Skip to main content

Strategic Comparisons

  • Chapter
  • 30 Accesses

Abstract

In the previous chapter we outlined a number of possible business strategies, and in the concluding section suggested that the choice of individual strategy would depend upon the goals of the organisation, the extent to which the firm’s present aspirations were being achieved, the overall strength of the business, and the conditions in the product-market areas in which the company operates. In this chapter we shall systematise some of these considerations in order to indicate how management should choose the right strategy for an individual product area or strategic business unit. The same approach is also used to indicate how multi-product firms should structure their various product interests in the form of a portfolio. The purpose of these techniques is thus to match the joint assessment of the environmental and business resources analysis set out in Chapter 3 with the strategic possibilities discussed in Chapter 4.

In diversified business organizations one of the main functions of the management is to decide how money, materials and skilled manpower should be provided and allocated between different business sectors in order to ensure the survival and healthy growth of the whole. — S. J. Q. Robinson et al. ‘The Directional Policy Matrix’, Long Range Planning, June 1978, p. 8.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. A good concise exposition of this by a director of the Boston Consulting Group is contained in B. Hedley, ‘Strategy and the “Business Portfolio” ’, Long Range Planning, February 1977, pp. 9–15.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Ibid., p. 11.

    Google Scholar 

  3. The product-market life-cycle concept implies that the volume of sales of any product follows a particular pattern over its life of tentative beginnings, a period of rapid growth followed by a plateau period during which sales are pretty well constant, and a final phase of decline as sales fall off markedly.

    Google Scholar 

  4. See J. Harvey, Business Policy and Strategic Management (Columbus, Ohio: Merrill Publishing, 1982) pp. 187–90.

    Google Scholar 

  5. See K. R. Harrigan and M. E. Porter, ‘End-game Strategies for Declining Businesses’, Harvard Business Review, July–August 1983, pp. 111–20.

    Google Scholar 

  6. See S. St. P. Slatter, ‘Common Pitfalls in Using the BCG Product Portfolio Matrix’, London Business School Journal, Winter 1980, pp. 18–22.

    Google Scholar 

  7. See R. D. Buzzell and F. D. Wiersema, ‘Successful Share-Building Strategies’, Harvard Business Review, January–February 1981, pp. 135–7; but see also research which indicates that factors in addition to market dominance will influence the profitability of market leaders. These factors include the nature of the market environment, product characteristics, the basis of competition in the market, and the degree of autonomy of market leader business units within their total organisation. See C. Y. Koo, ‘Market-Share Leadership — Not Always So Good”, Harvard Business Review, January–February 1984, pp. 50–4.

    Google Scholar 

  8. See W. S. Howe, Industrial Economics (London: Macmillan, 1978) pp. 86–8.

    Google Scholar 

  9. See R. G. Hamermesh et al., ‘Strategies for Low Market Share Businesses’, Harvard Business Review, May–June 1978, pp. 95–102.

    Google Scholar 

  10. J. Thackray, ‘The Five-Star Management of Ball’, Management Today, March 1984, pp. 66–71.

    Google Scholar 

  11. T. Lester, ‘The Giant Planning Problem’, Management Today, June 1982, p. 76.

    Google Scholar 

  12. See S. J. Q. Robinson et al., ‘The Directional Policy Matrix — Tool for Strategic Planning’, Long Range Planning, June 1978, pp. 8–15.

    Google Scholar 

  13. See ‘Tactics of a Reluctant Takeover Target’, Financial Times, 7 September 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  14. J. Thackray, ‘Motorola’s Leading Edge’, Management Today, November 1983, pp. 76–83.

    Google Scholar 

  15. D. E. Hussey, ‘Portfolio Analysis: Practical Experience with the Directional Policy Matrix’, Long Range Planning, August 1978, p. 7.

    Google Scholar 

  16. P. Haspeslagh, ‘Portfolio Planning: Uses and Limits’, Harvard Business Review, January–February 1982, p. 65.

    Google Scholar 

  17. See R. Wensley, ‘PIMS and BCG: New Horizons or False Dawn?’ Strategic Management Journal, 1982, Vol. III, pp. 147–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Copyright information

© 1986 W. Stewart Howe

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Howe, W.S. (1986). Strategic Comparisons. In: Corporate Strategy. Palgrave, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-18213-8_5

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics