marketing plan
Reading 14 discussed about the importance of core competencies to an organization by using examples such as Honda company, it also suggest how to define weather the company have core competencies or not.
In this reading, the writers suggested that core competence is similar to strategic capabilities that enable organizations to achieve a more sustainable competitive advantage. They are also suggested questions used to identify core competence, which are does it provide potential access to a wide variety of markets? Does it make a significant contribution to the perceived customer benefits to the end products? And does it very hard to imitate? Refer back to Woods reading in week 4, she addressed five questions to define if a capability is a strategic or not. The five questions are
1. Does it deliver customer value?
2. Is it rare?
3. Is it hard to imitate?
4. Could it easy to be used in several markets?
5. And is it exploitable now?
Question 1, 3 and 4 are similar to Prahalad and Hamel’s ideas in reading 14.
Prahalad and Hamel also suggested a tactics that managers often use in their organization called “ The Tyranny of the SUB” which means SBU managers lock up the key person in the organization in ‘silos’ rather than share them for the benefit of the wider organization. Refer to Nalebuff and Brandenburger’s reading 13, to change the games managers have to change whether players, added value, tactics, scope or rules in the market. The example of Cannon used in reading 14 actually shows the company changed their tactics to change the games. Cannon have had lesser stock of the people and technologies that compose core competencies but could move them much quicker from one business unit to another.
Another example by change the tactics to change the game is Porsche company, they have their engineering groups as their core competence in the car market, After they decided to develop new SUV car instead of only focus on sports car
In this reading, the writers suggested that core competence is similar to strategic capabilities that enable organizations to achieve a more sustainable competitive advantage. They are also suggested questions used to identify core competence, which are does it provide potential access to a wide variety of markets? Does it make a significant contribution to the perceived customer benefits to the end products? And does it very hard to imitate? Refer back to Woods reading in week 4, she addressed five questions to define if a capability is a strategic or not. The five questions are
1. Does it deliver customer value?
2. Is it rare?
3. Is it hard to imitate?
4. Could it easy to be used in several markets?
5. And is it exploitable now?
Question 1, 3 and 4 are similar to Prahalad and Hamel’s ideas in reading 14.
Prahalad and Hamel also suggested a tactics that managers often use in their organization called “ The Tyranny of the SUB” which means SBU managers lock up the key person in the organization in ‘silos’ rather than share them for the benefit of the wider organization. Refer to Nalebuff and Brandenburger’s reading 13, to change the games managers have to change whether players, added value, tactics, scope or rules in the market. The example of Cannon used in reading 14 actually shows the company changed their tactics to change the games. Cannon have had lesser stock of the people and technologies that compose core competencies but could move them much quicker from one business unit to another.
Another example by change the tactics to change the game is Porsche company, they have their engineering groups as their core competence in the car market, After they decided to develop new SUV car instead of only focus on sports car
References: Whips and Tips, (2013). Porsche: Strategy 2018. [online] Available at: http://wrtg3040mmsjt.wordpress.com/2013/04/25/porsche-strategy-2018/ [Accessed 4 May. 2014].