GE/McKinsey Portfolio Matrix Model GE/McKinsey Matrix is the business portfolio framework developed by General Electric with the help of McKinsey and Company, an American global management consulting firm. GE Business Screen includes nine cells based on long-term industry attractiveness and business strength/competitive position. Factors that Affect Market Attractiveness: There are several factors which can help determine attractiveness. These are listed below: Market Size Market growth Market profitability Pricing trends Competitive intensity / rivalry Overall risk of returns in the industry Opportunity to differentiate products and services Segmentation Distribution structure (e.g. retail, direct, wholesale) Factors that Affect Competitive Strength: There are several factors which can help determine the business unit strength. These are listed below: Strength of assets and competencies Relative brand strength Market share Customer loyalty Relative cost position (cost structure compared with competitors) Distribution strength Record of technological or other innovation Access to financial and other investment resources Continue reading
Strategic Management Tools
The BCG Growth Share Matrix
In the late 1960s a consultant for the Boston Consulting Group presented his ideas about cash deficient and growth deficient businesses and the need for a balance between cash generators and cash users. After that the Boston Consulting Group developed a portfolio business model based on this thinking. The model, the BCG matrix or growth share matrix, was based on the Boston Consulting Group’s knowledge and work in the area of the experience curve and of the product life cycle and how they relate to cash generation and cash requirements. The growth share matrix was intended to analyze a portfolio from a corporate perspective because it is only at that level that cash balance is meaningful. A business may, however, be segmented further using this diagnostic tool to understand the positions of its various product lines or market segments. This portfolio can therefore be made up of products in a Continue reading
Mckinsey’s 7S Framework
The Mckinsey’s 7S Framework suggests that there is a multiplicity of factors that influence an organization’s ability to change and its proper mode of change. Because of the interconnections of the variables, it would be difficult to make significant progress in one area without making progress in the others as well. There is no starting point or implied hierarchy in the shape of the diagram, and it is not obvious which of the seven factors would be the driving force in changing a particular organization at a certain point of time. The critical variables would be different across organizations and in the same organizations at different points of time. History of Mckinsey’s 7S Framework The 7S Framework was first mentioned in “The Art Of Japanese Management” by Richard Pascale and Anthony Athos in 1981. They had been investigating how Japanese industry had been so successful. At around the same time Continue reading
Technology Adoption Life Cycle
Geoffrey Moore, An American organizational theorist, management consultant and author, in his books Crossing the Chasm (1991) and Inside the Tornado (1995), draws on marketing theory and high-tech experience to describe the elements of the product life cycle for technology innovations. His work examines how communities respond to discontinuous innovations – or any new products or services that require the end user in the marketplace to dramatically change their past behavior. He describes how companies must position their products differently through the cycle to reach their full sales potential and become an industry standard instead of a novelty. Many new technologies start along a classic new product diffusion curve, but fail soon thereafter. Through the various phases of the technology adoption life cycle, very different strategies for product and service offering and positioning are called for. The basis of the technology adoption life cycle is similar to the Continue reading
Grand Strategy Matrix
The Grand Strategy Matrix has become a popular tool for formulating feasible strategies, along with the SWOT Analysis, SPACE Matrix, BCG Matrix, and IE Matrix. Grand strategy matrix is the instrument for creating alternative and different strategies for the organization. All companies and divisions can be positioned in one of the Grand Strategy Matrix’s four strategy quadrants. The Grand Strategy Matrix is based on two dimensions: competitive position and market growth. Data needed for positioning SBUs in the matrix is derived from the portfolio analysis. This matrix offers feasible strategies for a company to consider which are listed in sequential order of attractiveness in each quadrant of the matrix. Quadrant I (Strong Competitive Position and Rapid Market Growth) – Firms located in Quadrant I of the Grand Strategy Matrix are in an excellent strategic position. The first quadrant refers to the firms or divisions with strong competitive base and operating Continue reading
Intensive Growth Strategies – Ansoff Matrix – Product-Market Grid
Intensive Growth Strategies – Expansion through Intensification Intensification involves expansion within the existing line of business. Intensive growth strategy involves safeguarding the present position and expanding in the current product-market space to achieve growth targets. Such an approach is very useful for enterprises that have not fully exploited the opportunities existing in their current products-market domain. A firm selecting an intensification strategy, concentrates on its primary line of business and looks for ways to meet its growth objectives by increasing its size of operations in its primary business. Intensive expansion of a firm can be accomplished in three ways, namely, market penetration, market development and product development first suggested in Ansoff’s model. Intensification strategy is followed when adequate growth opportunities exist in the firm’s current products-market space. However, while going in for internal expansion, the management should consider the following factors. While there are a number of expansion options, Continue reading