Strategy BUS Project Microsoft
Kettering University
Department of Business
MGMT 659 - Strategy
Summer 2013
Prof. Irish
BUS Project – Microsoft
Rakan Mogaddam
Contents
1 Current Situation Analysis 3
1.1 Past Performance Indexes 3
1.1.1 Ratios 3
1.1.2 Industry Competitor Comparison 4 1.2 Strategic Posture 4 1.2.1 Mission Statement 5 1.2.2 Vision Statement 5 1.2.3 Strategies and Policies 5
2 Corporate Governance 6
2.1 Board of Directors 6
2.2 Top Management 7
2.3 Stakeholders 8
3 External Environment 9
4 Internal Environment 10
5 Analysis of Strategic Factors 14
6 Alternatives & Recommendations 15
7 Implementation and Control 17
8 Evaluation Scorecard (Kaplan) 18 References: 20
1 Current Situation Analysis
1.1 Past Performance Indexes
1.1.1 Ratios
The ratios of Microsoft can be used to analyze how well the company is performing according to its investments and recent profits. The following are a few ratios for the year ended June 30, 2013:
1.1.1.1 Credit Ratios
1. Current Ratio:
271%
This ratio tells us the relation between the current assets and liabilities of the company.
2. Quick Ratio
266%
This ratio tells us how liquid our assets are. This means how quickly we can change our assets into cash.
1.1.1.2 Profitability Ratios
1. Return on Assets
12.69%
It tells about the profitability of the company according to its assets.
2. Return on Equity
30.09%
This ratio helps us understand how much net profit the company is earning on the capital invested by the shareholders.
1.1.2 Industry Competitor Comparison
Comparing these ratios with Google, we find that their profitability ratios are lower than Microsoft for the year ended June 2013. Its Return on Assets was 8.92% and Return on Equity 15.24%. However, the Current Ratio of Google was much higher with 422%, compared to Microsoft’s 260% in 2012. The Quick Ratio was also high with 418%, compared to 257% in 2012.
1.2 Strategic Posture
1.2.1 Mission Statement
“The Microsoft mission regarding global
Department of Business
MGMT 659 - Strategy
Summer 2013
Prof. Irish
BUS Project – Microsoft
Rakan Mogaddam
Contents
1 Current Situation Analysis 3
1.1 Past Performance Indexes 3
1.1.1 Ratios 3
1.1.2 Industry Competitor Comparison 4 1.2 Strategic Posture 4 1.2.1 Mission Statement 5 1.2.2 Vision Statement 5 1.2.3 Strategies and Policies 5
2 Corporate Governance 6
2.1 Board of Directors 6
2.2 Top Management 7
2.3 Stakeholders 8
3 External Environment 9
4 Internal Environment 10
5 Analysis of Strategic Factors 14
6 Alternatives & Recommendations 15
7 Implementation and Control 17
8 Evaluation Scorecard (Kaplan) 18 References: 20
1 Current Situation Analysis
1.1 Past Performance Indexes
1.1.1 Ratios
The ratios of Microsoft can be used to analyze how well the company is performing according to its investments and recent profits. The following are a few ratios for the year ended June 30, 2013:
1.1.1.1 Credit Ratios
1. Current Ratio:
271%
This ratio tells us the relation between the current assets and liabilities of the company.
2. Quick Ratio
266%
This ratio tells us how liquid our assets are. This means how quickly we can change our assets into cash.
1.1.1.2 Profitability Ratios
1. Return on Assets
12.69%
It tells about the profitability of the company according to its assets.
2. Return on Equity
30.09%
This ratio helps us understand how much net profit the company is earning on the capital invested by the shareholders.
1.1.2 Industry Competitor Comparison
Comparing these ratios with Google, we find that their profitability ratios are lower than Microsoft for the year ended June 2013. Its Return on Assets was 8.92% and Return on Equity 15.24%. However, the Current Ratio of Google was much higher with 422%, compared to Microsoft’s 260% in 2012. The Quick Ratio was also high with 418%, compared to 257% in 2012.
1.2 Strategic Posture
1.2.1 Mission Statement
“The Microsoft mission regarding global
References: Nasdaq. (2013). Financial Ratios (Goog). Available: http://www.nasdaq.com/symbol/goog/financials?query=ratios. [Accessed 4th Oct 2013]. Businessweek. (2013). Google Inc-Financial Ratios. Available: http://investing.businessweek.com/research/stocks/financials/ratios.asp?ticker=GOOG. [Accessed 4th Oct 2013]. Nasdaq. (2013). Financial Ratios (MSFT). Available: http://www.nasdaq.com/symbol/msft/financials?query=ratios. [Accessed 4th Oct 2013] Businessweek. (2013). Microsoft Corp-Financial Ratios. Available: http://investing.businessweek.com/research/stocks/financials/ratios.asp?ticker=MSFT. [Accessed 4th Oct 2013]. Microsoft. (2013). Microsoft Board of Directors. Available: http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/news/exec/bod.aspx. [Accessed 5th Oct 2013]. Arena, C. and Carreras, E. (2009). Business models, value chains and value propositions. Intellectual Asset Management, Iss. 1 pp. 49-55. Microsoft, M. (2013). Intellectual Property. [online] Retrieved from: http://www.microsoft.com/sam/en/us/intproperty.aspx [Accessed: 5 Oct 2013]. Microsoft, M. (2013). Human resources. [online] Retrieved from: http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/dynamics/human-resources.aspx [Accessed: 5 Oct 2013]. Sherman, B. (2008). Make that at least 7 Degrees of Separation. [online] Retrieved from: http://socialcapital.wordpress.com/category/microsoft/ [Accessed: 5 Oct 2013]. Taylor, H. (2009). Microsoft. [online] Retrieved from: http://www.ehow.com/facts_5272399_microsoft-swot-analysis.html [Accessed: 5 Oct 2013].