Strategic group map restaurant industry

page 46

CHAPTER 3

Evaluating a Company’s External Environment

© Bull’s Eye/Image Zoo/Getty Images

|

PRINTED BY: Aaron Reagan . Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted.

11/7/2017http://e.pub/lc7027taixs89fglf6e8.vbk/OEBPS/chapter03-print-1510071377.xhtml

page 47

Learning Objectives THIS CHAPTER WILL HELP YOU UNDERSTAND:

LO 1 How to recognize the factors in a company’s broad macro-environment that may have strategic significance.

LO 2 How to use analytic tools to diagnose the competitive conditions in a company’s industry.

LO 3 How to map the market positions of key groups of industry rivals.

LO 4 How to determine whether an industry’s outlook presents a company with sufficiently attractive opportunities for growth and profitability.

No matter what it takes, the goal of strategy is to beat the competition.

Kenichi Ohmae—Consultant and author

There is no such thing as weak competition; it grows all the time.

Nabil N. Jamal—Consultant and author

Sometimes by losing a battle you find a new way to win the war.

Donald Trump—President of the United States and founder of Trump Entertainment Resorts

In order to chart a company’s strategic course wisely, managers must first develop a deep understanding of the company’s present situation. Two facets of a company’s situation are especially pertinent: (1) its external environment—most notably, the competitive conditions of the industry in which the company operates; and (2) its internal environment—particularly the company’s resources and organizational capabilities.

Insightful diagnosis of a company’s external and internal environments is a prerequisite for managers to succeed in crafting a strategy that is an excellent fit with the company’s situation—the first test of a winning strategy. As depicted in Figure 3.1, strategic thinking begins with an appraisal of the company’s external and internal environments (as a basis for deciding on a long-term direction and developing a strategic vision), moves toward an evaluation of the most promising alternative strategies and business models, and culminates in choosing a specific strategy.

FIGURE 3.1  From Thinking Strategically about the Company’s Situation to Choosing a Strategy

PRINTED BY: Aaron Reagan . Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted.

11/7/2017http://e.pub/lc7027taixs89fglf6e8.vbk/OEBPS/chapter03-print-1510071377.xhtml

This chapter presents the concepts and analytic tools for zeroing in on those aspects of a company’s external environment that should be considered in making strategic choices. Attention centers on the broad environmental context, the specific market arena in which a company operates, the drivers of change, the positions and likely actions of rival companies, and the factors that determine competitive success. In Chapter 4, we explore the methods of evaluating a company’s internal circumstances and competitive capabilities.

THE STRATEGICALLY RELEVANT FACTORS IN THE COMPANY’S MACRO-ENVIRONMENT

LO 1

How to recognize the factors in a company’s broad macro-environment that may have strategic significance.

Every company operates in a broad “macro-environment” that comprises six principal components: political factors; economic conditions in the firm’s general environment (local, country, regional, worldwide); sociocultural forces; technological factors; environmental factors (concerning the natural environment); and legal/regulatory conditions. Each of these components has the potential to affect the firm’s more immediate industry and competitive environment, although some are likely to have a more important effect than others (see Figure 3.2). An analysis of the impact of these factors is often referred to as PESTEL analysis, an acronym that serves as a reminder of the six components involved (political, economic, sociocultural, technological, environmental, legal/regulatory).

FIGURE 3.2  The Components of a Company’s Macro-Environment

PRINTED BY: Aaron Reagan . Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted.

11/7/2017http://e.pub/lc7027taixs89fglf6e8.vbk/OEBPS/chapter03-print-1510071377.xhtml

page 48

CORE CONCEPT The macro-environment encompasses the broad environmental context in which a company’s industry is situated.

Since macro-economic factors affect different industries in different ways and to different degrees, it is important for managers to determine which of these represent the most strategically relevant factors outside the firm’s industry boundaries. By strategically relevant, we mean important enough to have a bearing on the decisions the company ultimately makes about its long-term direction, objectives, strategy, and business model. The impact of the outer-ring factors depicted in Figure 3.2 on a company’s choice of strategy can range from big to small. But even if those factors change slowly or are likely to have a low impact on the company’s business situation, they still merit a watchful eye.

CORE CONCEPT

PRINTED BY: Aaron Reagan . Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted.

11/7/2017http://e.pub/lc7027taixs89fglf6e8.vbk/OEBPS/chapter03-print-1510071377.xhtml

PESTEL analysis can be used to assess the strategic relevance of the six principal components of the macro-environment: Political, Economic, Social, Technological, Environmental, and Legal/Regulatory forces.

For example, the strategic opportunities of cigarette producers to grow their businesses are greatly reduced by antismoking ordinances, the decisions of governments to impose higher cigarette taxes, and the growing cultural stigma attached to smoking. Motor vehicle companies must adapt their strategies to customer concerns about high gasoline prices and to environmental concerns about carbon emissions. Companies in the food processing, restaurant, sports, and fitness industries have to pay special attention to changes in lifestyles, eating habits, leisure-time preferences, and attitudes toward nutrition and fitness in fashioning their strategies. Table 3.1 provides a brief description of the components of the macro-environment and some examples of the industries or business situations that they might affect.

TABLE 3.1 The Six Components of the Macro-Environment

Component Description

Political factors Pertinent political factors include matters such as tax policy, fiscal policy, tariffs, the political climate, and the strength of institutions such as the federal banking system. Some political policies affect certain types of industries more than others. An example is energy policy, which clearly affects energy producers and heavy users of energy more than other types of businesses.

Economic conditions

Economic conditions include the general economic climate and specific factors such as interest rates, exchange rates, the inflation rate, the unemployment rate, the rate of economic growth, trade deficits or surpluses, savings rates, and per-capita domestic product. Some industries, such as construction, are particularly vulnerable to economic downturns but are positively affected by factors such as low interest rates. Others, such as discount retailing, benefit when general economic conditions weaken, as consumers become more price-conscious.

Sociocultural forces

Sociocultural forces include the societal values, attitudes, cultural influences, and lifestyles that impact demand for particular goods and services, as well as demographic factors such as the population size, growth rate, and age distribution. Sociocultural forces vary by locale and change over time. An example is the trend toward healthier lifestyles, which can shift spending toward exercise equipment and health clubs and away from alcohol and snack foods. The demographic effect of people living longer is having a huge impact on the health care, nursing homes, travel, hospitality, and entertainment industries.

PRINTED BY: Aaron Reagan . Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted.

11/7/2017http://e.pub/lc7027taixs89fglf6e8.vbk/OEBPS/chapter03-print-1510071377.xhtml

page 49

Component Description Technological factors

Technological factors include the pace of technological change and technical developments that have the potential for wide- ranging effects on society, such as genetic engineering, nanotechnology, and solar energy technology. They include institutions involved in creating new knowledge and controlling the use of technology, such as R&D consortia, university- sponsored technology incubators, patent and copyright laws, and government control over the Internet. Technological change can encourage the birth of new industries, such as the connected wearable devices, and disrupt others, such as the recording industry.

Environmental forces

These include ecological and environmental forces such as weather, climate, climate change, and associated factors like water shortages. These factors can directly impact industries such as insurance, farming, energy production, and tourism. They may have an indirect but substantial effect on other industries such as transportation and utilities.

Legal and regulatory factors

These factors include the regulations and laws with which companies must comply, such as consumer laws, labor laws, antitrust laws, and occupational health and safety regulation. Some factors, such as financial services regulation, are industry-specific. Others, such as minimum wage legislation, affect certain types of industries (low-wage, labor-intensive industries) more than others.

As company managers scan the external environment, they must be alert for potentially important outer-ring developments, assess their impact and influence, and adapt the company’s direction and strategy as needed. However, the factors in a company’s environment having the biggest strategy-shaping impact typically pertain to the company’s immediate industry and competitive environment. Consequently, it is on a company’s industry and competitive environment that we concentrate the bulk of our attention in this chapter.

ASSESSING THE COMPANY’S INDUSTRY AND COMPETITIVE ENVIRONMENT

LO 2

How to use analytic tools to diagnose the competitive conditions in a company’s industry.

PRINTED BY: Aaron Reagan . Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted.

11/7/2017http://e.pub/lc7027taixs89fglf6e8.vbk/OEBPS/chapter03-print-1510071377.xhtml

page 50

page 51

Thinking strategically about a company’s industry and competitive environment entails using some well-validated concepts and analytic tools. These include the five forces framework, the value net, driving forces, strategic groups, competitor analysis, and key success factors. Proper use of these analytic tools can provide managers with the understanding needed to craft a strategy that fits the company’s situation within their industry environment. The remainder of this chapter is devoted to describing how managers can use these tools to inform and improve their strategic choices.

THE FIVE FORCES FRAMEWORK The character and strength of the competitive forces operating in an industry are never the same from one industry to another. The most powerful and widely used tool for diagnosing the principal competitive pressures in a market is the five forces framework.1 This framework, depicted in Figure 3.3, holds that competitive pressures on companies within an industry come from five sources. These include (1) competition from rival sellers, (2) competition from potential new entrants to the industry, (3) competition from producers of substitute products, (4) supplier bargaining power, and (5) customer bargaining power.

FIGURE 3.3  The Five Forces Model of Competition: A Key Analytic Tool

PRINTED BY: Aaron Reagan . Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted.

11/7/2017http://e.pub/lc7027taixs89fglf6e8.vbk/OEBPS/chapter03-print-1510071377.xhtml

page 52

Sources: Adapted from M. E. Porter, “How Competitive Forces Shape Strategy,” Harvard Business Review 57, no. 2 (1979), pp. 137–145; M. E. Porter, “The Five Competitive Forces That Shape Strategy,” Harvard Business Review 86, no. 1 (2008), pp. 80–86.

Using the five forces model to determine the nature and strength of competitive pressures in a given industry involves three steps:

• Step 1: For each of the five forces, identify the different parties involved, along with the specific factors that bring about competitive pressures.

• Step 2: Evaluate how strong the pressures stemming from each of the five forces are (strong, moderate, or weak).

• Step 3: Determine whether the five forces, overall, are supportive of high industry profitability.

Competitive Pressures Created by the Rivalry among Competing Sellers

PRINTED BY: Aaron Reagan . Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted.

11/7/2017http://e.pub/lc7027taixs89fglf6e8.vbk/OEBPS/chapter03-print-1510071377.xhtml

page 53

The strongest of the five competitive forces is often the rivalry for buyer patronage among competing sellers of a product or service. The intensity of rivalry among competing sellers within an industry depends on a number of identifiable factors. Figure 3.4 summarizes these factors, identifying those that intensify or weaken rivalry among direct competitors in an industry. A brief explanation of why these factors affect the degree of rivalry is in order:

FIGURE 3.4  Factors Affecting the Strength of Rivalry

• Rivalry increases when buyer demand is growing slowly or declining. Rapidly expanding buyer demand produces enough new business for all industry members to grow without having to draw customers away from rival enterprises. But in markets where buyer demand is slow-growing or shrinking, companies eager to gain more business are likely to engage in aggressive price discounting, sales promotions, and other tactics to increase their sales volumes at the expense of rivals, sometimes to the point of igniting a fierce battle for market share.

• Rivalry increases as it becomes less costly for buyers to switch brands. The less costly it is for buyers to switch their purchases from one seller to another, the easier it is for sellers to steal customers away from rivals. When the cost of switching brands is higher, buyers are less prone to brand switching and sellers have protection from rivalrous moves. Switching costs include not only monetary costs but also the time, inconvenience, and psychological costs involved in switching brands. For example, retailers may not switch to the brands of rival manufacturers because they are hesitant to sever long-standing supplier relationships or incur the additional

PRINTED BY: Aaron Reagan . Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted.

11/7/2017http://e.pub/lc7027taixs89fglf6e8.vbk/OEBPS/chapter03-print-1510071377.xhtml

page 54

expense of retraining employees, accessing technical support, or testing the quality and reliability of the new brand.

• Rivalry increases as the products of rival sellers become less strongly differentiated. When the offerings of rivals are identical or weakly differentiated, buyers have less reason to be brand- loyal—a condition that makes it easier for rivals to convince buyers to switch to their offerings. Moreover, when the products of different sellers are virtually identical, shoppers will choose on the basis of price, which can result in fierce price competition among sellers. On the other hand, strongly differentiated product offerings among rivals breed high brand loyalty on the part of buyers who view the attributes of certain brands as more appealing or better suited to their needs.

• Rivalry is more intense when industry members have too much inventory or significant amounts of idle production capacity, especially if the industry’s product entails high fixed costs or high storage costs. Whenever a market has excess supply (overproduction relative to demand), rivalry intensifies as sellers cut prices in a desperate effort to cope with the unsold inventory. A similar effect occurs when a product is perishable or seasonal, since firms often engage in aggressive price cutting to ensure that everything is sold. Likewise, whenever fixed costs account for a large fraction of total cost so that unit costs are significantly lower at full capacity, firms come under significant pressure to cut prices whenever they are operating below full capacity. Unused capacity imposes a significant cost-increasing penalty because there are fewer units over which to spread fixed costs. The pressure of high fixed or high storage costs can push rival firms into offering price concessions, special discounts, and rebates and employing other volume-boosting competitive tactics.

• Rivalry intensifies as the number of competitors increases and they become more equal in size and capability. When there are many competitors in a market, companies eager to increase their meager market share often engage in price-cutting activities to drive sales, leading to intense rivalry. When there are only a few competitors, companies are more wary of how their rivals may react to their attempts to take market share away from them. Fear of retaliation and a descent into a damaging price war leads to restrained competitive moves. Moreover, when rivals are of comparable size and competitive strength, they can usually compete on a fairly equal footing—an evenly matched contest tends to be fiercer than a contest in which one or more industry members have commanding market shares and substantially greater resources than their much smaller rivals.

• Rivalry becomes more intense as the diversity of competitors increases in terms of long-term directions, objectives, strategies, and countries of origin. A diverse group of sellers often contains one or more mavericks willing to try novel or rule-breaking market approaches, thus generating a more volatile and less predictable competitive environment. Globally competitive markets are often more rivalrous, especially when aggressors have lower costs and are intent on gaining a strong foothold in new country markets.

• Rivalry is stronger when high exit barriers keep unprofitable firms from leaving the industry. In industries where the assets cannot easily be sold or transferred to other uses, where workers are entitled to job protection, or where owners are committed to remaining in business for personal reasons, failing firms tend to hold on longer than they might otherwise—even when they are bleeding red ink. Deep price discounting of this sort can destabilize an otherwise attractive industry.

The previous factors, taken as whole, determine whether the rivalry in an industry is relatively strong, moderate, or weak. When rivalry is strong, the battle for market share is generally so vigorous that the profit margins of most industry members are squeezed to bare-bones levels. When rivalry is moderate, a more normal state, the maneuvering among industry members, while lively and healthy, still allows most industry members to earn acceptable profits. When rivalry is weak, most companies in the industry are relatively well satisfied with their sales growth and market shares and rarely undertake offensives to steal customers away from one another. Weak rivalry means that there is no downward pressure on industry profitability due to this particular competitive force.

PRINTED BY: Aaron Reagan . Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted.

11/7/2017http://e.pub/lc7027taixs89fglf6e8.vbk/OEBPS/chapter03-print-1510071377.xhtml

The Choice of Competitive Weapons Competitive battles among rival sellers can assume many forms that extend well beyond lively price competition. For example, competitors may resort to such marketing tactics as special sales promotions, heavy advertising, rebates, or low-interest-rate financing to drum up additional sales. Rivals may race one another to differentiate their products by offering better performance features or higher quality or improved customer service or a wider product selection. They may also compete through the rapid introduction of next-generation products, the frequent introduction of new or improved products, and efforts to build stronger dealer networks, establish positions in foreign markets, or otherwise expand distribution capabilities and market presence. Table 3.2 displays the competitive weapons that firms often employ in battling rivals, along with their primary effects with respect to price (P), cost (C), and value (V)—the elements of an effective business model and the value-price-cost framework, discussed in Chapter 1.

TABLE 3.2 Common “Weapons” for Competing with Rivals

Types of Competitive Weapons Primary Effects

Discounting prices, holding clearance sales

Lowers price (P), increases total sales volume and market share, lowers profits if price cuts are not offset by large increases in sales volume

Offering coupons, advertising items on sale

Increases sales volume and total revenues, lowers price (P), increases unit costs (C), may lower profit margins per unit sold (P − C)

Advertising product or service characteristics, using ads to enhance a company’s image

Boosts buyer demand, increases product differentiation and perceived value (V), increases total sales volume and market share, but may increase unit costs (C) and lower profit margins per unit sold

Innovating to improve product performance and quality

Increases product differentiation and value (V), boosts buyer demand, boosts total sales volume, likely to increase unit costs (C)

Introducing new or improved features, increasing the number of styles to provide greater product selection

Increases product differentiation and value (V), strengthens buyer demand, boosts total sales volume and market share, likely to increase unit costs (C)

Increasing customization of product or service

Increases product differentiation and value (V), increases buyer switching costs, boosts total sales volume, often increases unit costs (C)

PRINTED BY: Aaron Reagan . Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted.

11/7/2017http://e.pub/lc7027taixs89fglf6e8.vbk/OEBPS/chapter03-print-1510071377.xhtml

page 55

page 56

Types of Competitive Weapons Primary Effects Building a bigger, better dealer network

Broadens access to buyers, boosts total sales volume and market share, may increase unit costs (C)

Improving warranties, offering low-interest financing

Increases product differentiation and value (V), increases unit costs (C), increases buyer switching costs, boosts total sales volume and market share

Competitive Pressures Associated with the Threat of New Entrants New entrants into an industry threaten the position of rival firms since they will compete fiercely for market share, add to the number of industry rivals, and add to the industry’s production capacity in the process. But even the threat of new entry puts added competitive pressure on current industry members and thus functions as an important competitive force. This is because credible threat of entry often prompts industry members to lower their prices and initiate defensive actions in an attempt to deter new entrants. Just how serious the threat of entry is in a particular market depends on two classes of factors: (1) the expected reaction of incumbent firms to new entry and (2) what are known as barriers to entry. The threat of entry is low in industries where incumbent firms are likely to retaliate against new entrants with sharp price discounting and other moves designed to make entry unprofitable (due to the expectation of such retaliation). The threat of entry is also low when entry barriers are high (due to such barriers). Entry barriers are high under the following conditions:2

• There are sizable economies of scale in production, distribution, advertising, or other activities. When incumbent companies enjoy cost advantages associated with large-scale operations, outsiders must either enter on a large scale (a costly and perhaps risky move) or accept a cost disadvantage and consequently lower profitability.

• Incumbents have other hard to replicate cost advantages over new entrants. Aside from enjoying economies of scale, industry incumbents can have cost advantages that stem from the possession of patents or proprietary technology, exclusive partnerships with the best and cheapest suppliers, favorable locations, and low fixed costs (because they have older facilities that have been mostly depreciated). Learning-based cost savings can also accrue from experience in performing certain activities such as manufacturing or new product development or inventory management. The extent of such savings can be measured with learning/experience curves. The steeper the learning/experience curve, the bigger the cost advantage of the company with the largest cumulative production volume. The microprocessor industry provides an excellent example of this:

Manufacturing unit costs for microprocessors tend to decline about 20 percent each time cumulative production volume doubles. With a 20 percent experience curve effect, if the first 1 million chips cost $100 each, once production volume reaches 2 million, the unit cost would fall to $80 (80 percent of $100), and by a production volume of 4 million, the unit cost would be $64 (80 percent of $80).3

• Customers have strong brand preferences and high degrees of loyalty to seller. The stronger the attachment of buyers to established brands, the harder it is for a newcomer to break into the

PRINTED BY: Aaron Reagan . Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted.

11/7/2017http://e.pub/lc7027taixs89fglf6e8.vbk/OEBPS/chapter03-print-1510071377.xhtml

page 57

marketplace. In such cases, a new entrant must have the financial resources to spend enough on advertising and sales promotion to overcome customer loyalties and build its own clientele. Establishing brand recognition and building customer loyalty can be a slow and costly process. In addition, if it is difficult or costly for a customer to switch to a new brand, a new entrant may have to offer a discounted price or otherwise persuade buyers that its brand is worth the switching costs. Such barriers discourage new entry because they act to boost financial requirements and lower expected profit margins for new entrants.

• Patents and other forms of intellectual property protection are in place. In a number of industries, entry is prevented due to the existence of intellectual property protection laws that remain in place for a given number of years. Often, companies have a “wall of patents” in place to prevent other companies from entering with a “me too” strategy that replicates a key piece of technology.

• There are strong “network effects” in customer demand. In industries where buyers are more attracted to a product when there are many other users of the product, there are said to be “network effects,” since demand is higher the larger the network of users. Video game systems are an example because users prefer to have the same systems as their friends so that they can play together on systems they all know and can share games. When incumbents have a large existing base of users, new entrants with otherwise comparable products face a serious disadvantage in attracting buyers.

• Capital requirements are high. The larger the total dollar investment needed to enter the market successfully, the more limited the pool of potential entrants. The most obvious capital requirements for new entrants relate to manufacturing facilities and equipment, introductory advertising and sales promotion campaigns, working capital to finance inventories and customer credit, and sufficient cash to cover startup costs.

• There are difficulties in building a network of distributors/dealers or in securing adequate space on retailers’ shelves. A potential entrant can face numerous distribution-channel challenges. Wholesale distributors may be reluctant to take on a product that lacks buyer recognition. Retailers must be recruited and convinced to give a new brand ample display space and an adequate trial period. When existing sellers have strong, well-functioning distributor–dealer networks, a newcomer has an uphill struggle in squeezing its way into existing distribution channels. Potential entrants sometimes have to “buy” their way into wholesale or retail channels by cutting their prices to provide dealers and distributors with higher markups and profit margins or by giving them big advertising and promotional allowances. As a consequence, a potential entrant’s own profits may be squeezed unless and until its product gains enough consumer acceptance that distributors and retailers are willing to carry it.

• There are restrictive regulatory policies. Regulated industries like cable TV, telecommunications, electric and gas utilities, radio and television broadcasting, liquor retailing, nuclear power, and railroads entail government-controlled entry. Government agencies can also limit or even bar entry by requiring licenses and permits, such as the medallion required to drive a taxicab in New York City. Government-mandated safety regulations and environmental pollution standards also create entry barriers because they raise entry costs. Recently enacted banking regulations in many countries have made entry particularly difficult for small new bank startups—complying with all the new regulations along with the rigors of competing against existing banks requires very deep pockets.

• There are restrictive trade policies. In international markets, host governments commonly limit foreign entry and must approve all foreign investment applications. National governments commonly use tariffs and trade restrictions (antidumping rules, local content requirements, quotas, etc.) to raise entry barriers for foreign firms and protect domestic producers from outside competition.

Whether an industry’s entry barriers ought to be considered high or low depends on the resources and capabilities possessed by the pool of potential entrants.

PRINTED BY: Aaron Reagan . Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted.

11/7/2017http://e.pub/lc7027taixs89fglf6e8.vbk/OEBPS/chapter03-print-1510071377.xhtml

Figure 3.5 summarizes the factors that cause the overall competitive pressure from potential entrants to be strong or weak. An analysis of these factors can help managers determine whether the threat of entry into their industry is high or low, in general. But certain kinds of companies—those with sizable financial resources, proven competitive capabilities, and a respected brand name—may be able to hurdle an industry’s entry barriers even when they are high.4 For example, when Honda opted to enter the U.S. lawn-mower market in competition against Toro, Snapper, Craftsman, John Deere, and others, it was easily able to hurdle entry barriers that would have been formidable to other newcomers because it had long-standing expertise in gasoline engines and a reputation for quality and durability in automobiles that gave it instant credibility with homeowners. As a result, Honda had to spend relatively little on inducing dealers to handle the Honda lawn-mower line or attracting customers. Similarly, Samsung’s brand reputation in televisions, DVD players, and other electronics products gave it strong credibility in entering the market for smartphones—Samsung’s Galaxy smartphones are now a formidable rival of Apple’s iPhone.

FIGURE 3.5  Factors Affecting the Threat of Entry

PRINTED BY: Aaron Reagan . Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted.

11/7/2017http://e.pub/lc7027taixs89fglf6e8.vbk/OEBPS/chapter03-print-1510071377.xhtml

page 58

page 59

High entry barriers and weak entry threats today do not always translate into high entry barriers and weak entry threats tomorrow.

It is also important to recognize that the barriers to entering an industry can become stronger or weaker over time. For example, key patents that had prevented new entry in the market for functional 3-D printers expired in February 2014, opening the way for new competition in this industry. Use of the Internet for shopping has made it much easier for e-tailers to enter into competition against some of the best-known retail chains. On the other hand, new strategic actions by incumbent firms to increase advertising, strengthen distributor–dealer relations, step up R&D, or improve product quality can erect higher roadblocks to entry.

Competitive Pressures from the Sellers of Substitute Products Companies in one industry are vulnerable to competitive pressure from the actions of companies in a closely adjoining industry whenever buyers view the products of the two industries as good substitutes. For instance, the producers of eyeglasses and contact lens face competitive pressures from the doctors who do corrective laser surgery. Similarly, the producers of sugar experience competitive pressures from the producers of sugar substitutes (high-fructose corn syrup, agave syrup, and artificial sweeteners). Internet providers of news-related information have put brutal competitive pressure on the publishers of newspapers.

As depicted in Figure 3.6, three factors determine whether the competitive pressures from substitute products are strong or weak. Competitive pressures are stronger when:

FIGURE 3.6  Factors Affecting Competition from Substitute Products

PRINTED BY: Aaron Reagan . Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted.

11/7/2017http://e.pub/lc7027taixs89fglf6e8.vbk/OEBPS/chapter03-print-1510071377.xhtml

page 60

1. Good substitutes are readily available and attractively priced. The presence of readily available and attractively priced substitutes creates competitive pressure by placing a ceiling on the prices industry members can charge without risking sales erosion. This price ceiling, at the same time, puts a lid on the profits that industry members can earn unless they find ways to cut costs.

2. Buyers view the substitutes as comparable or better in terms of quality, performance, and other relevant attributes. The availability of substitutes inevitably invites customers to compare performance, features, ease of use, and other attributes besides price. The users of paper cartons constantly weigh the price-performance trade-offs with plastic containers and metal cans, for example. Movie enthusiasts are increasingly weighing whether to go to movie theaters to watch newly released movies or wait until they can watch the same movies streamed to their home TV by Netflix, Amazon Prime, cable providers, and other on demand sources.

3. The costs that buyers incur in switching to the substitutes are low. Low switching costs make it easier for the sellers of attractive substitutes to lure buyers to their offerings; high switching costs deter buyers from purchasing substitute products.

PRINTED BY: Aaron Reagan . Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted.

11/7/2017http://e.pub/lc7027taixs89fglf6e8.vbk/OEBPS/chapter03-print-1510071377.xhtml

Before assessing the competitive pressures coming from substitutes, company managers must identify the substitutes, which is less easy than it sounds since it involves (1) determining where the industry boundaries lie and (2) figuring out which other products or services can address the same basic customer needs as those produced by industry members. Deciding on the industry boundaries is necessary for determining which firms are direct rivals and which produce substitutes. This is a matter of perspective—there are no hard-and-fast rules, other than to say that other brands of the same basic product constitute rival products and not substitutes.

Competitive Pressures Stemming from Supplier Bargaining Power Whether the suppliers of industry members represent a weak or strong competitive force depends on the degree to which suppliers have sufficient bargaining power to influence the terms and conditions of supply in their favor. Suppliers with strong bargaining power are a source of competitive pressure because of their ability to charge industry members higher prices, pass costs on to them, and limit their opportunities to find better deals. For instance, Microsoft and Intel, both of which supply PC makers with essential components, have been known to use their dominant market status not only to charge PC makers premium prices but also to leverage their power over PC makers in other ways. The bargaining power of these two companies over their customers is so great that both companies have faced antitrust charges on numerous occasions. Prior to a legal agreement ending the practice, Microsoft pressured PC makers to load only Microsoft products on the PCs they shipped. Intel has defended itself against similar antitrust charges, but in filling orders for newly introduced Intel chips, it continues to give top priority to PC makers that use the biggest percentages of Intel chips in their PC models. Being on Intel’s list of preferred customers helps a PC maker get an early allocation of Intel’s latest chips and thus allows the PC maker to get new models to market ahead of rivals.

Small-scale retailers often must contend with the power of manufacturers whose products enjoy well-known brand names, since consumers expect to find these products on the shelves of the retail stores where they shop. This provides the manufacturer with a degree of pricing power and often the ability to push hard for favorable shelf displays. Supplier bargaining power is also a competitive factor in industries where unions have been able to organize the workforce (which supplies labor). Air pilot unions, for example, have employed their bargaining power to increase pilots’ wages and benefits in the air transport industry.

As shown in Figure 3.7, a variety of factors determine the strength of suppliers’ bargaining power. Supplier power is stronger when:

FIGURE 3.7  Factors Affecting the Bargaining Power of Suppliers

PRINTED BY: Aaron Reagan . Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted.

11/7/2017http://e.pub/lc7027taixs89fglf6e8.vbk/OEBPS/chapter03-print-1510071377.xhtml

page 61

page 62

• Demand for suppliers’ products is high and the products are in short supply. A surge in the demand for particular items shifts the bargaining power to the suppliers of those products; suppliers of items in short supply have pricing power.

• Suppliers provide differentiated inputs that enhance the performance of the industry’s product. The more valuable a particular input is in terms of enhancing the performance or quality of the products of industry members, the more bargaining leverage suppliers have. In contrast, the suppliers of commodities are in a weak bargaining position, since industry members have no reason other than price to prefer one supplier over another.

• It is difficult or costly for industry members to switch their purchases from one supplier to another. Low switching costs limit supplier bargaining power by enabling industry members to change suppliers if any one supplier attempts to raise prices by more than the costs of switching. Thus, the higher the switching costs of industry members, the stronger the bargaining power of their suppliers.

• The supplier industry is dominated by a few large companies and it is more concentrated than the industry it sells to. Suppliers with sizable market shares and strong demand for the items they supply generally have sufficient bargaining power to charge high prices and deny requests from industry members for lower prices or other concessions.

• Industry members are incapable of integrating backward to self-manufacture items they have been buying from suppliers. As a rule, suppliers are safe from the threat of self- manufacture by their customers until the volume of parts a customer needs becomes large enough for the customer to justify backward integration into self-manufacture of the component. When industry members can threaten credibly to self-manufacture suppliers’ goods, their bargaining power over suppliers increases proportionately.

• Suppliers provide an item that accounts for no more than a small fraction of the costs of the industry’s product. The more that the cost of a particular part or component affects the final product’s cost, the more that industry members will be sensitive to the actions of suppliers to

PRINTED BY: Aaron Reagan . Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted.

11/7/2017http://e.pub/lc7027taixs89fglf6e8.vbk/OEBPS/chapter03-print-1510071377.xhtml

page 63

raise or lower their prices. When an input accounts for only a small proportion of total input costs, buyers will be less sensitive to price increases. Thus, suppliers’ power increases when the inputs they provide do not make up a large proportion of the cost of the final product.

• Good substitutes are not available for the suppliers’ products. The lack of readily available substitute inputs increases the bargaining power of suppliers by increasing the dependence of industry members on the suppliers.

• Industry members are not major customers of suppliers. As a rule, suppliers have less bargaining leverage when their sales to members of the industry constitute a big percentage of their total sales. In such cases, the well-being of suppliers is closely tied to the well-being of their major customers, and their dependence upon them increases. The bargaining power of suppliers is stronger, then, when they are not bargaining with major customers.

In identifying the degree of supplier power in an industry, it is important to recognize that different types of suppliers are likely to have different amounts of bargaining power. Thus, the first step is for managers to identify the different types of suppliers, paying particular attention to those that provide the industry with important inputs. The next step is to assess the bargaining power of each type of supplier separately.

Competitive Pressures Stemming from Buyer Bargaining Power and Price Sensitivity Whether buyers are able to exert strong competitive pressures on industry members depends on (1) the degree to which buyers have bargaining power and (2) the extent to which buyers are price- sensitive. Buyers with strong bargaining power can limit industry profitability by demanding price concessions, better payment terms, or additional features and services that increase industry members’ costs. Buyer price sensitivity limits the profit potential of industry members by restricting the ability of sellers to raise prices without losing revenue due to lost sales.

As with suppliers, the leverage that buyers have in negotiating favorable terms of sale can range from weak to strong. Individual consumers seldom have much bargaining power in negotiating price concessions or other favorable terms with sellers. However, their price sensitivity varies by individual and by the type of product they are buying (whether it’s a necessity or a discretionary purchase, for example). Similarly, small businesses usually have weak bargaining power because of the small- size orders they place with sellers. Many relatively small wholesalers and retailers join buying groups to pool their purchasing power and approach manufacturers for better terms than could be gotten individually. Large business buyers, in contrast, can have considerable bargaining power. For example, large retail chains like Walmart, Best Buy, Staples, and Home Depot typically have considerable bargaining power in purchasing products from manufacturers, not only because they buy in large quantities, but also because of manufacturers’ need for access to their broad base of customers. Major supermarket chains like Kroger, Albertsons, Hannaford, and Aldi have sufficient bargaining power to demand promotional allowances and lump-sum payments (called slotting fees) from food products manufacturers in return for stocking certain brands or putting them in the best shelf locations. Motor vehicle manufacturers have strong bargaining power in negotiating to buy original-equipment tires from tire makers such as Goodyear, Michelin, and Pirelli, partly because they buy in large quantities and partly because consumers are more likely to buy replacement tires that match the tire brand on their vehicle at the time of its purchase.

Figure 3.8 summarizes the factors determining the strength of buyer power in an industry. Note that the first five factors are the mirror image of those determining the bargaining power of suppliers, as described next.

FIGURE 3.8  Factors Affecting the Bargaining Power of Buyers

PRINTED BY: Aaron Reagan . Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted.

11/7/2017http://e.pub/lc7027taixs89fglf6e8.vbk/OEBPS/chapter03-print-1510071377.xhtml

page 64

Buyer bargaining power is stronger when:

• Buyer demand is weak in relation to the available supply. Weak or declining demand and the resulting excess supply create a “buyers’ market,” in which bargain-hunting buyers have leverage in pressing industry members for better deals and special treatment. Conversely, strong or rapidly growing market demand creates a “sellers’ market” characterized by tight supplies or shortages—conditions that put buyers in a weak position to wring concessions from industry members.

• Industry goods are standardized or differentiation is weak. In such circumstances, buyers make their selections on the basis of price, which increases price competition among vendors.

• Buyers’ costs of switching to competing brands or substitutes are relatively low. Switching costs put a cap on how much industry producers can raise prices or reduce quality before they will lose the buyer’s business.

• Buyers are large and few in number relative to the number of sellers. The larger the buyers, the more important their business is to the seller and the more sellers will be willing to grant concessions.

• Buyers pose a credible threat of integrating backward into the business of sellers. Companies like Anheuser-Busch, Coors, and Heinz have partially integrated backward into metal-can manufacturing to gain bargaining power in obtaining the balance of their can requirements from otherwise powerful metal-can manufacturers.

• Buyers are well informed about the product offerings of sellers (product features and quality, prices, buyer reviews) and the cost of production (an indicator of markup). The more information buyers have, the better bargaining position they are in. The mushrooming availability of product

PRINTED BY: Aaron Reagan . Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted.

11/7/2017http://e.pub/lc7027taixs89fglf6e8.vbk/OEBPS/chapter03-print-1510071377.xhtml

page 65

information on the Internet (and its ready access on smartphones) is giving added bargaining power to consumers, since they can use this to find or negotiate better deals.

• Buyers have discretion to delay their purchases or perhaps even not make a purchase at all. Consumers often have the option to delay purchases of durable goods (cars, major appliances), or decline to buy discretionary goods (massages, concert tickets) if they are not happy with the prices offered. Business customers may also be able to defer their purchases of certain items, such as plant equipment or maintenance services. This puts pressure on sellers to provide concessions to buyers so that the sellers can keep their sales numbers from dropping off.

The following factors increase buyer price sensitivity and result in greater competitive pressures on the industry as a result:

• Buyer price sensitivity increases when buyers are earning low profits or have low income. Price is a critical factor in the purchase decisions of low-income consumers and companies that are barely scraping by. In such cases, their high price sensitivity limits the ability of sellers to charge high prices.

• Buyers are more price-sensitive if the product represents a large fraction of their total purchases. When a purchase eats up a large portion of a buyer’s budget or represents a significant part of his or her cost structure, the buyer cares more about price than might otherwise be the case.

The starting point for the analysis of buyers as a competitive force is to identify the different types of buyers along the value chain—then proceed to analyzing the bargaining power and price sensitivity of each type separately. It is important to recognize that not all buyers of an industry’s product have equal degrees of bargaining power with sellers, and some may be less sensitive than others to price, quality, or service differences. For example, apparel manufacturers confront significant bargaining power when selling to big retailers like Nordstrom, Macy’s, or Bloomingdale’s, but they can command much better prices selling to small owner-managed apparel boutiques.

Is the Collective Strength of the Five Competitive Forces Conducive to Good Profitability? Assessing whether each of the five competitive forces gives rise to strong, moderate, or weak competitive pressures sets the stage for evaluating whether, overall, the strength of the five forces is conducive to good profitability. Is any of the competitive forces sufficiently powerful to undermine industry profitability? Can companies in this industry reasonably expect to earn decent profits in light of the prevailing competitive forces?

The most extreme case of a “competitively unattractive” industry occurs when all five forces are producing strong competitive pressures: Rivalry among sellers is vigorous, low entry barriers allow new rivals to gain a market foothold, competition from substitutes is intense, and both suppliers and buyers are able to exercise considerable leverage. Strong competitive pressures coming from all five directions drive industry profitability to unacceptably low levels, frequently producing losses for many industry members and forcing some out of business. But an industry can be competitively unattractive without all five competitive forces being strong. In fact, intense competitive pressures from just one of the five forces may suffice to destroy the conditions for good profitability and prompt some companies to exit the business.

CORE CONCEPT The strongest of the five forces determines the extent of the downward pressure on an industry’s profitability.

PRINTED BY: Aaron Reagan . Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted.

11/7/2017http://e.pub/lc7027taixs89fglf6e8.vbk/OEBPS/chapter03-print-1510071377.xhtml

page 66

As a rule, the strongest competitive forces determine the extent of the competitive pressure on industry profitability. Thus, in evaluating the strength of the five forces overall and their effect on industry profitability, managers should look to the strongest forces. Having more than one strong force will not worsen the effect on industry profitability, but it does mean that the industry has multiple competitive challenges with which to cope. In that sense, an industry with three to five strong forces is even more “unattractive” as a place to compete. Especially intense competitive conditions seem to be the norm in tire manufacturing, apparel, and commercial airlines, three industries where profit margins have historically been thin.

In contrast, when the overall impact of the five competitive forces is moderate to weak, an industry is “attractive” in the sense that the average industry member can reasonably expect to earn good profits and a nice return on investment. The ideal competitive environment for earning superior profits is one in which both suppliers and customers are in weak bargaining positions, there are no good substitutes, high barriers block further entry, and rivalry among present sellers is muted. Weak competition is the best of all possible worlds for also-ran companies because even they can usually eke out a decent profit—if a company can’t make a decent profit when competition is weak, then its business outlook is indeed grim.

Matching Company Strategy to Competitive Conditions

A company’s strategy is increasingly effective the more it provides some insulation from competitive pressures, shifts the competitive battle in the company’s favor, and positions the firm to take advantage of attractive growth opportunities.

Working through the five forces model step by step not only aids strategy makers in assessing whether the intensity of competition allows good profitability but also promotes sound strategic thinking about how to better match company strategy to the specific competitive character of the marketplace. Effectively matching a company’s business strategy to prevailing competitive conditions has two aspects:

1. Pursuing avenues that shield the firm from as many of the different competitive pressures as possible.

2. Initiating actions calculated to shift the competitive forces in the company’s favor by altering the underlying factors driving the five forces.

But making headway on these two fronts first requires identifying competitive pressures, gauging the relative strength of each of the five competitive forces, and gaining a deep enough understanding of the state of competition in the industry to know which strategy buttons to push.

COMPLEMENTORS AND THE VALUE NET Not all interactions among industry participants are necessarily competitive in nature. Some have the potential to be cooperative, as the value net framework demonstrates. Like the five forces framework, the value net includes an analysis of buyers, suppliers, and substitutors (see Figure 3.9). But it differs from the five forces framework in several important ways.

FIGURE 3.9  The Value Net

PRINTED BY: Aaron Reagan . Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted.

11/7/2017http://e.pub/lc7027taixs89fglf6e8.vbk/OEBPS/chapter03-print-1510071377.xhtml

First, the analysis focuses on the interactions of industry participants with a particular company. Thus it places that firm in the center of the framework, as Figure 3.9 shows. Second, the category of “competitors” is defined to include not only the focal firm’s direct competitors or industry rivals but also the sellers of substitute products and potential entrants. Third, the value net framework introduces a new category of industry participant that is not found in the five forces framework—that of “complementors.” Complementors are the producers of complementary products, which are products that enhance the value of the focal firm’s products when they are used together. Some examples include snorkels and swim fins or shoes and shoelaces.

CORE CONCEPT Complementors are the producers of complementary products, which are products that enhance the value of the focal firm’s products when they are used together.

The inclusion of complementors draws particular attention to the fact that success in the marketplace need not come at the expense of other industry participants. Interactions among industry participants may be cooperative in nature rather than competitive. In the case of complementors, an increase in sales for them is likely to increase the sales of the focal firm as well. But the value net framework also encourages managers to consider other forms of cooperative interactions and realize that value is created jointly by all industry participants. For example, a company’s success in the marketplace depends on establishing a reliable supply chain for its inputs, which implies the need for cooperative relations with its suppliers. Often a firm works hand in hand with its suppliers to ensure a smoother, more efficient operation for both parties. Newell- Rubbermaid, for example, works cooperatively as a supplier to companies such as Kmart and

PRINTED BY: Aaron Reagan . Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted.

11/7/2017http://e.pub/lc7027taixs89fglf6e8.vbk/OEBPS/chapter03-print-1510071377.xhtml

page 67

page 68

Kohl’s. Even direct rivals may work cooperatively if they participate in industry trade associations or engage in joint lobbying efforts. Value net analysis can help managers discover the potential to improve their position through cooperative as well as competitive interactions.

INDUSTRY DYNAMICS AND THE FORCES DRIVING CHANGE

While it is critical to understand the nature and intensity of competitive and cooperative forces in an industry, it is equally critical to understand that the intensity of these forces is fluid and subject to change. All industries are affected by new developments and ongoing trends that alter industry conditions, some more speedily than others. The popular hypothesis that industries go through a life cycle of takeoff, rapid growth, maturity, market saturation and slowing growth, followed by stagnation or decline is but one aspect of industry change—many other new developments and emerging trends cause industry change.5 Any strategies devised by management will therefore play out in a dynamic industry environment, so it’s imperative that managers consider the factors driving industry change and how they might affect the industry environment. Moreover, with early notice, managers may be able to influence the direction or scope of environmental change and improve the outlook.

CORE CONCEPT Driving forces are the major underlying causes of change in industry and competitive conditions.

Industry and competitive conditions change because forces are enticing or pressuring certain industry participants (competitors, customers, suppliers, complementors) to alter their actions in important ways. The most powerful of the change agents are called driving forces because they have the biggest influences in reshaping the industry landscape and altering competitive conditions. Some driving forces originate in the outer ring of the company’s macro-environment (see Figure 3.2), but most originate in the company’s more immediate industry and competitive environment.