CHAPTER Competitive Advantage and Firm Performance McGraw-Hill/Irwin Copyright © 2013 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.
Download ReportTranscript CHAPTER Competitive Advantage and Firm Performance McGraw-Hill/Irwin Copyright © 2013 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.
CHAPTER 5 Competitive Advantage and Firm Performance McGraw-Hill/Irwin Copyright © 2013 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. Fundamentals of Competitive Strategy Superior Long-Run Performance The central goal Attractive Industry Structure Competitive Advantage High returns for the average participant Outperform the average industry participant Superior Competitive Position Do different things than rivals Operational Effectiveness Do the same things as rivals but better Part 1 Strategy Analysis LO 5-1 Describe and evaluate economic value creation when measuring competitive advantage. LO 5-2 Describe and evaluate accounting profitability when measuring competitive advantage. LO 5-3 Describe and evaluate shareholder value creation when measuring competitive advantage. LO 5-4 Describe and evaluate the balanced-scorecard approach for assessing competitive advantage. LO 5-5 Describe and evaluate the triple-bottom-line approach when assessing competitive advantage. LO 5-6 Compare and contrast different approaches to measuring competitive advantage, and derive managerial implications. How Do We Measure Performance? • “The strategic aim of a business is to earn a return on capital, and if in any particular case the return in the long run is not satisfactory, then the deficiency should be corrected or the activity abandoned for a more favorable one.” Alfred P. Sloan My Years with General Motors Chapter Case 5 Google vs. Microsoft • Google and Microsoft in multipoint competition How to measure success of this competition? Revenues and net income? Performance per employee? • There are several ways to measure firm performance. • The key idea is to “triangulate” (i.e., to use multiple measures of performance to evaluate the health of the organization). EXHIBIT 5.1 Comparing Google & Microsoft on Different Dimensions Performance viewpoint changes significantly when the measurement changes from absolute to per-employee figures (on the bottom) 8 9 2-20 Tradeoff Between Profitability and Growth Rate PMAX Profitability P1 P2 G0 G1 G2 Growth Rate Copyright 1998 by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved. 10 Economic Profits and Competitive Advantage • Driving a wedge between revenues and costs is how competitive advantage is created. • In strategy, we need to think simultaneously about: The value we create for our customer; How we capture some of the value in terms of higher prices; The costs we incur in creating that value. • Conceptual traps that managers fall into: Accounting costs versus Opportunity Costs Market Share is not competitive advantage 11 Measuring Competitive Advantage • Always measured relative to other firms • Three standards are typical by asking: 1. How much economic value does the firm generate? 2. What is the firm’s accounting profitability? 3. How much shareholder value does the firm create? Economic Value Creation • Value: A dollar amount a consumer is willing to pay for a good or service • Price: The dollar amount a good or service is offered for sale • Pizza! • Value = $12 • Price = $10 • Cost = $7 SOLD! • Consumer Surplus $12 - $10 = $2 • Cost: The dollar amount to make the good or service • Producer Surplus $10 - $7 = $3 • Economic Value $12 - $7 = $5 EXHIBIT 5.2 Competitive Advantage & Economic Value COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE = HIGHEST VALUE – COST Economic Value Creation • Opportunity Costs The next best alternative use for resources Pizza entrepreneur Wages Capital invested $40,000 employment salary $25,000 interest on capital If the restaurant made $60,000 in (accounting) profits… The owner actually had an economic LOSS of $5,000 Economic Value as Competitive Advantage • If the economic value created is greater than its rivals competitive advantage equal to its rivals competitive parity lower than its rivals competitive disadvantage Sustainable Competitive Advantage and the Measurement of Performance • While we have said that the objective of strategy is to “create competitive advantage,” specifically we have the goal to maximize economic return. • Economic & Accounting Measures of Performance Economic Profits ROA, ROE, ROC Discounting Cash Flows Horizon CFt CF3 CF1 CF2 Valuet+1 … + + + = + + NPV 1+r (1+r)2 (1+r)3 (1+r)t (1+r)t+1 NPV: Net Present Value CFt: Cash Flow at time t • Financial Measures Performance NPV Methods r: Discount rate Horizon Value: Value of ongoing enterprise after time t of 17 Financial Measures of Performance: NPV or DCF Analysis • The principle of discounted cash flow (DCF) analysis that firms apply to their individual projects can also be applied to the firm as a whole. Maximizing the net present value of the firm’s cash flow (“sustainable competitive advantage”) corresponds to maximization of its stock market valuation and hence maximizes the wealth of its shareholders. Cash Flow + 0 Time - Net Cash Flow • EBT - t (EBT) • EBT (1-t) = NET INCOME • EBT (1-t) + depreciation - capital expenditures = NET CASH FLOW (note we are assuming no change in accounts receivable, no change in net working capital, no change in inventory) • Equivalent concepts: Maximize NPV DCF Approach Maximize Economic Profits (EVA) Sustainable Competitive Advantage (SCA) 19 Limitations of Present Value Measures • Projections are only as good as the ability of managers to measure accurately the financial consequences of actions. • An implicit assumption of value-based strategy was that business units and all investment proposals were selfcontained. It was usually expected that divesting a business or curtailing an investment project would have no financial repercussions elsewhere in the corporation (e.g., ignores knowledge transfers). • Strict financial measurement of many long-term investments, particularly in intangible assets, is virtually impossible. 20 Limitations of Present Value Measures • Investments in R&D typically do not offer direct returns; their economic value is a strategic option to invest in new products and processes that may arise from R&D. Narrowly- defined DCF does not accurately value investments where there is significant strategic options value. (Merck has been at the forefront of applying strategic options theory to analyze investments in R&D). 21 Capital Market Approaches To Measuring Performance • Market Value Added (MVA) Market Value less Total Investment • Economic Value Added (EVA) Operating Profit (after tax) less annual capital costs; basically, this is economic profit • Tobin’s q (Market Value/Book Value) A firm’s market value divided by its “replacement” cost • The Market Value of the Firm Current Value of all securities issued by the firm 22 Economic Value Added (EVA) • Anheuser-Busch: Operating profit $1,756 million - taxes $617 million = $1,139 million • WACC : 67% equity at 14.3% 33% debt at 5.2% 11.3% WACC Capital of $8 billion 11.3% * $8billion = $904 million $1,139 - $904 = $235 million EVA 23 Firms with the Highest Ratios of Market Value to Book Value (December 2005) Company Valuation ratio Country Company Valuation ratio Country Yahoo! Japan 72.0 Japan Coca-Cola 7.8 US Colgate-Palmolive 20.8 US Diageo 7.4 UK Glaxo Smith Kline 13.4 UK 3M 7.3 US Anheuser-Busch 12.6 US Nokia 6.7 Finland eBay 11.2 US Sanofi-Aventis 6.3 France SAP 10.8 Germany AstraZeneca 5.9 UK Yahoo! 10.7 US Johnson & Johnson 5.7 US Dell Computer 10.0 US Boeing 5.7 US Sumitomo Mitsui Financial 8.8 Japan Eli Lily 5.6 US Procter & Gamble 8.4 US Cisco Systems 5.5 US Qualcomm 8.3 US Roche Holding 5.5 Switz. Schlumberger 8.2 US L’Oreal 5.3 France Unilever 8.1 Neth/UK Altria 5.2 US PepsiCo 8.0 US Novartis 5.1 Switz. LO 5-1 Describe and evaluate economic value creation when measuring competitive advantage. LO 5-2 Describe and evaluate accounting profitability when measuring competitive advantage. LO 5-3 Describe and evaluate shareholder value creation when measuring competitive advantage. LO 5-4 Describe and evaluate the balanced-scorecard approach for assessing competitive advantage. LO 5-5 Describe and evaluate the triple-bottom-line approach when assessing competitive advantage. LO 5-6 Compare and contrast different approaches to measuring competitive advantage, and derive managerial implications. Accounting Profitability • Uses standard, publicly available metrics • Permits direct firm performance comparisons Using standard ratios • Regulated by: Accounting principles (GAAP) U.S. Securities & Exchange Commission (SEC) Sarbanes-Oxley Act (2002) EXHIBIT 5.3 Top 10 Fortune 500 Companies by Profits ($M) EXHIBIT 5.4 Top 10 Fortune 500 Companies by Return on Revenue ROR measures the profit earned per dollar of revenue as a percentage. A size-adjusted measure of profits. Profits vs. Return on Revenue (ROR) Ranking changes markedly with the use of different metrics 2010 Profits in $M 2010 ROR % Accounting Profitability • Need to move beyond a “snapshot” metric Look at more than one year of data • Permits direct firm performance comparisons Using standard ratios • Competitive advantage is relative to competitors Study firms in the same industry “Apples to apples” comparisons EXHIBIT 5.5 Firm Performance - Pharmaceutical Industry by ROR Pfizer performance declines as Merck improves and takes the competitive advantage over this period Drawbacks for Accounting Measures • Does not consider “off balance sheet” items Health care, pension obligations • Focuses on tangible assets, which may no longer be strategically relevant Key is intangible assets “Knowledge-based economy” Manufacturing vs. Services • Historical data Backward-looking “Driving a car by looking in the review mirror” EXHIBIT 5.6 Declining Importance of Book Value in Stock Valuation LO 5-1 Describe and evaluate economic value creation when measuring competitive advantage. LO 5-2 Describe and evaluate accounting profitability when measuring competitive advantage. LO 5-3 Describe and evaluate shareholder value creation when measuring competitive advantage. LO 5-4 Describe and evaluate the balanced-scorecard approach for assessing competitive advantage. LO 5-5 Describe and evaluate the triple-bottom-line approach when assessing competitive advantage. LO 5-6 Compare and contrast different approaches to measuring competitive advantage, and derive managerial implications. Shareholder Value Creation • Shareholders – legal owners of public firms Total return to shareholders Return on risk capital + dividends External performance metric Efficient-market hypothesis All available information is embedded in the stock price • SEC requires all public firms to submit shareholder returns • Stock price based on expectations of performance EXHIBIT 5.7 Normalized Stock Returns 2005–2010 Drawbacks to Shareholder Value as Competitive Advantage • Stock prices can be highly volatile, which makes it difficult to assess firm performance (at least in the short term) • Macro economic factors (e.g., unemployment rate, economic growth or contraction, interest rate and exchange rates…) all have a direct bearing on stock prices • Stock prices frequently reflect the psychological mood of the investors, which can be at times irrational “Irrational exuberance” Alan Greenspan, former Federal Reserve Chair Dan Ariely Video Google vs. Microsoft, Continued • Accounting perspective shows Microsoft with an advantage over Google. But both firms have large intangible assets. • BUT shareholder value favors Google over Microsoft! Microsoft stock is flat while Google is up 200%. EXHIBIT 5.8 Comparing Google and Microsoft Using ROE and ROA Microsoft outperforms Google in 2010 based on this accounting data EXHIBIT 5.9 Normalized Stock Returns 2005–2010 Google is enjoying a sustained competitive advantage over Microsoft based on shareholder value. LO 5-1 Describe and evaluate economic value creation when measuring competitive advantage. LO 5-2 Describe and evaluate accounting profitability when measuring competitive advantage. LO 5-3 Describe and evaluate shareholder value creation when measuring competitive advantage. LO 5-4 Describe and evaluate the balanced-scorecard approach for assessing competitive advantage. LO 5-5 Describe and evaluate the triple-bottom-line approach when assessing competitive advantage. LO 5-6 Compare and contrast different approaches to measuring competitive advantage, and derive managerial implications. 42 THE BALANCED SCORECARD • Advantages Communicate vision thru the organization • Disadvantages Tool for strategy implementation not formulation. Translate vision into measureable goals Limited guidance on selecting metrics Design business processes Implement organizational learning Limited insight on how to get back on track to meet goals Can be viewed as just a tracking tool for metrics EXHIBIT 5.10 A Balanced-Scorecard Approach to Competitive Advantage Balanced Scorecard Example STRATEGIC DIRECTION Strategies & Objectives PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT Current-Year Initiatives Business Results Financial • Annual revenue - $X • Profit before tax - $X • ROA - X% • Revenue per employee - $X Overriding Purpose: Process Assessments Leadership • Make improvement in work environment as measured by employee survey • Gain recognition for community relations Customer/Consumer • Improve customer delivery • Increase sales to Europe • Meet customer loyalty goals • Reduce defects Strategies & Objectives Partner/Supplier/Operations • Develop strategy and plan to have suppliers own material inventory • Supplier contribution to cost reduction • Achieve inventory turns goal Human Resources • Balance the Human Resource availability with initiative requirements, establish plans, & execute • Implement diversity plan • Plan and execute strategic staffing plan SBU-Specific • Develop rapid prototyping processes and match prototype capacity to business needs • Software process improvement to goal • Acquire new services customers to meet plans • Meet on-time product launch goal Group SBU Strategic Planning • Establish an effective strategybased M&A process. Customer & Mkt Focus • Complete market segment analysis • Tie sales plan & budgets to group regional goals Information/Analysis • Provide IT support for decentralized operations Human Resources • Develop a comprehensive college recruiting strategy • Implement an employee feedback process Process Mgmt • Complete ISO 9000 tasks as planned • Improve overall new product introduction process The Triple Bottom Line • Financial, Social, and Ecological Considerations EXHIBIT 5.11 Also known as "People, Planet, & Profits" BP oil spill had many major effects BMW changed car designs to enhance recycling Integrative approach for sustainable strategy The Triple Bottom Line STRATEGY HIGHLIGHT 5.1 Interface: The World’s First Fully Sustainable Company • Interface is a global leader in modular carpet tiles Business to business so not a consumer name In 1994, founder & CEO set a BHAG Highly industrial, petroleum-intensive business to go “off oil”! By 2008, estimates savings at $400 million Energy efficiency Recycled raw materials instead of virgin material Sustainability as a market differentiator Employee motivation 1–47 LO 5-1 Describe and evaluate economic value creation when measuring competitive advantage. LO 5-2 Describe and evaluate accounting profitability when measuring competitive advantage. LO 5-3 Describe and evaluate shareholder value creation when measuring competitive advantage. LO 5-4 Describe and evaluate the balanced-scorecard approach for assessing competitive advantage. LO 5-5 Describe and evaluate the triple-bottom-line approach when assessing competitive advantage. LO 5-6 Compare and contrast different approaches to measuring competitive advantage, and derive managerial implications. EXHIBIT 5.12 How Do We Measure Competitive Advantage? Implications for the Strategist • Both quantitative AND qualitative performance dimensions matter. Managers need to have a holistic view • Competitive advantage is best by criteria, reflecting overall company performance Metrics aggregate upward, useful to gauge firm's strategy • Only better strategy is our goal. No best strategy exists Strategic performance metrics must be relative 51 Take-Away Concepts LO 5-1 Describe and evaluate economic value creation when measuring competitive advantage. Three components are critical to evaluating any good or service: value (V), price (P), and cost (C). In economics, cost includes opportunity cost. Economic value created is the difference between a buyer’s willingness to pay for a good or service and the firm’s cost to produce it (V - C). A firm has a competitive advantage when it is able to create more economic value than its rivals. To measure firm-level competitive advantage, we estimate the economic value created for all products and services offered by the firm. Take-Away Concepts LO 5-2 Describe and evaluate accounting profitability when measuring competitive advantage. To measure accounting profitability, we use standard metrics derived from publicly available accounting data. Commonly used profitability metrics in strategic management are return on assets (ROA), return on equity (ROE), return on invested capital (ROIC), and return on revenue (ROR). All accounting data are historical and thus backward-looking. They do not consider off–balance sheet items such as an innovation competency. They focus mainly on tangible assets, which are no longer the most important. Take-Away Concepts LO 5-3 Describe and evaluate shareholder value creation when measuring competitive advantage. The measure of competitive advantage that matters from the shareholders’ perspective is the return on (risk) capital. Investors are primarily interested in total return to shareholders, which includes stock price appreciation plus dividends received over a specific period. Total return to shareholders is an external performance metric; it indicates how the market views all available information about a firm’s past, current state, and expected future performance. Stock prices can be highly volatile, which makes it difficult to assess firm performance. Overall macroeconomic factors have a direct bearing on stock prices. Also, stock prices frequently reflect the psychological mood of the investors, which can at times be irrational. Take-Away Concepts LO 5-4 Describe and evaluate the balanced scorecard approach for assessing competitive advantage. The balanced-scorecard approach provides a more integrative view of competitive advantage. Its goal is to harness multiple internal and external performance dimensions to balance financial and strategic goals. Managers develop strategic objectives for the balanced scorecard by answering four key questions: 1. How do customers view us? 2. How do we create value? 3. What core competencies do we need? 4. How do shareholders view us? Take-Away Concepts LO 5-5 Describe and evaluate the triple-bottom-line framework when assessing competitive advantage. Sustainable strategy refers to a firm’s ability to maintain its performance in the economic, social, and ecological context—called the triple bottom line. LO 5-6 Compare and contrast different approaches to measuring competitive advantage, and derive managerial implications. Both quantitative and qualitative criteria matter when assessing the effectiveness of a firm’s strategy. Competitive advantage is best measured by criteria that reflect performance of the company overall; the goal of strategic management is to integrate and align each functional-level activity to obtain superior performance at the company level. Any performance metric must be interpreted relative to competitors and the industry average.