portfolio - Management Class
Download
Report
Transcript portfolio - Management Class
PORTFOLIO ANALYSIS
Models
Tools
Prescriptions
Strategies
C. M. Clarke-Hill
BUILDING
SHAREHOLDER VALUE
How attractive is group of businesses firm is
in?
How good is overall performance outlook over
next five years?
If previous answers are not satisfactory, what
should firm do to:
- Get out of some businesses
- Strengthen position of remaining
ones
- Acquire new businesses to boost
prospects for better performance
PORTFOLIO MODELS
A multidivisional firm has the
problem of how to allocate resources
and to back winners in their
‘portfolio’.
Certain Portfolio models are linked
with:
The Product Life Cycle concept
The Experience Curve Concept
The PIMS Study
PORTFOLIO ANALYSIS
Portfolio Models can be used to
provide strategic insights by:
— Acting as a diagnostic aid
— Providing a conceptual
framework
— Being a prescriptive guide
— Being a planning tool
PORTFOLIO ANALYSIS
THE BOSTON
CONSULTANCY
GROUP MATRIX
THE BCG MATRIX
The BCG Matrix is called
the Growth Share
Matrix because the
model combines market
growth and relative
market share
BCG GROWTH SHARE MATRIX
HIGH
M
A
R
K
E
T
G
R
O
W
T
H
STAR
QUESTION MARK
?
CASH COW
DOG
LOW
HIGH
RELATIVE MARKET SHARE
LOW
TWO VARIABLES USED
Market Growth Rate
(Vertical)
Relative Market
Share (Horizontal)
MARKET GROWTH RATE
“High Growth” businesses
are in markets growing
faster than economy
“Low growth” businesses are
in markets growing slower
than economy
RELATIVE MARKET SHARE
Calculated by dividing firm’s market share
by market share of firms largest rival
Typical dividing line between “high” and
“low” relative market share businesses
placed at about .75 or .8
Businesses on left are share leaders
Businesses on right are in below-average
relative market share positions
Each business is a “circle” with size
scaled to portion of total corporate
revenues generated
ASSUMPTIONS UNDER WHICH
THE MATRIX IS BASED
Cash Generated is proportional to
Relative Market Share
Cash is needed to keep pace with
market growth rate
Additional cash is needed to increase
market share
Growth rate eventually slows to allow
cash to be generated
BCG STRATEGY PRESCRIPTIONS
Within the portfolio context there are FOUR
basic strategies that can be pursued:
BUILD - a strategy of building market
share
HOLD - a strategy of holding share
relative to competitors and to market
growth rate
HARVEST - a cash out strategy with little
or no new investment
QUIT - a strategy of exit or withdrawal
BCG GROWTH SHARE MATRIX
HIGH
M
A
R
K
E
T
G
R
O
W
T
H
LOW
STAR
QUESTION MARK
Strategies: Build
CASH COW
Strategies: Hold/Harvest
HIGH
C. M. Clarke-Hill
Strategies: Build/Harvest
Quit
DOG
Strategies: Harvest/Quit
Build (?)
RELATIVE MARKET SHARE
LOW
PLC AND AN EXTENDED FORM
OF GROWTH-SHARE MATRIX
Life Cycle Stage
Extended Growth Share Types
Introduction Stage Infants - negative cash
flow
Growth Stage
Stars
Question Marks
Maturity
Cash Cows
Dogs
Decline
War Horses
Dodos
M
A
R
K
E
T
G
R
O
W
T
H
BCG CASH FLOW POSITION
CHART
HIGH
STAR
Modest positive
or negative
cash flow
CASH COW
Large positive cash
flow
QUESTION MARK
Large negative cash
flow
Optimum Cash Flow
DOG
Modest positive or
negative cash flow
LOW
HIGH
RELATIVE MARKET SHARE
LOW
BCG PRODUCT DYNAMICS PORTFOLIO CHART
HIGH
M
A
R
K
E
T
G
R
O
W
T
H
STAR
QUESTION MARK
Success
Sequence
Disaster Sequence
CASH COW
DOG
LOW
HIGH
RELATIVE MARKET SHARE
LOW
USING THE MATRIX
Check for internal balance
Look for trends
Evaluate the competition
Consider factors not captured by
the display
Develop possible target portfolios
Check for financial balance
PORTFOLIO BALANCE ?
The balanced portfolio is
regarded as desirable - can we
have other ‘unbalanced’
portfolios?
Too
Too
Too
Too
many
many
many
many
stars?
cash cows?
question marks?
dogs?
TOO MANY STARS - (HIGH
GROWTH ORIENTED
COMPANIES)
Problems of cash flow
High marketing investments in high
growth markets are a pre-requisite to
build or hold market share
NPD costs need to be funded &
capitalised
Problems of high growth can be
problematical - need for high
borrowings
TOO MANY QUESTION MARKS
Negative cash flows can be problematic for
development - can be undercapitalised
Question marks can become cash traps
High development costs must be capped
Question marks are costly in management
time
Can question marks be ‘turned around’?
TOO MANY CASH COWS (PROFIT ORIENTATED COMPANY)
Excessive cash inflows
Where is the future growth to
come from ?
High profitability can be used
to fund dividends
How do you plan for fading cash
cows ?
TOO MANY DOGS A COMPANY IN DECLINE
No growth
Modest cash flows
Where is the future to be
But DOGS can be profitable in the
short run
Slow or fast decline in the business
fortune
BCG BALANCED GROWTH SHARE MATRIX
HIGH
M
A
R
K
E
T
G
R
O
W
T
H
STAR
QUESTION MARK
10
2
5
3
6
CASH COW
DOG
4
1
9
8
7
LOW
HIGH
RELATIVE MARKET SHARE
LOW
WEAKNESSES OF
GROWTH- SHARE MATRIX
Four-cell matrix hides fact that many
businesses are in “average” growth rate
markets and have “average” relative market
share positions
Misleading simplification to categorise
businesses into just four types
Matrix doesn’t identify which businesses
offer best investment opportunities
Being a leader in a slow growth market
doesn’t guarantee cash cow status.
WEAKNESSES OF
GROWTH- SHARE MATRIX
Assessment of relative long-term
attractiveness of business units
requires more than just market
growth and relative market share
Connection between relative market
share and profitability is not as tight
as experience curve effect implies.
Many firms with small relative
market shares are profitable.
DIRECTIONAL
POLICY MATRIX
This model is an alternativeto
the BCG Matrix, and is
based on different criteria.
Market attractiveness
Business strengths
DPM Cont.
The two factors of Market
Attractiveness and Business
Strengths are COMPOSITE measures
of potential opportunities open to
the firm and the opportunities that
the firm can take by leveraging its
internal business strengths or
competencies.
GENERAL ELECTRIC’S MARKET
ATTRACTIVENESS - BUSINESS
STRENGTH MATRIX
Strong
High
Medium
Low
Average
Weak
MARKET ATTRACTIVENESS
Market Size
Growth Rate
Profit Margin
Competition
Intensity
Seasonality
Cyclicality
Social Impact
Regulation
Environment
Opportunities &
Threats
Barriers to
Exit/Entry
Technology &
Capital
BUSINESS STRENGTH
Market Share
Core Competencies
Profit Margin vs Competitors
Ability to Match Price/Service
Relative Costs
Knowledge
Technological Ability
Management Caliber
CONSTRUCTING
ATTRACTIVENESS/ BUSINESS
STRENGTH MATRIX
Quantitative measures of market
attractiveness and business strength
used to plot each business unit’s
position in the matrix
Each business unit appears as a circle.
Area of the circle is proportional to
size of market. Pie slices within circle
reflect business’s market share.
RATING INDUSTRY
ATTRACTIVENESS
Select factors to compare long term
attractiveness of each market
Assign weights to each attractiveness
factor
Rate each market on each
attractiveness factor, using scale of 1
to 10
Calculate weighted ratings; sum to get
to get an overall market
attractiveness rating for each market
RATING BUSINESS
POSITION/COMPETITIVE
STRENGTH
Select factors to compare
competitive strength of each
business unit
Assign weight to each competitive
strength factor
Rate each business on each factor
using scale of 1 to 10
Calculate weighted ratings; sum to
get an overall business unit strength
rating for each business.
STRATEGY IMPLICATIONS OF
ATTRACTIVENESS/STRENGTH MATRIX
Businesses in three cells at upper left
have top investment priority. General
strategic prescription is “grow and
build”
Business in three diagonal cells given
medium investment priority
Businesses in lower right of matrix are
strong candidates for harvesting or
divestment. May be candidates for
“overhaul and reposition strategy”.
GENERAL ELECTRIC’S MARKET
ATTRACTIVENESS - BUSINESS
STRENGTH MATRIX
Strong
High
Medium
Average
Weak
Grow and Build
Medium
Harvest/Divest
Low
Overhaul and Reposition
ADVANTAGES OF
ATTRACTIVENESS/STRENGTH MATRIX
Allows for intermediate rankings
between high & low and strong & weak
Incorporates wider variety of
strategically relevant variables
Stresses channelling of corporate
resources to businesses with greatest
potential for competitive advantage and
superior performance.
WEAKNESSES OF
ATTRACTIVENESS/STRENGTH
MATRIX
No real guidance on specifics of business
strategy
Most to be concluded is general strategic
posture
Leaves issues of strategic coordination
across businesses wide open, as well as
issue of specific competitive approaches and
action to take at business unit level
Tends to obscure businesses about to
emerge as winners.
PORTFOLIO MODELS
IN USE
Care when using such models
Models help - but - remember
the assumptions
Different models can offer
differing solutions
Use your judgement
Think of the ‘other’ factors
DIFFERENT MODELS DIFFERENT RESULTS
Results of a study by Wind,
Mahajan and Swire (1983)
concluded that when using
standardised portfolio models
the classification of any
business into a specific
portfolio position depends on
four factors
WIND, MAHAJAN AND SWIRE
CONT.
The operational definition of the
dimension used
The rule used to divide a
dimension in high or low categories
The weighting of the variables
used in constituting the composite
dimensions
The specific portfolio model used
WIND et al, Cont
The issue here is that different
models can offer different
strategic solutions as SBUs can be
classified in different positions
There may be unintended benefits different portfolio models give
different positions can cause a
debate in the strategic process
Cash Cow or Dog?