Anda di halaman 1dari 55

Strategic Management

Need of Strategic Management:1. Due to change 2. To provide guide lines 3. Research and development 4. Probability for business performance 5. ystemi!ed decision

". #mproves $ommunication %. &llocation of resource


8. 9.

#mproves $oordination 'elps the managers to have holistic approach

Importance of Strategic Management:-

1. To the shape the (uture of business 2. )ffective strategic idea 3. *angers and employer are innovative and creative 4. #ts decentrali!ed the *anagement 5. #ts helps to increase the productivity ". To *a+es discipline %. To *a+e control

,. To ma+es for-ard s thin+ing

The Strategic Planning Process:


#n today.s highly competitive business environment/ budget0oriented planning or forecast0based planning methods are insufficient for a large corporation to survive and prosper. The firm must engage in strategic planning that clearly defines ob1ectives and assesses both the internal and e2ternal situation to formulate strategy/ implement the strategy/ evaluate the progress/ and ma+e ad1ustments as necessary to stay on trac+. & simplified vie- of the strategic planning process is sho-n by the follo-ing diagram3 The Strategic Planning Process

The Strategic Planning Process

Mission & Objectives

Environmental Scanning

Strateg !orm"lation

Strateg Implementation

Eval"ation & #ontrol

Mission and Objectives

The mission statement describes the company.s business vision/ including the unchanging values and purpose of the firm and for-ard0loo+ing visionary goals that guide the pursuit of future opportunities. 4uided by the business vision/ the firm.s leaders can define measurable financial and strategic ob1ectives. (inancial ob1ectives involve measures such as sales targets and earnings gro-th. trategic ob1ectives are related to the firm.s business position/ and may include measures such as mar+et share and reputation. Environmental Scan The environmental scan includes the follo-ing components3

#nternal analysis of the firm &nalysis of the firm.s industry 5tas+ environment6 )2ternal microenvironment 5P) T analysis6

The internal analysis can identify the firm.s strengths and -ea+nesses and the e2ternal analysis reveals opportunities and threats. & profile of the strengths/ -ea+nesses/ opportunities/ and threats is generated by means of a 78T analysis &n industry analysis can be performed using a frame-or+ developed by *ichael Porter +no-n as Porter.s five forces. This frame-or+ evaluates entry barriers/ suppliers/ customers/ substitute products/ and industry rivalry. Strateg !orm"lation 4iven the information from the environmental scan/ the firm should match its strengths to the opportunities that it has identified/ -hile addressing its -ea+nesses and e2ternal threats. To attain superior profitability/ the firm see+s to develop a competitive advantage over its rivals. & competitive advantage can be based on cost or differentiation. *ichael Porter identified three industry0independent generic strategies from -hich the firm can choose. Strateg Implementation The selected strategy is implemented by means of programs/ budgets/ and procedures. #mplementation involves organi!ation of the firm.s resources and motivation of the staff to achieve ob1ectives.

The -ay in -hich the strategy is implemented can have a significant impact on -hether it -ill be successful. #n a large company/ those -ho implement the strategy li+ely -ill be different people from those -ho formulated it. (or this reason/ care must be ta+en to communicate the strategy and the reasoning behind it. 8ther-ise/ the implementation might not succeed if the strategy is misunderstood or if lo-er0 level managers resist its implementation because they do not understand -hy the particular strategy -as selected. Eval"ation & #ontrol The implementation of the strategy must be monitored and ad1ustments made as needed. )valuation and control consists of the follo-ing steps3 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Define parameters to be measured Define target values for those parameters Perform measurements $ompare measured results to the pre0defined standard *a+e necessary changes

$#% %ro&th-Share Matri'


$ompanies that are large enough to be organi!ed into strategic business units face the challenge of allocating resources among those units. #n the early 19%:.s the ;oston $onsulting 4roup developed a model for managing a portfolio of different business units 5or ma1or product lines6. The ;$4 gro&th-share matri' displays the various business units on a graph of the mar+et gro-th rate vs. mar+et share relative to competitors3
$#% %ro&th-Share Matri'

Resources are allocated to business units according to -here they are situated on the grid as follo-s3

#ash #o& 0 a business unit that has a large mar+et share in a mature/ slogro-ing industry. $ash co-s re<uire little investment and generate cash that can be used to invest in other business units. Star 0 a business unit that has a large mar+et share in a fast gro-ing industry. tars may generate cash/ but because the mar+et is gro-ing rapidly they re<uire investment to maintain their lead. #f successful/ a star -ill become a cash co- -hen its industry matures. ("estion Mar) *or Problem #hild+ 0 a business unit that has a small mar+et share in a high gro-th mar+et. These business units re<uire resources to gromar+et share/ but -hether they -ill succeed and become stars is un+no-n. ,og 0 a business unit that has a small mar+et share in a mature industry. & dog may not re<uire substantial cash/ but it ties up capital that could better be deployed else-here. =nless a dog has some other strategic purpose/ it should be li<uidated if there is little prospect for it to gain mar+et share.

The ;$4 matri2 provides a frame-or+ for allocating resources among different business units and allo-s one to compare many business units at a glance. 'o-ever/ the approach has received some negative criticism for the follo-ing reasons3

The lin+ bet-een mar+et share and profitability is <uestionable since increasing mar+et share can be very e2pensive. The approach may overemphasi!e high gro-th/ since it ignores the potential of declining mar+ets. The model considers mar+et gro-th rate to be a given. #n practice the firm may be able to gro- the mar+et.

These issues are addressed by the 4) > *c?insey *atri2/ -hich considers mar+et gro-th rate to be only one of many factors that ma+e an industry attractive/ and -hich considers relative mar+et share to be only one of many factors describing the competitive strength of the business unit.

The $"siness -ision and #ompan Mission Statement

7hile a business must continually adapt to its competitive environment/ there are certain core ideals that remain relatively steady and provide guidance in the process of strategic decision0ma+ing. These unchanging ideals form the b"siness vision and are e2pressed in the company mission statement. #n their 199" article entitled Building Your Company's Vision/ @ames $ollins and @erry Porras provided a frame-or+ for understanding business vision and articulating it in a mission statement. The mission statement communicates the firm.s core ideology and visionary goals/ generally consisting of the follo-ing three components3
1. 2. 3.

#ore val"es to -hich the firm is committed #ore p"rpose of the firm -isionar goals the firm -ill pursue to fulfill its mission

The firm.s core values and purpose constitute its core ideology and remain relatively constant. They are independent of industry structure and the product life cycle. The core ideology is not created in a mission statementA rather/ the mission statement is simply an e2pression of -hat already e2ists. The specific phrasing of the ideology may change -ith the times/ but the underlying ideology remains constant.

The three components of the business vision can be portrayed as follo-s3

#ore -al"es

#ore P"rpos e

$"siness -ision

#ore -al"es The core values are a fe- values 5no more than five or so6 that are central to the firm. $ore values reflect the deeply held values of the organi!ation and are independent of the current industry environment and management fads. 8ne -ay to determine -hether a value is a core value to as+ -hether it -ould continue to be supported if circumstances changed and caused it to be seen as a liability. #f the ans-er is that it -ould be +ept/ then it is core value. &nother -ay to determine -hich values are core is to imagine the firm moving into a totally different industry. The values that -ould be carried -ith it into the ne- industry are the core values of the firm. $ore values -ill not change even if the industry in -hich the company operates changes. #f the industry changes such that the core values are not appreciated/ then the firm should see+ ne- mar+ets -here its core values are vie-ed as an asset. (or e2ample/ if innovation is a core value but then 1: years do-n the road innovation is no longer valued by the current customers/ rather than change its values the firm should see+ ne- mar+ets -here innovation is advantageous. The follo-ing are a fe- e2amples of values that some firms has chosen to be in their core3

e2cellent customer service pioneering technology creativity integrity social responsibility

#ore P"rpose The core purpose is the reason that the firm e2ists. This core purpose is e2pressed in a carefully formulated mission statement. Bi+e the core values/ the core purpose is relatively unchanging and for many firms endures for decades or even centuries. This purpose sets the firm apart from other firms in its industry and sets the direction in -hich the firm -ill proceed. The core purpose is an idealistic reason for being. 7hile firms e2ist to earn a profit/ the profit motive should not be highlighted in the mission statement since it provides little direction to the firm.s employees. 7hat is more important is how the firm -ill earn its profit since the Cho-C is -hat defines the firm. #nitial attempts at stating a core purpose often result in too specific of a statement that focuses on a product or service. To isolate the core purpose/ it is useful to as+ C-hyC in response to first0pass/ product0oriented mission statements. (or e2ample/ if a mar+et research firm initially states that its purpose is to provide mar+et research data to its customers/ as+ing C-hyC leads to the fact that the data is to help customers better understand their mar+ets. $ontinuing to as+ C-hyC may lead to the revelation that the firm.s core purpose is to assist its clients in reaching their ob1ectives by helping them to better understand their mar+ets. The core purpose and values of the firm are not selected 0 they are discovered. The stated ideology should not be a goal or aspiration but rather/ it should portray the firm as it really is. &ny attempt to state a value that is not already held by the firm.s employees is li+ely to not be ta+en seriously.

-isionar %oals The visionary goals are the lofty ob1ectives that the firm.s management decides to pursue. This vision describes some milestone that the firm -ill reach in the future and may re<uire a decade or more to achieve. #n contrast to the core ideology that the firm discovers/ visionary goals are selected. These visionary goals are longer term and more challenging than strategic or tactical goals. There may be only a 5:D chance of reali!ing the vision/ but the firm must believe that it can do so. $ollins and Porras describe these lofty ob1ectives as C;ig/ 'airy/ &udacious 4oals.C These goals should be challenging enough so that people

nearly gasp -hen they learn of them and reali!e the effort that -ill be re<uired to reach them. *ost visionary goals fall into one of the follo-ing categories3

Target 0 <uantitative or <ualitative goals such as a sales target or (ord.s goal to Cdemocrati!e the automobile.C #ommon enem 0 centered on overta+ing a specific firm such as the 195:.s goal of Philip0*orris to displace R@R. .ole model 0 to become li+e another firm in a different industry or mar+et. (or e2ample/ a cycling accessories firm might strive to become Cthe Ei+e of the cycling industry.C Internal transformation 0 especially appropriate for very large corporations. (or e2ample/ 4) set the goal of becoming number one or number t-o in every mar+et it serves.

7hile visionary goals may re<uire significant stretching to achieve/ many visionary companies have succeeded in reaching them. 8nce such a goal is reached/ it needs to be replacedA other-ise/ it is unli+ely that the organi!ation -ill continue to be successful. (or e2ample/ (ord succeeded in placing the automobile -ithin the reach of everyday people/ but did not replace this goal -ith a better one and 4eneral *otors overtoo+ (ord in the 193:.s.

#ompetitive /dvantage
7hen a firm sustains profits that e2ceed the average for its industry/ the firm is said to possess a competitive advantage over its rivals. The goal of much of business strategy is to achieve a sustainable competitive advantage. *ichael Porter identified t-o basic types of competitive advantage3

#ost advantage ,ifferentiation advantage

& competitive advantage e2ists -hen the firm is able to deliver the same benefits as competitors but at a lo-er cost 5cost advantage6/ or deliver benefits that e2ceed those of competing products 5differentiation advantage6. Thus/ a competitive advantage enables the firm to create superior value for its customers and superior profits for itself. $ost and differentiation advantages are +no-n as positional advantages since they describe the firm.s position in the industry as a leader in either cost or differentiation. & resource-based view emphasi!es that a firm utili!es its resources and capabilities to create a competitive advantage that ultimately results in superior value creation. The follo-ing diagram combines the resource0based and positioning vie-s to illustrate the concept of competitive advantage3

/ Model of #ompetitive /dvantage

Resources

Distinctive $ompetencies

$ost &dvantage or Differentiation &dvantage

Falue $reation

$apabilities

.eso"rces and #apabilities &ccording to the resource0based vie-/ in order to develop a competitive advantage the firm must have resources and capabilities that are superior to those of its competitors. 7ithout this superiority/ the competitors simply could replicate -hat the firm -as doing and any advantage <uic+ly -ould disappear. .eso"rces are the firm0specific assets useful for creating a cost or differentiation advantage and that fe- competitors can ac<uire easily. The follo-ing are some e2amples of such resources3

Patents and trademar+s Proprietary +no-0ho#nstalled customer base Reputation of the firm ;rand e<uity

#apabilities refer to the firm.s ability to utili!e its resources effectively. &n e2ample of a capability is the ability to bring a product to mar+et faster than competitors.

uch capabilities are embedded in the routines of the organi!ation and are not easily documented as procedures and thus are difficult for competitors to replicate. The firm.s resources and capabilities together form its distinctive competencies. These competencies enable innovation/ efficiency/ <uality/ and customer responsiveness/ all of -hich can be leveraged to create a cost advantage or a differentiation advantage. #ost /dvantage and ,ifferentiation /dvantage $ompetitive advantage is created by using resources and capabilities to achieve either a lo-er cost structure or a differentiated product. & firm positions itself in its industry through its choice of lo- cost or differentiation. This decision is a central component of the firm.s competitive strategy. &nother important decision is ho- broad or narro- a mar+et segment to target. Porter formed a matri2 using cost advantage/ differentiation advantage/ and a broad or narro- focus to identify a set of generic strategies that the firm can pursue to create and sustain a competitive advantage. -al"e #reation The firm creates value by performing a series of activities that Porter identified as the value chain. #n addition to the firm.s o-n value0creating activities/ the firm operates in a value system of vertical activities including those of upstream suppliers and do-nstream channel members. To achieve a competitive advantage/ the firm must perform one or more value creating activities in a -ay that creates more overall value than do competitors. uperior value is created through lo-er costs or superior benefits to the consumer 5differentiation6.

#ore #ompetencies

#n their 199: article entitled/ The Core Competence of the Corporation/ $.?. Prahalad and 4ary 'amel coined the term core competencies/ or the collective learning and coordination s+ills behind the firm.s product lines. They made the case that core competencies are the source of competitive advantage and enable the firm to introduce an array of ne- products and services. &ccording to Prahalad and 'amel/ core competencies lead to the development of core products. $ore products are not directly sold to end usersA rather/ they are used to build a larger number of end0user products. (or e2ample/ motors are a core product that can be used in -ide array of end products. The business units of the corporation each tap into the relatively fe- core products to develop a larger number of end user products based on the core product technology. This flo- from core competencies to end products is sho-n in the follo-ing diagram3

#ore #ompetencies to End Prod"cts


End Products 1 2 3 4 5 " % , 9 1: 11 12

$"siness 0

$"siness 1

$"siness 2

$"siness 3

#ore Prod"ct 0

#ore Prod"ct 1

#ompetence 0

#ompetence 1

#ompetence 2

#ompetence 3

The intersection of mar+et opportunities -ith core competencies forms the basis for launching ne- businesses. ;y combining a set of core competencies in different -ays and matching them to mar+et opportunities/ a corporation can launch a vast array of businesses. 7ithout core competencies/ a large corporation is 1ust a collection of discrete businesses. $ore competencies serve as the glue that bonds the business units together into a coherent portfolio.

,eveloping #ore #ompetencies &ccording to Prahalad and 'amel/ core competencies arise from the integration of multiple technologies and the coordination of diverse production s+ills. ome e2amples include Philip.s e2pertise in optical media and ony.s ability to miniaturi!e electronics. There are three tests useful for identifying a core competence. & core competence should3 1. provide access to a -ide variety of mar+ets/ and 2. contribute significantly to the end0product benefits/ and 3. be difficult for competitors to imitate. $ore competencies tend to be rooted in the ability to integrate and coordinate various groups in the organi!ation. 7hile a company may be able to hire a team of brilliant scientists in a particular technology/ in doing so it does not automatically gain a core competence in that technology. #t is the effective coordination among all the groups involved in bringing a product to mar+et that results in a core competence. #t is not necessarily an e2pensive underta+ing to develop core competencies. The missing pieces of a core competency often can be ac<uired at a lo- cost through alliances and licensing agreements. #n many cases an organi!ational design that facilitates sharing of competencies can result in much more effective utili!ation of those competencies for little or no additional cost.

To better understand ho- to develop core competencies/ it is -orth-hile to understand -hat they do not entail. &ccording to Prahalad and 'amel/ core competencies are not necessarily about3

outspending rivals on RGD sharing costs among business units integrating vertically

7hile the building of core competencies may be facilitated by some of these actions/ by themselves they are insufficient.

The 4oss of #ore #ompetencies $ost0cutting moves sometimes destroy the ability to build core competencies. (or e2ample/ decentrali!ation ma+es it more difficult to build core competencies because autonomous groups rely on outsourcing of critical tas+s/ and this outsourcing prevents the firm from developing core competencies in those tas+s since it no longer consolidates the +no-0ho- that is spread throughout the company. (ailure to recogni!e core competencies may lead to decisions that result in their loss. (or e2ample/ in the 19%:.s many =. . manufacturers divested themselves of their television manufacturing businesses/ reasoning that the industry -as mature and that high <uality/ lo- cost models -ere available from (ar )ast manufacturers. #n the process/ they lost their core competence in video/ and this loss resulted in a handicap in the ne-er digital television industry. imilarly/ *otorola divested itself of its semiconductor DR&* business at 25"?b level/ and then -as unable to enter the 1*b mar+et on its o-n. ;y recogni!ing its core competencies and understanding the time re<uired to build them or regain them/ a company can ma+e better divestment decisions. #ore Prod"cts $ore competencies manifest themselves in core products that serve as a lin+ bet-een the competencies and end products. $ore products enable value creation in the end products. )2amples of firms and some of their core products include3

3* 0 substrates/ coatings/ and adhesives ;lac+ G Dec+er 0 small electric motors

$anon 0 laser printer subsystems *atsushita 0 F$R subsystems/ compressors E)$ 0 semiconductors 'onda 0 gasoline po-ered engines

The core products are used to launch a variety of end products. (or e2ample/ 'onda uses its engines in automobiles/ motorcycles/ la-n mo-ers/ and portable generators. ;ecause firms may sell their core products to other firms that use them as the basis for end user products/ traditional measures of brand mar+et share are insufficient for evaluating the success of core competencies. Prahalad and 'amel suggest that core product share is the appropriate metric. 7hile a company may have a lo- brand share/ it may have high core product share and it is this share that is important from a core competency standpoint. 8nce a firm has successful core products/ it can e2pand the number of uses in order to gain a cost advantage via economies of scale and economies of scope.

Implications for #orporate Management Prahalad and 'amel suggest that a corporation should be organi!ed into a portfolio of core competencies rather than a portfolio of independent business units. ;usiness unit managers tend to focus on getting immediate end0products to mar+et rapidly and usually do not feel responsible for developing company0-ide core competencies. $onse<uently/ -ithout the incentive and direction from corporate management to do other-ise/ strategic business units are inclined to underinvest in the building of core competencies. #f a business unit does manage to develop its o-n core competencies over time/ due to its autonomy it may not share them -ith other business units. &s a solution to this problem/ Prahalad and 'amel suggest that corporate managers should have the ability to allocate not only cash but also core competencies among business units. ;usiness units that lose +ey employees for the sa+e of a corporate core competency should be recogni!ed for their contribution.

#orporate Strateg :

T pes of #orporate Strateg :

Strategic Management Concepts


&lthough the term Hstrategic managementI is bantered around a lot in the businesses -orld/ it is not understood very -ell by most people. )ssentially strategic management ans-ers the <uestions of H-here do you -ant your business to goI 5goals6/ Hho- is your business going to get thereI 5strategy6 and Hho- -ill you +no-hen you get thereI 5evaluation6. & strategic management analogy is ta+ing a trip during your vacation. (irst you decide -here you -ant to go J the natural beauty of Kello-stone or the bright lights of Bas Fegas. Then you develop a strategy of ho- to get there J ta+e an airplane 5-hich flights6/ drive your car 5-hich high-ays6/ etc. This -ill be influenced by the amount of money/ time and 8ther resources you have available. Then you monitor your trip to see if your strategy ta+es you to your destination and ho- your strategy -or+ed 5missed (lights/ poor road conditions/ etc.6. ;elo- are concepts to help e2pand your understand of strategic management for a business. These -ill help sharpen your focus for using trategic *anagement for a Falue0added (arm ;usiness. 16 26 trategic management involves deciding -hat is important for the long0range success of your business and focusing on it. trategic management as+s/ H'o- should # position my business to meet management and business goalsLI

36 & business strategy is a series of business decisions that lead to achieving a business goal. 46 trategic management involves the Hbig pictureI of your business. 56 trategic management involves planning/ analy!ing and implementing a business strategy. "6 trategic management is most effective if you can step bac+ far enough and say Hall things are possible.I %6 The essence of strategic management is matching business resources to mar+et opportunities. ,6 trategic management involves see+ing and identifying opportunities and threats in the mar+et and industry and the outside -orld in general. 96 trategic management is based on the premise that Hall businesses are not the same.I 1:6 trategic management involves assessing the strengths and -ea+nesses of your business. 116 7hen assessing strengths and -ea+nesses/ personal s+ills and abilities are li+ely to be more important than business assets. 126 trategic management involves loo+ing into the future rather than d-elling on the past. 136 trategic management is proactive rather than reactive. 146 trategic management involves anticipating change and ta+ing advantage of it. 156 trategic thin+ing involves assessing ho- decisions made today -ill affect my business in the future. 1"6 trategic management is more of a state0of mind than a rigid process. 1%6 & military connotation of strategic management is Hit hasnMt -on every -ar/ but it has avoided a lot of ambushes.I

1,6 trategic management is most useful for businesses -ith uni<ue or differentiated products for niche/ specialty or differentiated product *ar+ets. 196 trategic planning comes before business planning. trategic planning is used to identify and assess alternative business strategies. ;usiness planning is used to implement a business strategy. 2:6 trategic planning is more -ords and less numbers than business planning. 216 & strategic plan is a HlivingI document that changes as your goals and resources evolve.

Strategic management

%lobal Strategic Management


During the last half of the t-entieth century/ many barriers to international trade fell and a -ave of firms began pursuing global strategies to gain a competitive advantage. 'o-ever/ some industries benefit more from globali!ation than do others/ and some nations have a comparative advantage over other nations in certain industries. To create a successful global strategy/ managers first must understand the nature of global industries and the dynamics of global competition. So"rces of #ompetitive /dvantage from a %lobal Strateg & -ell0designed global strategy can help a firm to gain a competitive advantage. This advantage can arise from the follo-ing sources3

Efficienc

o o o o

)conomies of scale from access to more customers and mar+ets )2ploit another country.s resources 0 labor/ ra- materials )2tend the product life cycle 0 older products can be sold in lesser developed countries 8perational fle2ibility 0 shift production as costs/ e2change rates/ etc. change over time

Strategic o (irst mover advantage and only provider of a product to a mar+et o $ross subsidi!ation bet-een countries o Transfer price .is)
o o

Diversify macroeconomic ris+s 5business cycles not perfectly correlated among countries6 Diversify operational ris+s 5labor problems/ earth<ua+es/ -ars6

4earning o ;roaden learning opportunities due to diversity of operating environments .ep"tation o $rossover customers bet-een mar+ets 0 reputation and brand identification

umantra 4hoshal of #E )&D proposed a frame-or+ comprising three categories of strategic ob1ectives and three sources of advantage that can be used to achieve them. &ssembling these into a matri2 results in the follo-ing frame-or+3

Strategic Objectives Efficienc in Operations !le'ibilit Innovation and

Sources of Competitive Advantage National ,ifferences )2ploit factor cost differences *ar+et or policy0induced changes ocietal differences in Scale Economies cale in each activity Scope Economies haring investments and costs

;alancing scale -ith Portfolio strategic G operational ris+s diversification )2perience 0 cost reduction hared learning across

4earning

management and organi!ation and innovation

activities

The Nat"re of #ompetitive /dvantage in %lobal Ind"stries & global industry can be defined as3

&n industry in -hich firms must compete in all -orld mar+ets of that product in order to survive. &n industry in -hich a firm.s competitive advantage depends on economies of scale and economies of scope gained across mar+ets.

ome industries are more suited for globali!ation than are others. The follo-ing drivers determine an industry.s globali!ation potential. 05 #ost ,rivers o Bocation of strategic resources o Differences in country costs o Potential for economies of scale 5production/ RGD/ etc.6 (lat e2perience curves in an industry inhibits globali!ation. 8ne reason that the facsimile industry had more global potential than the furniture industry is that for fa2 machines/ the production costs drop 3:D04:D -ith each doubling of volumeA the curve is much flatter for the furniture industry and many service industries. #ndustries for -hich the larger e2penses are in RGD/ such as the aircraft industry/ e2hibit more economies of scale than those industries for -hich the larger e2penses are rent and labor/ such as the dry cleaning industry. #ndustries in -hich costs drop by at least 2:D for each doubling of volume tend to be good candidates for globali!ation. o Transportation costs 5value>bul+ or value>-eight ratio6 NO Diamonds and semiconductors are more global than ice.

15 #"stomer ,rivers o $ommon customer needs favor globali!ation. (or e2ample/ the facsimile industry.s customers have more homogeneous needs than those of the furniture industry/ -hose needs are defined by local tastes/ culture/ etc.

o o

4lobal customers3 if a firm.s customers are other global businesses/ globali!ation may be re<uired to reach these customers in all their mar+ets. (urthermore/ global customers often re<uire globally standardi!ed products. 4lobal channels re<uire a globally coordinated mar+eting program. trong established local distribution channels inhibits globali!ation. Transferable mar+eting3 -hether mar+eting elements such as brand names and advertising re<uire little local adaptation. 7orld brands -ith non0dictionary names may be developed in order to benefit from a single global advertising campaign.

25 #ompetitive ,rivers o 4lobal competitors3 The e2istence of many global competitors indicates that an industry is ripe for globali!ation. 4lobal competitors -ill have a cost advantage over local competitors. o 7hen competitors begin leveraging their global positions through cross0subsidi!ation/ an industry is ripe for globali!ation.

35 %overnment ,rivers o Trade policies o Technical standards o Regulations

The furniture industry is an e2ample of an industry that did not lend itself to globali!ation before the 19":.s. ;ecause furniture has a high bul+ compared to its value/ and because furniture is easily damaged in shipping/ transport costs traditionally -ere high. 4overnment trade barriers also -ere unfavorable. The -edish furniture company #?)& pioneered a move to-ards globali!ation in the furniture industry. #?)&.s furniture -as unassembled and therefore could be shipped more economically. #?)& also lo-ered costs by involving the customer in the value chainA the customer carried the furniture home and assembled it himself. #?)& also had a frugal culture that gave it cost advantages. #?)& successfully e2panded in )urope since customers in different countries -ere -illing to purchase similar

designs. 'o-ever/ after successfully e2panding to several countries/ #?)& ran into difficulties in the =. . mar+et for several reasons3

Different tastes in furniture and a re<uirement for more customi!ed furniture. Difficult to transfer #?)&.s frugal culture to the =. . The -edish ?rona increased in value/ increasing the cost of furniture made in -eden and sold in the =. . toc+0outs due to the one to t-o month shipping time from )urope *ore competition in the =. . than in )urope

#o"ntr #omparative /dvantages #ompetitive advantage is a firm.s ability to transform inputs into goods and services at a ma2imum profit on a sustained basis/ better than competitors. #omparative advantage resides in the factor endo-ments and created endo-ments of particular regions. (actor endo-ments include land/ natural resources/ labor/ and the si!e of the local population. #n the 192:.s/ -edish economists )li 'ec+sher and ;ertil 8hlin developed the factor0proportions theory/ according to -hich a country en1oys a comparative advantage in those goods that ma+e intensive use of factors that the country has in relative abundance. *ichael ). Porter argued that a nation can create its o-n endo-ments to gain a comparative advantage. $reated endo-ments include s+illed labor/ the technology and +no-ledge base/ government support/ and culture. Porter.s Diamond of Eational &dvantage is a frame-or+ that illustrates the determinants of national advantage. This diamond represents the national playing field that countries establish for their industries. T pes of International Strateg : M"lti-domestic vs5 %lobal ulti-domestic !trategy

Product customi!ed for each mar+et Decentrali!ed control 0 local decision ma+ing )ffective -hen large differences e2ist bet-een countries &dvantages3 product differentiation/ local responsiveness/ minimi!ed political ris+/ minimi!ed e2change rate ris+

"lobal !trategy

Product is the same in all countries. $entrali!ed control 0 little decision0ma+ing authority on the local level )ffective -hen differences bet-een countries are small &dvantages3 cost/ coordinated activities/ faster product development

& fully multi0local value chain -ill have every function from RGD to distribution and service performed entirely at the local level in each country. &t the other e2treme/ a fully global value chain -ill source each activity in a different country. Philips is a good e2ample of a company that follo-ed a multidomestic strategy. This strategy resulted in3

#nnovation from local RGD )ntrepreneurial spirit Products tailored to individual countries 'igh <uality due to bac+-ard integration

The multi0domestic strategy also presented Philips -ith many challenges3


'igh costs due to tailored products and duplication across countries The innovation from the local RGD groups resulted in products that -ere RGD driven instead of mar+et driven. Decentrali!ed control meant that national buy0in -as re<uired before introducing a product 0 time to mar+et -as slo-.

*atsushita is a good e2ample of a company that follo-ed a global strategy. This strategy resulted in3

trong global distribution net-or+ $ompany0-ide mission statement that -as follo-ed closely (inancial control *ore applied RGD &bility to get to mar+et <uic+ly and force standards since individual country buy0in -as not necessary.

The global strategy presented *atsushita -ith the follo-ing challenges3


Problem of strong yen Too much dependency on one product 0 the F$R Boss of non0&sian employees because of glass ceilings

& third strategy/ -hich -as appropriate to 7hirlpool is one of mass customi!ation/ discussed belo-.

%lobal #ost Str"ct"re /nal sis #n 19,"/ 7hirlpool $orporation -as considering e2panding into )urope by ac<uiring Philips. *a1or Domestic &ppliance Division. (rom the frame-or+ of customers/ costs/ competitors/ and government/ there -ere several pros and cons to this proposed strategy. Pros

#nternal components of the appliances could be the same/ offering economies of scale. The cost to customi!e the outer structure of the appliances -as relatively lo-. The appliance industry -as mature -ith lo- gro-th. The ac<uisition -ould offer an avenue to continue gro-ing.

Cons

(ragmented distribution net-or+ in )urope. Different consumer needs and preferences. (or e2ample/ in )urope refrigerators tend to be smaller than in the =. ./ have only one outside door/ and have standard si!es so they can be built into the +itchen cabinet. #n @apan/ refrigerators tend to have several doors in order to +eep different compartments at different temperatures and to isolate odors. &lso/ because houses are smaller in @apan/ consumers desire <uieter appliances. 7hirlpool already -as the dominant player in a fragmented industry.

ince Philip.s had a relatively small mar+et share in the )uropean appliance mar+et/ one must analy!e the cost structure to determine if the ac<uisition -ould offer

7hirlpool a competitive advantage. 7ith the ac<uisition/ 7hirlpool -ould be able to cut costs on ra- materials/ depreciation and maintenance/ RGD/ and general and administrative costs. These costs represented 53D of 7hirlpool.s cost structure. $ompared to most other industries/ this percentage of costs that could benefit from economies of scale is <uite large. #t -ould be reasonable to e2pect a 1:D reduction in these costs/ an amount that -ould decrease overall cost by 5.3D/ doubling profits. uch potential 1ustifies the ris+ of increasing the comple2ity of the organi!ation. ;ecause of the different preferences of consumers in different mar+ets/ a purely global strategy -ith standard products -as not appropriate. 7hirlpool -ould have to adapt its products to local mar+ets/ but maintain some global integration in order to reali!e cost benefits. This strategy is +no-n as Cmass customi!ation.C 7hirlpool ac<uired Philips. *a1or Domestic &ppliance Division/ 4%D in 19,9 and the remainder in 1991. #nitially/ margins doubled as predicted. 'o-ever/ local competitors responded by better tailoring their products and cutting costsA 7hirlpool.s profits then began to decline. 7hirlpool applied the same strategy to &sia/ but 4) -as outperforming 7hirlpool there by tailoring its products as part of its multi0domestic strategy.

%lobali6ing Service $"sinesses ervice industries tend to have a flat e2perience curve and lo-er economies of scale. 'o-ever/ some economy of scale may be gained through +no-ledge sharing/ -hich enables the cost of developing the +no-ledge over a larger base. &lso/ in some industries such as professional services/ capacity utili!ation can better be managed as the scope of operations increases. 8n the customer side/ because a service firm.s customers may themselves be operating internationally/ global e2pansion may be a necessity. ?no-ledge gained in foreign mar+ets can used to better service customers. (inally/ being global also enhances a firm.s reputation/ -hich is critical in service businesses. 'igh <uality service products often depend on the service firm.s culture/ and maintaining a consistent culture -hen e2panding globally is a challenge. & good e2ample of a service firm that e2perienced global e2pansion challenges is the management consulting firm ;ain G $ompany/ #nc. #n consulting/ a firm.s most important strategic asset is its reputation/ so a consistent firm culture is very

important. ;ain faced the follo-ing challenges/ -hich depend on the firm.s strategy and -hich affect the ability to maintain a consistent culture3

$oordinating across offices and sharing +no-ledge 7hether to hire locals or international staff 'o- to compensate

Modes of !oreign Mar)et Entr &n important part of a global strategy is the method that the firm -ill use to enter the foreign mar+et. There are four possible modes of foreign mar+et entry3

)2porting Bicensing 5includes franchising6 @oint Fenture (oreign Direct #nvestment

These options vary in their degree of speed/ control/ and ris+/ as -ell as the re<uired level of investment and mar+et +no-ledge. The entry mode selection can have a significant impact on the firm.s foreign mar+et success.

Iss"es in Emerging Economies #n emerging economies/ capital mar+ets are relatively inefficient. There is a lac+ of information/ the cost of capital is high/ and venture capital is virtually none2istent. ;ecause of the scarcity of high0<uality educational institutions/ the labor mar+ets lac+ -ell trained people and companies often must fill the void. ;ecause of lac+ing communications infrastructure/ building a brand name is difficult but good brands are highly valued because of lo-er product <uality of the alternatives. Relationships -ith government officials often are necessary to succeed/ and contracts may not be -ell enforced by the legal system. 7hen a large government monopoly 5e.g. a state0o-ned oil company6 is privati!ed/ there often is political pressure in the country against allo-ing the firm to be ac<uired by a foreign entity. 7hereas a very large =. . oil company may prefer ac<uisitions/ because of the anti0foreign sentiment 1oint ventures often are more

appropriate for outside companies interested in ne-ly privati!ed emerging economy firms.

7no&ledge Management in %lobal !irms There is much value in transferring +no-ledge and best practices bet-een parts of a global firm. 'o-ever/ many barriers prevent +no-ledge from being transferred3

;arriers attributable to the +no-ledge source o lac+ of motivation o lac+ of credibility ;arriers attributable to the +no-ledge itself 0 ambiguity and comple2ity ;arriers attributable to the +no-ledge recipient o lac+ of motivation 5not invented here syndrome6 o lac+ of absorptive capacity 0 need prere<uisite +no-ledge to advance to ne2t level ;arriers attributable to the recipient.s e2isting process 0 process rigidity ;arriers attributable to the recipient.s e2ternal environment and constraints

(urthermore/ even -hen the transfer is successful/ there often is a temporary drop in performance before the improvements are seen. During this period/ there is danger of losing faith in the ne- -ay of doing things. To facilitate +no-ledge transfer a firm can3

#mplement processes to systematically identify valuable +no-ledge and best practices. $reate incentives to motivate both the +no-ledge source and recipient. Develop absorptive capacity in the recipient 0 cumulative +no-ledge Develop strong technical and social net-or+s bet-een parts of the firm that can share +no-ledge.

#o"ntr Management $ountry managers must have the follo-ing +no-ledge3

?no-ledge of strategic management

(irm0specific +no-ledge $ountry0specific +no-ledge ?no-ledge of the global environment

$ountry organi!ations can assume the role of implementor/ contributor/ strategic leader/ or blac+ hole/ depending on the combination of importance of the local mar+et and local resources.

Strategic Importance Level of Local Resources & Capabilities of Local Market 4o& 8igh 4o& 8igh #mplementor ;lac+ 'ole $ontributor trategic Beader

The least favorable of these roles is the blac+ hole/ -hich is a subsidiary in a strategically important mar+et that has fe- capabilities. & firm can find itself in this situation because of company traditions/ ignorance of local conditions/ unfavorable entry conditions/ misreading the mar+et/ e2cessive reliance on e2patriates/ and poor e2ternal relations. To get out of a blac+ hole a firm can form alliances/ focus its investments/ implement a local RGD organi!ation/ or -hen all else fails/ e2it the country. $ountry managers assume different roles 5The #ew Country anagers/ @ohn &. Puelch/ Professor of ;usiness &dministration/ 'arvard ;usiness chool6.

#nternational tructure3 $ountry manager is a trader -ho implements policy. *ultinational tructure3 $ountry manager plays the role of a functional manager -ith profit and loss responsibilities. Transnational tructure3 $ountry manager acts as a cabinet member 5team player6 since management control systems are standardi!ed and decision0 ma+ing po-er is shifted to the region manager. The country manager develops the lead mar+et in his country and transfers the +no-ledge gained to other similar mar+ets. 4lobal tructure3 $ountry manager acts as an ambassador and administrator. #n a global firm there usually are business directors -ho oversee mar+eting

and sales. The role of the country manager becomes one of a statesman. This person usually is a local -ith good government contacts.

Hierarchical Levels of Strategy


trategy can be formulated on three different levels3

corporate level business unit level functional or departmental level.

7hile strategy may be about competing and surviving as a firm/ one can argue that products/ not corporations compete/ and products are developed by business units. The role of the corporation then is to manage its business units and products so that each is competitive and so that each contributes to corporate purposes. $onsider Te2tron/ #nc./ a successful conglomerate corporation that pursues profits through a range of businesses in unrelated industries. Te2tron has four core business segments3

&ircraft 0 32D of revenues &utomotive 0 25D of revenues #ndustrial 0 39D of revenues (inance 0 4D of revenues.

7hile the corporation must manage its portfolio of businesses to gro- and survive/ the success of a diversified firm depends upon its ability to manage each of its product lines. 7hile there is no single competitor to Te2tron/ -e can tal+ about the competitors and strategy of each of its business units. #n the finance business segment/ for e2ample/ the chief rivals are ma1or ban+s providing commercial financing. *any managers consider the business level to be the proper focus for strategic planning.

#orporate 4evel Strateg

$orporate level strategy fundamentally is concerned -ith the selection of businesses in -hich the company should compete and -ith the development and coordination of that portfolio of businesses. $orporate level strategy is concerned -ith3

Reach 0 defining the issues that are corporate responsibilitiesA these might include identifying the overall goals of the corporation/ the types of businesses in -hich the corporation should be involved/ and the -ay in -hich businesses -ill be integrated and managed. $ompetitive $ontact 0 defining -here in the corporation competition is to be locali!ed. Ta+e the case of insurance3 #n the mid0199:.s/ &etna as a corporation -as clearly identified -ith its commercial and property casualty insurance products. The conglomerate Te2tron -as not. (or Te2tron/ competition in the insurance mar+ets too+ place specifically at the business unit level/ through its subsidiary/ Paul Revere. 5Te2tron divested itself of The Paul Revere $orporation in 199%.6 *anaging &ctivities and ;usiness #nterrelationships 0 $orporate strategy see+s to develop synergies by sharing and coordinating staff and other resources across business units/ investing financial resources across business units/ and using business units to complement other corporate business activities. #gor &nsoff introduced the concept of synergy to corporate strategy. *anagement Practices 0 $orporations decide ho- business units are to be governed3 through direct corporate intervention 5centrali!ation6 or through more or less autonomous government 5decentrali!ation6 that relies on persuasion and re-ards.

$orporations are responsible for creating value through their businesses. They do so by managing their portfolio of businesses/ ensuring that the businesses are successful over the long0term/ developing business units/ and sometimes ensuring that each business is compatible -ith others in the portfolio.

$"siness 9nit 4evel Strateg & strategic business unit may be a division/ product line/ or other profit center that can be planned independently from the other business units of the firm. &t the business unit level/ the strategic issues are less about the coordination of operating units and more about developing and sustaining a competitive advantage

for the goods and services that are produced. &t the business level/ the strategy formulation phase deals -ith3

positioning the business against rivals anticipating changes in demand and technologies and ad1usting the strategy to accommodate them influencing the nature of competition through strategic actions such as vertical integration and through political actions such as lobbying.

*ichael Porter identified three generic strategies 5cost leadership/ differentiation/ and focus6 that can be implemented at the business unit level to create a competitive advantage and defend against the adverse effects of the five forces.

!"nctional 4evel Strateg The functional level of the organi!ation is the level of the operating divisions and departments. The strategic issues at the functional level are related to business processes and the value chain. (unctional level strategies in mar+eting/ finance/ operations/ human resources/ and RGD involve the development and coordination of resources through -hich business unit level strategies can be e2ecuted efficiently and effectively. (unctional units of an organi!ation are involved in higher level strategies by providing input into the business unit level and corporate level strategy/ such as providing information on resources and capabilities on -hich the higher level strategies can be based. 8nce the higher0level strategy is developed/ the functional units translate it into discrete action0plans that each department or division must accomplish for the strategy to succeed.

8ori6ontal Integration

The ac<uisition of additional business activities at the same level of the value chain is referred to as hori6ontal integration. This form of e2pansion contrasts -ith

vertical integration by -hich the firm e2pands into upstream or do-nstream activities. 'ori!ontal gro-th can be achieved by internal e2pansion or by e2ternal e2pansion through mergers and ac<uisitions of firms offering similar products and services. & firm may diversify by gro-ing hori!ontally into unrelated businesses. ome e2amples of hori!ontal integration include3

The tandard 8il $ompany.s ac<uisition of 4: refineries. &n automobile manufacturer.s ac<uisition of a sport utility vehicle manufacturer. & media company.s o-nership of radio/ television/ ne-spapers/ boo+s/ and maga!ines.

/dvantages of 8ori6ontal Integration The follo-ing are some benefits sought by firms that hori!ontally integrate3

)conomies of scale 0 acheived by selling more of the same product/ for e2ample/ by geographic e2pansion. )conomies of scope 0 achieved by sharing resources common to different products. $ommonly referred to as Csynergies.C #ncreased mar+et po-er 5over suppliers and do-nstream channel members6 Reduction in the cost of international trade by operating factories in foreign mar+ets.

ometimes benefits can be gained through customer perceptions of lin+ages bet-een products. (or e2ample/ in some cases synergy can be achieved by using the same brand name to promote multiple products. 'o-ever/ such e2tensions can have dra-bac+s/ as pointed out by &l Ries and @ac+ Trout in their mar+eting classic/ Positioning.

Pitfalls of 8ori6ontal Integration 'ori!ontal integration by ac<uisition of a competitor -ill increase a firm.s mar+et share. 'o-ever/ if the industry concentration increases significantly then anti0trust issues may arise.

&side from legal issues/ another concern is -hether the anticipated economic gains -ill materiali!e. ;efore e2panding the scope of the firm through hori!ontal integration/ management should be sure that the imagined benefits are real. *any blunders have been made by firms that broadened their hori!ontal scope to achieve synergies that did not e2ist/ for e2ample/ computer hard-are manufacturers -ho entered the soft-are business on the premise that there -ere synergies bet-een hard-are and soft-are. 'o-ever/ a connection bet-een t-o products does not necessarily imply reali!able economies of scope. (inally/ even -hen the potential benefits of hori!ontal integration e2ist/ they do not materiali!e spontaneously. There must be an e2plicit hori!ontal strategy in place. uch strategies generally do not arise from the bottom0up/ but rather/ must be formulated by corporate management.

PEST /nal sis


& scan of the e2ternal macro0environment in -hich the firm operates can be e2pressed in terms of the follo-ing factors3

Political Economic Social Technological

The acronym PEST 5or sometimes rearranged as C T)PC6 is used to describe a frame-or+ for the analysis of these macro environmental factors. & P) T analysis fits into an overall environmental scan as sho-n in the follo-ing diagram3

Environmental Scan

: ; E'ternal /nal sis Internal /nal sis

Macro environment Microenvironment

< P5E5S5T5

Political !actors Political factors include government regulations and legal issues and define both formal and informal rules under -hich the firm must operate. ome e2amples include3

ta2 policy employment la-s environmental regulations trade restrictions and tariffs political stability

Economic !actors )conomic factors affect the purchasing po-er of potential customers and the firm.s cost of capital. The follo-ing are e2amples of factors in the macroeconomy3

economic gro-th interest rates e2change rates inflation rate

Social !actors ocial factors include the demographic and cultural aspects of the e2ternal macro environment. These factors affect customer needs and the si!e of potential mar+ets. ome social factors include3

health consciousness population gro-th rate age distribution career attitudes emphasis on safety

Technological !actors Technological factors can lo-er barriers to entry/ reduce minimum efficient production levels/ and influence outsourcing decisions. ome technological factors include3

RGD activity automation technology incentives rate of technological change

Porter=s !ive !orces / MO,E4 !O. IN,9ST.> /N/4>SIS

The model of pure competition implies that ris+0ad1usted rates of return should be constant across firms and industries. 'o-ever/ numerous economic studies have affirmed that different industries can sustain different levels of profitabilityA part of this difference is e2plained by industry structure. *ichael Porter provided a frame-or+ that models an industry as being influenced by five forces. The strategic business manager see+ing to develop an edge over rival firms can use this model to better understand the industry conte2t in -hich the firm operates.

,iagram of Porter=s ? !orces


S9PP4IE. PO@E.
upplier concentration #mportance of volume to supplier Differentiation of inputs #mpact of inputs on cost or differentiation -itching costs of firms in the industry Presence of substitute inputs Threat of for-ard integration $ost relative to total purchases in industry

$/..IE.S TO ENT.>
&bsolute cost advantages Proprietary learning curve &ccess to inputs 4overnment policy )conomies of scale $apital re<uirements ;rand identity -itching costs &ccess to distribution )2pected retaliation Proprietary products

T8.E/T O! S9$STIT9TES
0 -itching costs 0;uyer inclination to substitute 0Price0performance trade0off of substitutes

$9>E. PO@E.
;argaining leverage ;uyer volume ;uyer information ;rand identity Price sensitivity Threat of bac+-ard integration Product differentiation ;uyer concentration vs. industry ubstitutes available ;uyers. incentives

,E%.EE O! .I-/4.> 0)2it barriers 0#ndustry concentration 0(i2ed costs>Falue added 0#ndustry gro-th 0#ntermittent overcapacity 0Product differences 0 -itching costs 0;rand identity 0Diversity of rivals 0$orporate sta+es

I5 .ivalr #n the traditional economic model/ competition among rival firms drives profits to !ero. ;ut competition is not perfect and firms are not unsophisticated passive price ta+ers. Rather/ firms strive for a competitive advantage over their rivals. The intensity of rivalry among firms varies across industries/ and strategic analysts are interested in these differences. )conomists measure rivalry by indicators of industry concentration. The $oncentration Ratio 5$R6 is one such measure. The ;ureau of $ensus periodically reports the $R for ma1or tandard #ndustrial $lassifications 5 #$.s6. The $R indicates the percent of mar+et share held by the four largest firms 5$R.s for the largest ,/ 25/ and 5: firms in an industry also are available6. & high concentration ratio indicates that a high concentration of mar+et share is held by the largest firms 0 the industry is concentrated. 7ith only a fe- firms holding a large mar+et share/ the competitive landscape is less competitive 5closer to a monopoly6. & loconcentration ratio indicates that the industry is characteri!ed by many rivals/ none of -hich has a significant mar+et share. These fragmented mar+ets are said to be competitive. The concentration ratio is not the only available measureA the trend is to define industries in terms that convey more information than distribution of mar+et share. #f rivalry among firms in an industry is lo-/ the industry is considered to be disciplined. This discipline may result from the industry.s history of competition/ the role of a leading firm/ or informal compliance -ith a generally understood code of conduct. )2plicit collusion generally is illegal and not an optionA in lo-0rivalry industries competitive moves must be constrained informally. 'o-ever/ a maveric+ firm see+ing a competitive advantage can displace the other-ise disciplined mar+et. 7hen a rival acts in a -ay that elicits a counter0response by other firms/ rivalry intensifies. The intensity of rivalry commonly is referred to as being cutthroat/ intense/ moderate/ or -ea+/ based on the firms. aggressiveness in attempting to gain an advantage. #n pursuing an advantage over its rivals/ a firm can choose from several competitive moves3

$hanging prices 0 raising or lo-ering prices to gain a temporary advantage.

#mproving product differentiation 0 improving features/ implementing innovations in the manufacturing process and in the product itself. $reatively using channels of distribution 0 using vertical integration or using a distribution channel that is novel to the industry. (or e2ample/ -ith high0end 1e-elry stores reluctant to carry its -atches/ Time2 moved into drugstores and other non0traditional outlets and cornered the lo- to mid0price -atch mar+et. )2ploiting relationships -ith suppliers 0 for e2ample/ from the 195:.s to the 19%:.s ears/ Roebuc+ and $o. dominated the retail household appliance mar+et. ears set high <uality standards and re<uired suppliers to meet its demands for product specifications and price.

The intensity of rivalry is influenced by the follo-ing industry characteristics3


1. / larger n"mber of firms increases rivalry because more firms must compete

2.

3.

4.

5. ". %. ,.

for the same customers and resources. The rivalry intensifies if the firms have similar mar+et share/ leading to a struggle for mar+et leadership. Slo& mar)et gro&th causes firms to fight for mar+et share. #n a gro-ing mar+et/ firms are able to improve revenues simply because of the e2panding mar+et. 8igh fi'ed costs result in an economy of scale effect that increases rivalry. 7hen total costs are mostly fi2ed costs/ the firm must produce near capacity to attain the lo-est unit costs. ince the firm must sell this large <uantity of product/ high levels of production lead to a fight for mar+et share and results in increased rivalry. 8igh storage costs or highl perishable prod"cts cause a producer to sell goods as soon as possible. #f other producers are attempting to unload at the same time/ competition for customers intensifies. 4o& s&itching costs increases rivalry. 7hen a customer can freely s-itch from one product to another there is a greater struggle to capture customers. 4o& levels of prod"ct differentiation is associated -ith higher levels of rivalry. ;rand identification/ on the other hand/ tends to constrain rivalry. Strategic sta)es are high -hen a firm is losing mar+et position or has potential for great gains. This intensifies rivalry. 8igh e'it barriers place a high cost on abandoning the product. The firm must compete. 'igh e2it barriers cause a firm to remain in an industry/ even -hen the venture is not profitable. & common e2it barrier is asset specificity. 7hen the plant and e<uipment re<uired for manufacturing a product is highly speciali!ed/ these assets cannot easily be sold to other buyers in another industry. Bitton #ndustries. ac<uisition of #ngalls hipbuilding facilities illustrates this concept. Bitton -as successful in the 19":.s -ith its contracts to

build Eavy ships. ;ut -hen the Fietnam -ar ended/ defense spending declined and Bitton sa- a sudden decline in its earnings. &s the firm restructured/ divesting from the shipbuilding plant -as not feasible since such a large and highly speciali!ed investment could not be sold easily/ and Bitton -as forced to stay in a declining shipbuilding mar+et. 9. / diversit of rivals -ith different cultures/ histories/ and philosophies ma+e an industry unstable. There is greater possibility for maveric+s and for mis1udging rival.s moves. Rivalry is volatile and can be intense. The hospital industry/ for e2ample/ is populated by hospitals that historically are community or charitable institutions/ by hospitals that are associated -ith religious organi!ations or universities/ and by hospitals that are for0profit enterprises. This mi2 of philosophies about mission has lead occasionally to fierce local struggles by hospitals over -ho -ill get e2pensive diagnostic and therapeutic services. &t other times/ local hospitals are highly cooperative -ith one another on issues such as community disaster planning.

1:. Ind"str

Sha)eo"t5 & gro-ing mar+et and the potential for high profits induces ne- firms to enter a mar+et and incumbent firms to increase production. & point is reached -here the industry becomes cro-ded -ith competitors/ and demand cannot support the ne- entrants and the resulting increased supply. The industry may become cro-ded if its gro-th rate slo-s and the mar+et becomes saturated/ creating a situation of e2cess capacity -ith too many goods chasing too fe- buyers. & sha+eout ensues/ -ith intense competition/ price -ars/ and company failures. ;$4 founder ;ruce 'enderson generali!ed this observation as the Rule of Three and (our3 a stable mar+et -ill not have more than three significant competitors/ and the largest competitor -ill have no more than four times the mar+et share of the smallest. #f this rule is true/ it implies that3
o o o o o

#f there is a larger number of competitors/ a sha+eout is inevitable urviving rivals -ill have to gro- faster than the mar+et )ventual losers -ill have a negative cash flo- if they attempt to gro&ll e2cept the t-o largest rivals -ill be losers The definition of -hat constitutes the Cmar+etC is strategically important.

7hatever the merits of this rule for stable mar+ets/ it is clear that mar+et stability and changes in supply and demand affect rivalry. $yclical demand tends to create cutthroat competition. This is true in the disposable diaper industry in -hich demand fluctuates -ith birth rates/ and in the greeting card industry in -hich there are more predictable business cycles. II5 Threat of S"bstit"tes #n Porter.s model/ substitute products refer to products in other industries. To the economist/ a threat of substitutes e2ists -hen a product.s demand is affected by the price change of a substitute product. & product.s price elasticity is affected by substitute products 0 as more substitutes become available/ the demand becomes more elastic since customers have more alternatives. & close substitute product constrains the ability of firms in an industry to raise prices. The competition engendered by a Threat of ubstitute comes from products outside the industry. The price of aluminum beverage cans is constrained by the price of glass bottles/ steel cans/ and plastic containers. These containers are substitutes/ yet they are not rivals in the aluminum can industry. To the manufacturer of automobile tires/ tire retreads are a substitute. Today/ ne- tires are not so e2pensive that car o-ners give much consideration to retreading old tires. ;ut in the truc+ing industry ne- tires are e2pensive and tires must be replaced often. #n the truc+ tire mar+et/ retreading remains a viable substitute industry. #n the disposable diaper industry/ cloth diapers are a substitute and their prices constrain the price of disposables. 7hile the treat of substitutes typically impacts an industry through price competition/ there can be other concerns in assessing the threat of substitutes. $onsider the substitutability of different types of TF transmission3 local station transmission to home TF antennas via the air-ays versus transmission via cable/ satellite/ and telephone lines. The ne- technologies available and the changing structure of the entertainment media are contributing to competition among these substitute means of connecting the home to entertainment. )2cept in remote areas it is unli+ely that cable TF could compete -ith free TF from an aerial -ithout the greater diversity of entertainment that it affords the customer. III5 $" er Po&er The po-er of buyers is the impact that customers have on a producing industry. #n general/ -hen buyer po-er is strong/ the relationship to the producing industry is

near to -hat an economist terms a monopson 0 a mar+et in -hich there are many suppliers and one buyer. =nder such mar+et conditions/ the buyer sets the price. #n reality fe- pure monopsonies e2ist/ but fre<uently there is some asymmetry bet-een a producing industry and buyers. The follo-ing tables outline some factors that determine buyer po-er.
I-5

S"pplier Po&er

& producing industry re<uires ra- materials 0 labor/ components/ and other supplies. This re<uirement leads to buyer0supplier relationships bet-een the industry and the firms that provide it the ra- materials used to create products. uppliers/ if po-erful/ can e2ert an influence on the producing industry/ such as selling ra- materials at a high price to capture some of the industry.s profits. The follo-ing tables outline some factors that determine supplier po-er. -5 $arriers to Entr : Threat of Entr #t is not only incumbent rivals that pose a threat to firms in an industryA the possibility that ne- firms may enter the industry also affects competition. #n theory/ any firm should be able to enter and e2it a mar+et/ and if free entry and e2it e2ists/ then profits al-ays should be nominal. #n reality/ ho-ever/ industries possess characteristics that protect the high profit levels of firms in the mar+et and inhibit additional rivals from entering the mar+et. These are barriers to entry. ;arriers to entry are more than the normal e<uilibrium ad1ustments that mar+ets typically ma+e. (or e2ample/ -hen industry profits increase/ -e -ould e2pect additional firms to enter the mar+et to ta+e advantage of the high profit levels/ over time driving do-n profits for all firms in the industry. 7hen profits decrease/ -e -ould e2pect some firms to e2it the mar+et thus restoring a mar+et e<uilibrium. (alling prices/ or the e2pectation that future prices -ill fall/ deters rivals from entering a mar+et. (irms also may be reluctant to enter mar+ets that are e2tremely uncertain/ especially if entering involves e2pensive start0up costs. These are normal accommodations to mar+et conditions. ;ut if firms individually 5collective action -ould be illegal collusion6 +eep prices artificially lo- as a strategy to prevent potential entrants from entering the mar+et/ such entr -deterring pricing establishes a barrier. ;arriers to entry are uni<ue industry characteristics that define the industry. ;arriers reduce the rate of entry of ne- firms/ thus maintaining a level of profits for those

already in the industry. (rom a strategic perspective/ barriers can be created or e2ploited to enhance a firm.s competitive advantage. ;arriers to entry arise from several sources3
1. %overnment creates barriers5 &lthough the principal role of the government

in a mar+et is to preserve competition through anti0trust actions/ government also restricts competition through the granting of monopolies and through regulation. #ndustries such as utilities are considered natural monopolies because it has been more efficient to have one electric company provide po-er to a locality than to permit many electric companies to compete in a local mar+et. To restrain utilities from e2ploiting this advantage/ government permits a monopoly/ but regulates the industry. #llustrative of this +ind of barrier to entry is the local cable company. The franchise to a cable provider may be granted by competitive bidding/ but once the franchise is a-arded by a community a monopoly is created. Bocal governments -ere not effective in monitoring price gouging by cable operators/ so the federal government has enacted legislation to revie- and restrict prices. The regulatory authority of the government in restricting competition is historically evident in the ban+ing industry. =ntil the 19%:.s/ the mar+ets that ban+s could enter -ere limited by state governments. &s a result/ most ban+s -ere local commercial and retail ban+ing facilities. ;an+s competed through strategies that emphasi!ed simple mar+eting devices such as a-arding toasters to ne- customers for opening a chec+ing account. 7hen ban+s -ere deregulated/ ban+s -ere permitted to cross state boundaries and e2pand their mar+ets. Deregulation of ban+s intensified rivalry and created uncertainty for ban+s as they attempted to maintain mar+et share. #n the late 19%:.s/ the strategy of ban+s shifted from simple mar+eting tactics to mergers and geographic e2pansion as rivals attempted to e2pand mar+ets.
2. Patents and proprietar

)no&ledge serve to restrict entr into an ind"str 5 #deas and +no-ledge that provide competitive advantages are treated as private property -hen patented/ preventing others from using the +no-ledge and thus creating a barrier to entry. )d-in Band introduced the Polaroid camera in 194% and held a monopoly in the instant photography industry. #n 19%5/ ?oda+ attempted to enter the instant camera mar+et and sold a comparable camera. Polaroid sued for patent infringement and -on/ +eeping ?oda+ out of the instant camera industry. 3. /sset specificit inhibits entr into an ind"str 5 &sset specificity is the e2tent to -hich the firm.s assets can be utili!ed to produce a different product.

7hen an industry re<uires highly speciali!ed technology or plants and e<uipment/ potential entrants are reluctant to commit to ac<uiring speciali!ed assets that cannot be sold or converted into other uses if the venture fails. &sset specificity provides a barrier to entry for t-o reasons3 (irst/ -hen firms already hold speciali!ed assets they fiercely resist efforts by others from ta+ing their mar+et share. Ee- entrants can anticipate aggressive rivalry. (or e2ample/ ?oda+ had much capital invested in its photographic e<uipment business and aggressively resisted efforts by (u1i to intrude in its mar+et. These assets are both large and industry specific. The second reason is that potential entrants are reluctant to ma+e investments in highly speciali!ed assets. 4. Organi6ational *Internal+ Economies of Scale5 The most cost efficient level of production is termed Minim"m Efficient Scale 5*) 6. This is the point at -hich unit costs for production are at minimum 0 i.e./ the most cost efficient level of production. #f *) for firms in an industry is +no-n/ then -e can determine the amount of mar+et share necessary for lo- cost entry or cost parity -ith rivals. (or e2ample/ in long distance communications roughly 1:D of the mar+et is necessary for *) . #f sales for a long distance operator fail to reach 1:D of the mar+et/ the firm is not competitive. The e2istence of such an economy of scale creates a barrier to entry. The greater the difference bet-een industry *) and entry unit costs/ the greater the barrier to entry. o industries -ith high *) deter entry of small/ start0up businesses. To operate at less than *) there must be a consideration that permits the firm to sell at a premium price 0 such as product differentiation or local monopoly.

;arriers to e2it -or+ similarly to barriers to entry. )2it barriers limit the ability of a firm to leave the mar+et and can e2acerbate rivalry 0 unable to leave the industry/ a firm must compete. ome of an industry.s entry and e2it barriers can be summari!ed as follo-s3

Eas to Enter if there is:


,iffic"lt to Enter if there is:


$ommon technology Bittle brand franchise

Patented or proprietary +no-0hoDifficulty in brand s-itching

&ccess to distribution channels Bo- scale threshold

Restricted distribution channels 'igh scale threshold

Eas to E'it if there are:


,iffic"lt to E'it if there are:


alable assets Bo- e2it costs #ndependent businesses

peciali!ed assets 'igh e2it costs #nterrelated businesses

,>N/MI# N/T9.E O! IN,9ST.> .I-/4.> 8ur descriptive and analytic models of industry tend to e2amine the industry at a given state. The nature and fascination of business is that it is not static. 7hile -e are prone to generali!e/ for e2ample/ list 4*/ (ord/ and $hrysler as the C;ig 3C and assume their dominance/ -e also have seen the automobile industry change. $urrently/ the entertainment and communications industries are in flu2. Phone companies/ computer firms/ and entertainment are merging and forming strategic alliances that re0map the information terrain. chumpeter and/ more recently/ Porter have attempted to move the understanding of industry competition from a static economic or industry organi!ation model to an emphasis on the interdependence of forces as dynamic/ or punctuated e$uilibrium/ as Porter terms it. #n chumpeter.s and Porter.s vie- the dynamism of mar+ets is driven by innovation. 7e can envision these forces at -or+ as -e e2amine the follo-ing changes3