Understanding Competitors and Competition
7
Hair dressing industry may be a good example
to understand monopolistic competition.
There are many hairdressers in the country,
and most hairdressing firms are quite small.
There is free entry and it is at least possible
that people know enough about their hair-
dressing options so that the “sufficient
knowledge” condition is fulfilled. But the
products of different hairdressers are not
perfect substitutes. At the very least, their
services are differentiated by location. A
hairdresser in the downtown of Mexico may
not be a perfect substitute for a hairdresser
in the suburbs, although they may be good
substitutes from the point of view of a cus-
tomer who lives in the suburbs but works in
downtown. Hairdressers services may be
differentiated in other ways as well. Their
styles may be different; the decor of the
salon may be different, and that may make a
difference for some customers; and even the
quality of the conversation may make a dif-
ference. A very customer of a hair dressing
firm may change hairdressers because an
old hairdresser was an outspoken market
protectionist.
In the contemporary analysis of
competition and related strategies thereof, it
is observed that the competitive firms intend
to ascertain a continuous organizational
learning process with respect to the value
creation chain and measure performance of
the new products introduced in the market.
In the growing competitive markets the large
and reputed firms are developing strategies
to move into the provision of innovative
combinations of products and services as
‘high-value integrated solutions’ tailored to
each customer’s needs than simply ‘moving
downstream’ into services. Such firms are
developing innovative combinations of service
capabilities such as operations, business
consultancy and finance required to provide
complete solutions to each customer’s needs
Strategy Focus 1.1: Organizational Competencies
and Competitive Efficiency of Multinational
Companies
The high-performing companies like Barclays, Cisco, Dow
Chemical, 3M, and Roche drive to establish some basic
rules for setting and delivering strategy which include simple
executable strategy, realistic, short-run result oriented and
transparency in process of strategy implementation. The
above companies work on debating over the assumptions,
and do not construct strategic frameworks on forecasts.
The high performing companies create cross-functional
teams drawn from strategy, marketing, and finance to ensure
the assumptions underlying your long-term plans which
reflect both the real economics of the company’s markets
and its actual performance relative to competitors. It has
been observed that rigorous analytic framework is used by
the high performing companies. Such companies as above
ensure that the dialogue between the corporate office and
the business units about market trends and assumptions is
conducted within a rigorous framework, such as that of
profit pools. These companies manage the resources
deployments early to support the scheduled production
and marketing activities. Proper resources management
would in turn help the company create more realistic forecasts
and more executable plans by discussing up-front the level
and timing of critical deployments. The companies like
Barclays, Cisco, Dow Chemical, 3M, and Roche clearly
identify priorities and prioritize tactics so that employees
have a clear sense of where to direct their efforts and
continuously monitor performance. Tracking resource
deployment, monitoring and evaluating results against plans,
using continuous feedback to reset assumptions and
reallocate resources have been principal activities performed
by the business monitoring centers of these companies. The
monitoring and evaluation reports are directly reported to
the top management periodically. The Reward is set for the
best strategy, product, brand and sales managers who achieve
the targets and non-planned market shares in the up-stream
markets. These companies also develop execution capabilities
and motivational tools for the staff. Following these rules
strictly the high performing companies narrow the strategy-
to-performance gap and achieve sustainable growth among
the competitors.
Source: Euro Monitor Online
www.euromonitor.com
For more comprehension on the functional efficiencies
of high performing companies see Mankins Michael C
and Steele Richmond: Turning great strategies into great
performance, Harvard Business Review, July 2005