ideation stage with a fewideas, we all felt our strongest idea by far wascreating a “Red Box for toys.” We set out toprototype and concentrated on both the physicalbox as well as the logistics. In order to physicallyrepresent the logistics, we used large cork squaresand paper to illustrate what a customer would seeon the screen as they went to either rent or returna toy.

Having to create a physical box raised a lot ofquestions that we may not have otherwise thoughtof. Among these were how the toys were going tobe sanitized, packaged and displayed. Ultimately,we decided that there was going to have to be aworker who would come weekly to empty the boxand take the toys back to be cleaned. Packaging issomething we discussed heavily, and the problemwent hand in hand with how the toys would bedisplayed. Because the same toy was going to beconstantly moving from machine to consumer, itwould need to have some sort of secure packagingeach time. We debated between having plastic orpaper packaging that we would then encourage thecustomers to recycle or if we should havepackaging that was durable and reusable. Weultimately decided to repackage the toy in paper orplastic packaging after each time it was rented. Wewould advertise that the customer could removethe packaging right then and there and deposit it toa designated bin in the Toy Box. Because each toywould be packaged aesthetically, we could justdisplay the toys “as is.” The last physical feature we

discussed was what type of toys were going to beoffered. Because the toys were going to passed tomultiple users, we wanted the toys to be durableand simple so as to limit the opportunity for lostparts. We browsed Hasbro’s website anddetermined our main toy categories would beTonka, Nerf, Action Figures, and electronic gamessuch as Catch Phrase.

Writing out the text to be displayed on the userscreen interface as a customer was in the processof renting a toy was extremely helpful in getting usto think about logistics. When deciding how wewanted the process to work, we had to considerwhat would be most attractive to customers butsecondly, if we could convey the message in asimple and coherent manner. Our biggestdiscussion arose around price. We tried to thinkabout what price level customers would be willingto commit to while also thinking about making itsimple enough that customers would be verywilling to try the Toy Box out for the first time.Ultimately we decided on a membership basedsystem. We also began talking about the policy forbroken toys in regards to what terms andconditions we would have the customer wouldaccept when renting a toy. We came up with theidea of the “Super Perks Club.” If a customer joinedthis free club, it would act as a forgiveness programfor if they had damaged or missing pieces. Theprogram worked on a sliding scale where acustomer would be either rewarded or punishedfor consistent behaviors.

PROTOTYPE

6

If a customer rented a certain number of toys andreturned them safely, they would work their wayup to a free toy. Conversely, if they consistentlydamaged toys, they would be moved down into the“red zone” and would have to pay an increasingamount for the damages.

Summary Outcomes:1. Created a prototype of the physical Toy Boxwhich illustrated how the toys would be displayed,including touch screen interface2. Decided the types of toys to be offered: Tonka,Nerf, Action Figures, and electronic games3. Had a thorough discussion about the price point(membership), sanitation (weekly), as well aspolicies for broken/damaged toys

Key Insights/Take Aways:Creating a physical prototype helped ustremendously in determining what we wanted thephysical structure of the box to look like as well aswhat our rules and policies for the box would be.We were really forced to focus on customer ease ofuse. Because we were writing out “exactly” whatwould be displayed on the different screens, itforced us to read it in the shoes of the customerand ask ourselves if it was clear.

Overall, we were sometimes focusing a little toomuch on very specific logistics instead of thegeneral, big-picture information that would beneeded in order to pitch our idea to a potentialcustomer. An example of this is that we weregetting a little bit tied up in how the toys would bestored in the machine and dispensed – anengineering issue. But this helped us to think aboutwhat type of toys we would put in the box – whichwas a question very frequently asked by some ofour peers.

PROTOTYPE

7

We had the valuable opportunity of pitching ouridea to an audience for feedback on two separateoccasions. First, we were able to present our ideato our entire class. Because we had a lot o flogistical things to cover, it was a little bitchallenging to find a balance between explainingour overall idea and how it promotes sustainability,but also explaining the logistics of our machine andhow we believed it would be attractive tocustomers.

The main feedback we received from our peers wasabout pricing, the policy for broken toys, andsanitation. There were a few suggestions to baseour machine on a pay-as-you-go system asopposed to a membership system. And afterdiscussing the matter as a team, we believedchanging our model to pay-as-you-go (per unit)would ultimately attract more customers andpersuade them to “try out” the Toy Box for the firsttime. We anticipated some of these questions butwe did not have time to go over all of our solutionsand address their concerns, so the feedbacks werereally helpful when we tried to modify our pitchand decide to address the issues the customerscared about, such as sanitation and pricing, insteadof less important features such as how the screenlooked.

The second largest issue that was addressed in thefeedback forms was about the policy in regards tobroken toys. This ended up being our most debatedand difficult topic. We received a lot of questionsabout how we would inspect the toys and Uponfuture discussion, we decided to change from the“Super Perks Club” to a more simple policy where acustomer would only have to pay for the damagesif they were greater than 10% of the toys total cost.

concern for our customers and peers, so we madesure to emphasize that the toys would be sanitizedafter each use. However, we still received a lot ofquestions about how the toys would be sanitized inprocess-wise and where it would occur. When wemet the following week to review our feedback, weresearched ways toy libraries sanitized their toys.While the toy libraries did not get into explicitdetails, they did emphasize that all toys werecleaned, sanitized, and disinfected. In order toassure our customers of Hasbro’s sanitationstandards, we decided to implement a 100% “likenew” guarantee. We promoted this guaranteeduring the second round of evaluation and receivedmany fewer questions about sanitation.

Two other aspects that we reviewed as a teamafter the first round of feedback was packaging andtoys offered. We had been closely looking at RedBox policies in terms of broken or damaged disks,which lead us to think about their packaging. RedBox uses plastic cases that are reused customerafter customer. We felt this was more sustainable,easier for Hasbro terms of storage, time, andmoney, and easier for the customer because itemulates something they are used to.

Professor Luchs had mentioned thinking about thetypes of toys we offered in relation to ourcustomers, not just from a logistical standpoint. Webegan discussing the importance of offeringcustomers toys they would not get attached to, butwould use for a week and happily return. Thisresulted in the expansion of toy offerings to includeHasbro’s version of the Lego “Kre-O” and boardgames. We felt that children would build their Kre-O or play a few rounds of “Connect Four” and thenbe ready to return the toy for something else.

TEST

8

The second feedback stage proved to be the mostvaluable for a variety of reasons. First, it wasextremely helpful to listen to the other class givetheir pitches, so we knew the important aspects toemphasize. Additionally, we were able to receiveunexpected feedback from mothers of twodifferent families. That was extremely insightfulbecause they were directly in our target market, asopposed to our college student peers. They wereextremely supportive of the idea and both childrenand parents said they would use the Toy Box.

The most important piece of feedback we received,once again, regarded handling of broken toys. Itwas suggested that we could offer “insurance”where if you paid extra for a toy, you would becovered for damages. We liked this idea and took itback to our group discussion the next week.Ultimately, we decided that because the total costof the toys offered in the machine would notexceed $30, any insurance policy would basicallyhave to cover damages for the entire cost of thetoy. If we do not cover the cost of the whole toy,the pricing scheme would be too complicated forcustomers to understand.

After deliberation, we decided to go with a simplersystem. The first time someone returned adamaged toy, they will be forgiven. The secondtime, it will be a $10 fine. And any time after thatwill be flat $20 fine. Because customers have theoption to buy the broken toy, it made sense to setthe limit at $20. We believed this system wasstraightforward and easy to both understand andapply, unlike our original 10% value proposal,which was hard to quantify. The rest of ourfeedback was very positive, and any questions thatwere raised we felt was a matter of us furtherelaborating on the matter when speaking asopposed to adjusting it.

Summary Outcomes:1. Used feedback from our first presentation to ourindividual class to adjust our price to a pay-as-you-go (per unit) system, changed our broken toy policyto only address customers who broke or lostgreater than 10% of toy value, further researchedsanitation methods, changed to reusablepackaging, and expanded toy offerings2. Presented our idea to the other section of theclass and received positive feedback.3. Adjusted our broken toy policy one final time to

a tiered fine system.

TEST

Key Take Aways:The opportunity to receive feedback from otherswas extremely influential. For the most part, ourpeers were highly supportive of the Toy Boxconcept. Most of the suggested feedback wasabout specific policies or logistical matters and therental process. Because we had spent a lot of timediscussing and debating certain aspects, webecame very familiar with the ideas, so it wasbeneficial to have a fresh set of eyes and ears hearour proposal and give their immediate reaction.

[Parents] were extremely supportive of the idea, and both children and parents said they would use the Toy Box.

9

The overall design experience for the Hasbro ToyBox was smooth and natural. We had a similarunderstanding of what Hasbro has been doing interms of sustainability, so we picked outappropriate LP criteria quickly. Coming up with thetoy sharing idea (Product to Service) and lateriterations were heavily facilitated by the groupdynamic. By having someone act as the daily“Process Champion”, we were able to stay on trackof what we were supposed to do and not getcaught up in irrelevant conversations and critiques.

And even though we had taken a liking to the ToyBox idea from very early on in the design thinkingProcess, we explored another HMW statement andgenerated other ideas to possibly supplant orsupplement our initial thoughts. Eventually, wedecided the Toy Box had the most potential - thebusiness model is familiar to a lot of people, theservice provides unique values to the customers,and it helps to develop a sharing economy.

Since the general service idea is easy to grasp, wemostly focused on the logistic issues surroundingthe Toy Box, such as pricing, cleaning, andreturning. We anticipated questions surroundingthese issues and we were able to address them inour pitch to the class and to the conference. Butsince the feedback are mostly about the logistics ofthe Toy Box, we realized we needed to do a betterjob conveying our solutions in the pitch.

We deliberated heavily on logistical details, even tothe point where Professor Luchs had to tell us tofocus on the overall idea and leave those issues fordown the line. The conference was especiallyhelpful for us not only because we were able topitch our idea in a more focused way, but alsobecause several families stopped at our board

REFLECTION SUMMARY

10

and listened to our pitch. Since our target marketwas children and parents, feedback from thefamilies were far more valuable, insightful, andrelevant than those from our peers. It was alsovery encouraging and galvanizing.

Our final product, the Hasbro Toy Box, is special inthat it’s not the typical “green” good. It’s far moresocially sustainable than it is environmentallyconscious. Additionally, the service model is basedon addressing customer needs, not solely onenvironmental attributes, so our service did notencounter the obstacles that some groups mayhave run into, such as lack of consumer trust inclaims or an overly high price point.

Based on the feedback we have received from theparents at the conference, the Toy Box is already adesigned service that they would want to buy –independent of sustainability impact. The fact thatusing the service would help teach children aboutsustainable values and sharing economy is valueadded for the customer and society. This was animportant revelation for us and provided aneffective business case for the idea.

In addition, when dealing with the logistic issues atearlier stages, we have already addressed some ofthe obstacles that hinder sustainable consumption,such as consumers’ (occasionally) faultyperceptions that sustainable products are inferiorin quality and/or functionality. It could be that wevery luckily (and unintentionally) got it right fromthe beginning, but we think it would be helpful toemphasize that the teams are trying to “designsomething the customers would want to buy -independent of the sustainable attributes” in theIdeation stage.

Another suggestion we have for the overall designexperience is to switch orders of the Emphasizestage and the introduction of the sustainabilityframeworks/LP Analysis. Having the initialconsumer insight is crucial to the following modesin design thinking, and we just think it would bemore helpful if the empathy outcome is fresh whenwe enter the Define stage.

REFLECTION SUMMARY

Design something the customers would want to buy - independent of sustainability impact.

11

Happy wallets,

happy kids,

less clutter,

less waste…

More value!

HASBRO TOY BOX

12

The Hasbro Toy Box is a revolutionary entry intothe growing toy rental service market. FeaturingHasbro’s renowned innovation and ever-growingfamily of world-renowned brands, the Toy Box willinstill a sense of community and develop a moresustainable generation of consumers through itsembrace of the sharing economy.

Toys from Hasbro’s well-known lines will beoffered, including (but not limited to) Transformers,Kre-O, Tonka, Nerf, and family games such asMonopoly and Catchphrase. These toys will bethoroughly inspected weekly. They will also becleaned, sanitized, and disinfected during thattime. Toys that are in an unsuitable condition willbe donated to local shelters and children’smuseums and will be replaced with offerings fromHasbro’s latest attractive product lines.

A large part of Hasbro’s strategy to encourageengagement in a sharing community will be anaccident forgiveness program. Simply put, it is anadjustable fine system. The first time a child breaksa toy or loses a part to it, they will be forgiven, andthe toy can be returned at no additional cost.However, the second infraction will net a $10 fine,and the third triggers an increase to $20. Everyaccident thereafter will also be fined $20. Since theprice to purchase toys offered in the Toy Box will beno more than $20, such a hefty fine willdisincentivize reckless play.

The Hasbro Toy Box is a revolutionary entry into the growing toy rental service market.

13

Product: The Hasbro Toy Box is a one-stop rentalservice for toys; customers can rent and returnwithout stepping into a store of any kind. It is alarge electronic kiosk (along the lines of Best BuyExpress) which will be painted over with Hasbrolicensed properties, e.g. Mr. Potato Head, CaptainAmerica. It will hold toys which may be rented bythe week or outright purchased. These toys will beorganized internally through a proprietary “flex-fit”system which will enable varying weeklycombinations of toy quantity and size. The Toy Boxwill also include an online membership experienceand touchscreen interface.

The key feature of the Hasbro Toy Box is itssustainability initiatives and how it can empowerchildren with social awareness. It will serve as alearning tool for children and will teach them bothabout the environmental impact of toys andsocietal gains from adopting a sharing economyapproach. It can serve as a complement to currentsustainability lessons in school. We believe thatwhile the short term impact of the Hasbro Toy Boxis the easy rental and return of popular toys, thelong term product is actually the education of anew, more responsible generation of youth. Theselessons will be reinforced through the display ofeasy-to-read green facts throughout the rentalprocess.

Price: Toys will be rented out by the week, withmost rentals coming out at an average of $3,though the exact cost will depend on the specific

toy in question. Newer, more popular toys will bepriced at a higher rate to reflect higher demand.There will be an option to purchase at the machineat slightly reduced pricing (because the toys willnot be new). Any ”overdue” rentals will be fined ata rate of $1 daily. Additionally, if children take aliking to something, customers will have the optionto renew or buy their current rented toys online.

There are no direct competitors with a toy rentalmodel because most locales do not have any formof a toy library service. However, even in marketswith libraries, Hasbro’s product offerings will alsobe superior and thus reflect its high relative value.As a result, competitor-based pricing is not anoption; $3 is solely a value-based price point basedon the comparative dynamic of buying a toy tokeep versus briefly renting it for a week. It issubject to change in accordance with marketperformance and customer feedback.

Promotion: The Hasbro Toy Box will be promotedusing a pull strategy; once we get the word out,customers will come because this is a product theywant. In the initial stages of the product life cycle,promotion will principally be used to informchildren and their parents about the Toy Box andits benefits. As the product matures andestablishes a foundation of customers, promotionwill instead focus on loyalty programs and thespecific toy offerings. However, to reach our targetconsumer, it is crucial to create advertisementsthat actually appeal to a child.

4Ps ANALYSIS

14

Advertising will principally be done throughtelevision, particularly during Hasbro-createdcontent, such as My Little Pony: Friendship is Magicand Transformers: Rescue Bots. However, onlineand mobile promotion are also key, and as today’skids, even those from lower income households,are using more tablets and phones than anyprevious generation (and this trend is rising),Hasbro will also advertise extensively in popularmobile games and applications. We will also try toimplement native advertising on websitesfrequently visited by the child target market.

Additionally, the Toy Box itself is actually a form ofpromotion. People will be curious about the largeblue box outside their favorite grocery stores andwill approach it with an open mind. We are hopingthis magnetic effect will attract those families whoare neither heavy Internet users nor televisionviewers. We will not be promoting the Hasbro ToyBox on more traditional channels such as print andradio.

Place: The Hasbro Toy Box will initially be exclusiveto the Pawtucket, Rhode Island community (homeof Hasbro headquarters) as a trial run beforenationwide expansion. Within the town, machineswill be placed at several types of locations,including grocery stores, airports, and malls. Theseare places that children do not necessarily want tofind themselves and therefore will be veryreceptive to a toy, i.e. something that can entertainand distract them from the mundane. Themachines will be strategically placed at theentrances of grocery stores and/or any other areasof high foot traffic in malls.

Specialists” who will service the machines on aweekly basis; their responsibilities include cleaning,restocking, and determining the remaining lifespanof particular toys. These employees are highlyimportant to the Toy Box’s operation and will beextensively trained and report directly to Hasbro.Each will have a distinct geographic area whichthey are accountable for.

4Ps ANALYSIS

We are hoping [the Toy Box’s] magnetic effect will attract those families who are neither heavy Internet users nor television viewers.

15

The Hasbro Toy Box is a breed of its own. No othermajor company in the toy industry has a rentalservice for toys. This makes the Hasbro Toy Boxsuperior to what is currently available in themarket. The Toy Box is less impactful to theenvironment because it supports reusing. It alsobenefits the economy by allowing a higher returnper a unit at a cheaper price. This allows a widerspectrum of consumers to engage in the service.Additionally, the community is called upon tofacilitate a sharing economy.

Hasbro’s competition operates on the standard buyand sell method. The method currently in themarket today is more harmful to the environmentbecause it produces waste and causes a largerconstraint on the consumer and environment. Aneconomy such as this is unsustainable in the longrun. Furthermore, it does not instill a cultural visionof sustainability.

Another current avenue on the market today is thetoy library. Toy libraries provide the ability toborrow a certain toy for a period of time. Tolibraries are great for the environment but are notrealistic in terms of shifting smarter consumption,as the Toy Box. They have been around for a whileand have not created a cultural shift in asustainable direction. Ultimately they lackmeaningful impact on the community andeconomic incentive to slow production. The marketthey target is too small to promote a sharingeconomy, unlike the Hasbro Toy Box.

Initially, when starting this service, we focused onfour components of Hasbro’s Living Principlesframework: Product to Service, Disassembly,Behaviors, and Vision. These dynamics of theframework were found in the Environment,Economy, and Culture sections.

Product to Service:Hasbro’s capabilities were initially evaluated at apoor rating of 1. The lackluster rating was a resultof there being no concrete Product to Serviceoffering readily and publicly available. This area is abig opportunity in the market for a toy serviceindustry. The industry had no rental model in placebefore the creation of the Toy Box. With thecreation of the Toy Box, Hasbro now receives asuperb rating in that category simply from offeringone of the only toy rental services available – andthe only one from a large toy producer.

LIVING PRINCIPLES ANALYSIS

16

Behaviors:In the Environment section, Hasbro scored a 2 onBehaviors. This neutral score was because theylacked the effort and actions to protect and restorethe environment. The Hasbro Toy Box provides theability to utilize a sharing community. With rentingtoys, less have to be produced by Hasbro and eachtoy receives maximum use. These factors raise theBehaviors score to a 4.

Disassembly:Hasbro also creates products that are not easilydisassembled once discarded, earning it an initialscore of 2. For instance, more complex toys areusually made with multiple parts that are notclearly labeled. Being one of the largest suppliers oftoys, Hasbro has the ability to encourage anenormous amount of diverse people to behavesustainably. However, he Toy Box still provides thesame stylistic toys that Hasbro produced from theinitial LP Analysis. In this area, the Hasbro Toy Boxstays the same, at 2, because the parts are still notenvironmentally friendly.

Vision:Hasbro received a low score of 1 in the Visiondynamic because it did not provide customers withinspiration or relevant incentives to makeindividual sustainable life choices. The majority ofHasbro items were considered, at best, occasionaltreats and at worst, luxury goods. The Hasbro ToyBox changes that perception by granting those witha lower socioeconomic standing to participate inthe joy of playing with a Hasbro toy. The servicealso promotes a sharing economy and communityatmosphere. We envision this new dynamic willcompel consumers to make more sociallyresponsible decisions and visualize the impact oftheir choices on the community around them. Withthe Hasbro Toy Box, the Vision score rises to 4.

LIVING PRINCIPLES ANALYSIS

17

Autobots [Photograph]. Retrieved November 30, 2014 from http://thisisinfamous.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/Autobots-United-bots.png

Buzz Lightyear [Online Image]. Retrieved November 30, 2014 from http://static.giantbomb.com/uploads/original/0/4938/889948-buzzlightyear_high.jpg

Captain America [Photograph]. Retrieved November 30, 2014 from http://img534.imageshack.us/img534/3741/marvelavn10inultimateav.jpg

Hasbro Avengers [Photograph]. Retrieved November 30, 2014 from http://acecomics.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/hasbro-avengers.png

Hasbro Logo [Online Image]. Retrieved November 30, 2014 from http://rebelsreport.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/Hasbro_2009_1382391128.jpg

Hulk [Photograph]. Retrieved November 30, 2014 from http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-e9Par4JiMSM/UAeb5Ev7gtI/AAAAAAAAITs/o1yH0PNUxao/s1600/IMG_1846.JPG

Kre-o Battleship [Online Image]. Retrieved November 30, 2014 from http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-y1Z8z8t_RI4/T4_gm6aU73I/AAAAAAAAAt4/B6j9PI4GnV0/s1600/9b66da885056900b10b0e127134066e3-001.jpg

Kre-o Power Ranger [Photograph]. Retrieved November 30, 2014 from http://th07.deviantart.net/fs71/PRE/i/2013/037/d/2/kre_o_power_ranger_by_t4m32-d5u0ujz.jpg

Monopoly [Photograph]. Retrieved November 30, 2014 from https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7380/11513424364_f48b8cb877.jpg

Monopoly Token Hat [Photograph]. Retrieved November 30, 2014 from http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-zWCbXz06yoc/UQGnal-yiDI/AAAAAAAAB-s/I8neBdSVCrM/s1600/monopoly_token_hat.png

Monopoly Token Ship [Photograph]. Retrieved November 30, 2014 from http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-3hfDf86m9AM/UQGna9EhDWI/AAAAAAAAB-4/hVpypVNfBWo/s1600/monopoly_token_ship.png

Mr. Potato Head Wolverine [Photograph]. Retrieved November 30, 2014 from http://news.toyark.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/4/2013/02/Mr-Potato-Head-Wolverine-001_1360370575.jpg

WORKS CITED

18

My Little Pony [Photograph]. Retrieved November 30, 2014 from http://www.hasbro.com/common/productimages/pt_BR/70da5ba450569047f5e95a352fd0d022/converted4722d128677f22a590a5937c7b71637be531b308.jpg

My Little Pony Nightmare Moon [Photograph]. Retrieved November 30, 2014 from http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Orh_NsLSLh0/UdNUhNGZFXI/AAAAAAAASBk/ibnYVjZXb64/s1600/TRU_ENTERTAINMENT_EARTH_SDCC_2013_EXCLUSIVE_MY_LITTLE_PONY_NIGHTMARE_MOON.jpg

Optimus Prime Kre-o [Photograph]. Retrieved November 30, 2014 from http://www.tfw2005.com/transformers-news/attach/4/1/7/2/7/001-Beast-Blade-Optimus-Prime-Kre-O_1360102601.jpg

Spiderman [Online Image]. Retrieved November 30, 2014 from http://www.mureview.net/wp-content/gallery/spider-man/marvel-spider-man-3-75-mission-spider-sense-sm-38326.jpg

Toy Story 3 Aliens [Online Image]. Retrieved November 30, 2014 from http://www.thelittleactivitychest.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/toy-story-3-aliens.jpg

WORKS CITED (cont’d)

19