management policy and strategy session viii
Skip this Video
Download Presentation

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 37


  • Uploaded on

MANAGEMENT POLICY AND STRATEGY SESSION - VIII. Strategic Analysis and Choice in Multi-business Companies Prof. Sushil Department of Management Studies Indian Institute of Technology, Delhi INDIA Email: [email protected] Questions Related to Diversification and Integration.

I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'MANAGEMENT POLICY AND STRATEGY SESSION - VIII' - fidelio

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
management policy and strategy session viii


Strategic Analysis and Choice in Multi-business Companies

Prof. Sushil

Department of Management Studies

Indian Institute of Technology, Delhi


Email: [email protected]

questions related to diversification and integration
Questions Related to Diversification and Integration

1. Are opportunities for sharing infrastructure and capabilities forthcoming?

2. Are we capitalizing on our core competencies?

3. Does the company’s business portfolio balance financial resources?

4. Does our business portfolio achieve appropriate levels of risk and growth?


Most Power to

Create Value

Least Power to

Create Value


on Core



Market Power




Cash Flows






as a Reason

to Diversity



as a Reason

to Diversify

critical elements for shared opportunities to be meaningful
Critical Elements for Shared Opportunities to be Meaningful

1. Shared opportunities must be a significant portion of the value chain of businesses involved

2. Businesses involved must truly have shared needs or there is no basis for synergy in the first place

evaluating the role of core competencies
Is each core competency providing a relevant competitive advantage to the intended businesses?

Are businesses in portfolio related in ways making the company’s core competence(s) beneficial?

Is the combination of competencies unique or difficult to recreate?

Evaluating the Role of Core Competencies
balancing financial resources portfolio techniques
BCG Growth-Share Matrix

Industry Attractiveness-Business Strength Matrix

Life Cycle-Competitive Strength Matrix

Balancing Financial Resources: Portfolio Techniques
bcg growth share matrix
Cash Generation (Market Share)

Description of Dimensions



Market Share:Sales relative to those of other competitors in market (dividing point is usually selected to have only 2-3 largest competitors in any market fall into high market share region)

Growth Rate:Industry growth rate in constant dollars (dividing point is typically GNP’s growth rate)


Problem Child


Cash Use (Growth Rate)


Cash Cow


BCG Growth-Share Matrix
  • Question Marks - Build Market Share
  • Star - Hold Market Share
  • Cash Cows - Harvest
  • Dogs – Divest
factors considered in constructing an industry attractiveness business strength matrix
Nature of Competitive Rivalry

Bargaining Power of Suppliers/Customers

Threat of Substitutes/ New Entrants

  • Number of competitors
  • Size of competitors
  • Strength of competitors’ corporate parents
  • Price wars
  • Competition on multiple dimensions
  • Relative size of typical players
  • Numbers of each
  • Importance of purchases from or dales to
  • Ability to vertically integrate
  • Technological maturity/stability
  • Diversity of the market
  • Barriers to entry
  • Flexibility of distribution system
Factors Considered in Constructing an Industry Attractiveness-Business Strength Matrix

Industry Attractiveness Factors

factors considered in constructing an industry attractiveness business strength matrix continued
Economic Factors

Financial Norms

Sociopolitical Considerations

  • Sales volatility
  • Cyclicality of demand
  • Market growth
  • Capital intensity
  • Average profitability
  • Typical leverage
  • Credit practices
  • Government regulation
  • Community support
  • Ethical standards
Factors Considered in Constructing an Industry Attractiveness-Business Strength Matrix (continued)

Industry Attractiveness Factors

factors considered in constructing an industry attractiveness business strength matrix continued12
Cost Position

Level of Differentiation

Response Time

  • Economies of scale
  • Manufacturing costs
  • Overhead
  • Scrap/waste/rework
  • Experience effects
  • Labor rates
  • Proprietary processes
  • Promotion effectiveness
  • Product quality
  • Company image
  • Patented products
  • Brand awareness
  • Manufacturing flexibility
  • Time needed to introduce new products
  • Delivery times
  • Organizational flexibility
Factors Considered in Constructing an Industry Attractiveness-Business Strength Matrix (continued)

Business Strength Factors

factors considered in constructing an industry attractiveness business strength matrix concluded
Financial Strength

Human Assets

Public Approval

  • Solvency
  • Liquidity
  • Break-even point
  • Cash flows
  • Profitability
  • Growth in revenues
  • Turnover
  • Skill level
  • Relative wage/salary
  • Morale
  • Managerial commitment
  • Unionization
  • Goodwill
  • Reputation
  • Image
Factors Considered in Constructing an Industry Attractiveness-Business Strength Matrix (concluded)

Business Strength Factors

industry attractiveness business strength matrix
Industry Attractiveness

Description of Dimensions





Grow or Let Go

Selective Growth

Industry Attractiveness:Subjective assessment based on broadest possible range of external opportunities and threats beyond control of management

Business Strength:Subject assessment of how strong a competitive advantage is created by a broad range of a firm’s internal strengths and weaknesses





Grow or

Let Go


Business Strength

Grow or

Let Go




Industry Attractiveness-Business Strength Matrix
advantages of the industry attractiveness business strength matrix over the bcg matrix
Advantages of the Industry Attractiveness-Business Strength Matrix over the BCG Matrix
  • Terminology is less offensive and more understandable
  • Multiple measures associated with each dimension tap many factors relevant to business strength and market attractiveness
  • Allows for broader assessment during both strategy formulation and implementation for a multibusiness company
market life cycle competitive strength matrix
Stage of Market Life Cycle

Description of Dimensions





Stage of Market Life Cycle:See page 184

Competitive Strength:Overall subjective rating, based on wide range of factors regarding likelihood of gaining and maintaining a competitive advantage


Invest Aggressively



Invest Selectively


Competitive Strength




Market Life Cycle-Competitive Strength Matrix
contributions of portfolio approaches
Contributions of Portfolio Approaches

Convey large amounts of information about diverse businesses and corporate plans in a simplified format

Illuminate similarities and differences among businesses, conveying the logic behind corporate strategies for each business

Simplify priorities for sharing corporate resources across diverse businesses

Provide a simple prescription of what should be accomplished - a balanced portfolio of businesses

limitations of portfolio approaches
Limitations of Portfolio Approaches

Does not address how value is created across business units

Accurate measurement for matrix classification not as easy as matrices implied

Underlying assumption about relationship between market share and profits varies across different industries and market segments

Limited strategic options viewed as basic strategic missions

Portrays notion that firms need to be self-sufficient in capital

Fails to compare competitive advantage a business receives from being owned by a particular company with costs of owning it

behavioral considerations affecting strategic choice
Role of current strategy

Attitudes toward risk

Degree of firm’s external dependence

Competitive reaction

Internal political considerations

Managerial priorities different from stockholders

Behavioral Considerations Affecting Strategic Choice
behavioral considerations affecting strategic choice20
Behavioral Considerations Affecting Strategic Choice
  • Role of current strategy
    • What is the amount of time and resources invested in previous strategies?
    • How close are new strategies to the old?
    • How successful were previous strategies?
  • Degree of firm’s external dependence
    • How powerful are firm’s owners, customers, competitors, unions, and its government?
    • How flexible is firm with its environment?
behavioral considerations affecting strategic choice21
Behavioral Considerations Affecting Strategic Choice
  • Attitudes toward risk
    • Industry volatility and industry evolution affect managerial attitudes
    • Risk-oriented managers prefer offensive, opportunistic strategies
    • Risk-averse managers prefer defensive, conservative strategies
  • Managerial priorities different from stockholder interests
    • Agency theory suggests managers frequently place their own interests above those of their shareholders
behavioral considerations affecting strategic choice22
Behavioral Considerations Affecting Strategic Choice
  • Internal political considerations
    • Major sources of company power are CEO, key subunits, and key departments
    • Power can affect corporate decisions over analytical considerations
    • See Fig. 9-6
  • Competitive reaction
    • Probable impact of competitor response must be considered during strategy design process
    • Competitor response can alter strategy success
ge strategic circles
GE: Strategic Circles
  • In 1981, John E. Welch Jr., Chairman and CEO of General Electric designed the company’s operations on the basis of three `strategic circles’:
  • Core manufacturing units such as lighting and locomotives
  • Technology -intensive businesses services
  • To achieve the first or second position in the global market for each of its businesses: By 1986, this strategic orientation had taken shape with 14 distinct businesses, including aircraft engines, medical systems, engineering plastics, major appliances, television and financial services.
ibm s partners





IBM’s Partners






Jointly own Prodigy, an interactive computer service for consumers

Jointly built a US $200 million plant in Japan to manufacture high-

resolution colour flat screens for laptops

Jointly developing future chips and jointly built

16-Mb DRAM memory chips in France

Mitsubishi Electric sells IBM mainframes in Japan under its own name






IBM’s Partners







Developing tools to make it easier to create software for the OS/2 system

Sells IBM’s PCs and RS/6000 workstations under its own name

IBM sells Novell networking software

Two joint ventures: Taligent and Kaleida

Jointly developing the RISC microprocessor

Jointly developing a new generation of integrated microprocessor chips

reebok s outsourcing
Reebok’s Outsourcing

Its main function is marketing with a current staff strength of 35 in India. The other activities are outsourced as given below:

  • Apparel design National Institute of Fashion Technology
  • Warehouse management Bakshi Associates
  • Logistics Nexus Logistics
  • Retailing Phoenix
  • Advertising Hindustan Thompson
  • Store design and execution Aakar
  • Sports management 21st Century
  • Gymnasium A private firm
  • Manufacturing Shoes: Phoenix, Aero, Lakhani
  • Apparel Viniyoga and six others
  • Selection Prospects
major elements in a successful international strategic alliances
Major Elements in a Successful International Strategic Alliances
  • Complementary skills: which can contribute to the strength of the venture.
  • Cooperative cultures: cognizant of the important of cooperation
  • Compatible goals: based on their particular firm’s goals and not just convenience
  • Commensurate levels of risk: consider the risks involved
different types of strategic alliances contd
Alliance Types

Collaborative advertising

R&D partnerships

Lease service agreements

Shared distribution

Technology transfer

Cooperative bidding

Different Types of Strategic Alliances Contd….


  • American Express and Toys R Us (cooperative efforts for television advertising and promotion)
  • Cytel and Sumitomo chemicals (alliance to develop the next generation of biotechnology drugs)
  • Cigna and United Motor Works (arrangement to provide financing for non-US firms and governments)
  • Nissan and Volkswagen (Nissan sells Volkswagens in Europe and Volkswagen distributes Nissan’s cards also in Europe)
  • IBM and Apple Computers (arrangement to develop the next generation of operating system software)
  • Boeing, General Dynamics and Lockheed (cooperated together in winning the contract for an advanced tactical fighter)
different types of strategic alliances
Different Types of Strategic Alliances

Alliance Types

Cross -manufacturing

Resource venturing

Government and industry partnering

Internal spin-offs



Ford and Mazda (design and build similar cards on the same manufacturing/assembly line)

Swift Chemical Co., Texasgulf, RTZ and US Borax (Canadian-based mining natural resources venture)

DuPont and National Cancer Institute (DuPont worked with NCI in the first phase of the clinical cancer trial on IL)

Cummins engine and Toshiba Corporation (created a new company to develop/market silicon nitride products)

Hoffman-LaRoche and Glaxo (HL and Glaxo agreed for BHL to sell Zantac, an anti-ulcer drug in the United States)

stages of an alliance
Stages of an Alliance
  • Strategy development The focus is on development of resource strategies for production, technology and manpower. This has to be aligned to the objectives of corporate strategy alliances.
  • Partner assessment The attempt to assess the strengths and weaknesses of a partner and understand a partner’s motives for alliance formation.
  • Contract negotiations It is necessary to have realistic objectives, defining each partner’s contributions and rewards. It is also necessary to incorporation termination clauses, penalties for poor performance and arbitration procedures.
  • Alliance operations This is concerned with the management’s commitment, and linking of budgets and resources with priorities.
british airways
British Airways
  • The alliance between British Airways and American Airlines was announced in June 1996. BA and American together control 60 per cent of the flights between the UK and the US, 70 per cent of the traffic between London and New York, 90 per cent between London and Chicago, and all flights between London and Dallas.
  • Bermuda II, the UK-US aviation agreement, was concluded in 1977 which gives details of which airlines can fly between specified US and UK cities, and the number of flights they can operate. BA was against the scrapping of the agreement till recently.
british airways contd
British AirwaysContd...
  • American Airlines was against the trend towards code-sharing agreements which allows airlines to sell tickets on routes they do not serve. This was considered to be anti-competitive. Now both BA and American have to retreat from their respective positions.
  • BA has a partnership with US Air in which it has a 24.6 per cent stake. The US government has not granted anti-trust immunity to the alliance to coordinate their operations more closely. Therefore, BA and American are asking for anti-trust immunity and requesting their governments to negotiate a new, liberalized aviation agreement.
modes of cooperation
Modes of Cooperation
  • Joint ventures and research corporations Combinations of at least two firms into a `distinct’ firm with shared equity investments. Profits and losses accrue on the basis of investment.
  • Joint R&D Joint research agreements to establish joint undertaking of R&D projects with shared resources.
  • Technology exchange agreement Technology sharing agreements, cross-licensing and mutual second-souring of existing technologies.
  • Equity investment Large firms partnering with a smaller high tech company with a minority sharing coupled with research contracts.
  • Customer-supplier relationships There can be many forms such as co-production contracts, co-marketing relationships, and research contracts.
  • Unilateral technology flows Second-sourcing and licensing agreements (Hagedoorn and Schakenraad, 1994)
samsung group
Samsung Group
  • A joint venture with Texas Instruments to manufacture semiconductors - they are building a semiconductor plant in Portugal.
  • Cooperation with General Instrument in developing high definition televisions (HDTV).
  • The sharing of technology for flash memory devices with Toshiba.
  • Co-developing computer workstations with Hewlett Packard-they have a joint venture, Samsung -Hewlett Packard-which markets the American company’s products in Korea.
  • Supply of memory chip technology to Oki Electric.
  • Partnership with General Electric in high-tech medical equipment.
  • Lockheed for F-16 jet fighters (local assembly)
  • Pratt and Whitney for jet engines (supplies components)
  • Amoco for textile raw materials
  • Corning for TV glass and building plants in China and Malaysia
  • Mitsui Petrochemical for petrochemicals
  • An agreement with Apple Computers for new technology creation for multimedia.
  • A technology -sharing agreement with IBM to develop new data storage devices using `NAND-flash’ memory chips semiconductor devices; it has developed the world’s smallest 256-Mb D-Ram.
  • Through an alliance with IBM, Japan, it opened a second large-size thin-film transistor (TFT) LCD plant in 1995.
  • Alliances with National Semiconductor and Samsung Electronics of Korea to jointly develop and market flash memory chips.
toshiba contd
  • An alliance with Sun Microsystems Inc. of the US in the areas of rightsizing, Internet and interactive technology. They will share product development, marketing and distribution in these fast-growth areas. Toshiba plans to develop and build systems based on Sun’s 64-bit UltraSPARC microprocessor. The rightsizing or integration of in-house information systems is aimed at enhancing the efficiency of the company’s white-collar workers. Toshiba will invest about US $303 million to rightsize its computer systems between 1995 and 1999. Sun Microsystems will bring in the technology for the projects, while Toshiba will provide the hardware to enhance efficiency of information technology.
  • An R&D agreement with Texas Instruments to develop a next-generation computer memory chip.
  • Providing chip manufacturing technology to Goldstar Electron of Korea.
  • Supplying mainframe computers to Germany’s Comparex and Italy’s Olivetti.
  • A joint venture with GE to sell lighting products in Japan.
  • Joint development of a new RISC computer chip with Hewlett Packard.
  • Joint development of medical equipment with Boehringer-Mannheim of Germany
  • Research cooperation between Hitachi Cambridge Laboratory and Cambridge University for developing a single electron memory device.