issue 1 - Roland Berger
issue 1 - Roland Berger
issue 1 - Roland Berger
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
p business culture<br />
constantinos markides<br />
“ Despite the potential conflicts, opposing business models<br />
can be combined to counter strategic innovations.”<br />
Constantinos Markides<br />
pressure by Southwest Airlines, which was<br />
playing a totally different game—the game<br />
of low cost, point-to-point, direct flights. In<br />
response, Continental created a new subsidiary,<br />
Continental Lite, which ultimately<br />
PORTER IS MISTAKEN—STRATEGIC<br />
INNOVATORS NEED TO BE IN TWO<br />
PLACES AT THE SAME TIME<br />
failed, since the internal conflicts could not<br />
be resolved. What are these conflicts that<br />
Porter talks about? One such conflict is the<br />
risk of mutual cannibalization between parent<br />
and subsidiary. There are problems of<br />
overlapping distribution. And there are organizational<br />
conflicts. Established companies<br />
have a culture and structure that have<br />
been built up over a long period of time. But<br />
companies that implement strategic innovations<br />
need an entirely different type of corporate<br />
culture and organization.<br />
My own position is that Porter is wrong in<br />
advising companies not to play two different<br />
games. I agree with him that playing<br />
two games is very difficult given all these<br />
conflicts. But it is not impossible. Companies<br />
have four strategies available using<br />
two business models—one conventional,<br />
one unconventional (see matrix p. 53).<br />
Separation is the preferred strategy when<br />
the new market is not only strategically<br />
different from the existing business but also<br />
when the two markets face serious tradeoffs<br />
and conflicts. The Swiss food company<br />
Nestlé experienced this first scenario when<br />
it set up a separate unit called Nespresso in<br />
the early 1990s. Nespresso, an exclusive<br />
brand for young urban professionals,<br />
actually had an adverse impact on its traditional<br />
instant coffee sales. For this reason,<br />
Nestlé moved the new unit to a different<br />
town, assigning it full autonomy. Nespresso<br />
is now one of the most profitable units<br />
within Nestlé.<br />
Separation is unnecessary if the new market<br />
is very similar to the existing business<br />
area and holds little prospect of conflict. In<br />
this second category, it is better to integrate<br />
business models into the existing structure.<br />
Merrill Lynch, for example, created an<br />
online-trading niche within its existing<br />
business. Old and new customers alike<br />
could make their own decisions about the<br />
type of advice and trading they wanted.<br />
A third scenario emerges when the new<br />
market is strategically similar to the existing<br />
business but the two face serious conflicts.<br />
In such a case it might be better to<br />
keep the concepts separate for a period of<br />
time and then slowly merge them. When<br />
the Danish bank Lan & Spar decided to set<br />
CONSTANTINOS MARKIDES is a management<br />
professor at the London Business School (LBS). Born<br />
in Cyprus, Markides studied economics at Boston University<br />
and received an MBA and doctorate degree<br />
(DBA) from Harvard. Before teaching at LBS, he<br />
worked for the Cyprus Development Bank and Harvard<br />
Business School. Markides has published numerous<br />
articles in major magazines, including the Harvard<br />
Business Review and the Sloan Management Review.<br />
up a direct bank alongside its branch<br />
network, it kept the two concepts separate<br />
for three years before merging them into<br />
one. It then carefully completed the<br />
transition.<br />
The challenge the firm faces here is to keep<br />
the new business model protected from the<br />
mindsets and policies of the existing business,<br />
while at the same time exploiting<br />
synergies between the two businesses and<br />
preparing them for the eventual marriage.<br />
The fourth scenario arises when the new<br />
market is fundamentally different from the<br />
existing business but the two do not conflict<br />
seriously. In such a case, it might be better<br />
to first build the new business inside the<br />
organization so as to leverage the firm’s<br />
existing assets and experience and learn<br />
about the dynamics of the new market, then<br />
separate it into an independent unit.<br />
This is exactly how Tesco, the UK’s biggest<br />
supermarket chain, approached its online<br />
spinoff, Tesco.com. The company started a<br />
home delivery service in the mid-1990s<br />
under the name Tesco Direct. The first<br />
trials involved making small deliveries to<br />
pensioners. Later, customers ordered from<br />
a paper catalog, then from a CD-ROM, and<br />
eventually through the company’s<br />
Web site. By 2001, Tesco Direct was reorganized<br />
as a full subsidiary of Tesco and was<br />
renamed Tesco.com—the first step in the divorce<br />
proceedings. In 2003, Tesco’s executive<br />
board announced that Tesco.com would<br />
be spun off. The online arm had become<br />
a different business and had to be given<br />
the freedom and autonomy to develop as<br />
it saw fit.<br />
The decision about when to separate and<br />
when to keep a strategic innovation inside<br />
the organization is obviously important,<br />
but it is equally important to appreciate<br />
that this is only part of the solution. Having<br />
decided which of these strategies a firm<br />
will adopt, the key question that must be<br />
addressed is this: “How can I manage the<br />
52<br />
think: act