Skip to main content

THE TWO LEVELS OF STRATEGY

The word strategy has many modifiers in the business world: portfolio, diversification, differentiation, growth, market share, shareholder value, customer, brand, product, pricing, cost, manufacturing, supply chain, channel, distribution, sourcing, IT, digital, people, communications, investor relations, and M&A among them. All of these forms of strategy are variations of the two most fundamental types: corporate and business. Typically, corporate strategy is seen as being relevant to a company as a whole, whereas business strategy is reserved for the individual businesses within a company.

But things get more complex when you consider the most fundamental questions that a strategy needs to answer:
1. Who is the target customer?
2. What is the value proposition for this target customer?
3. What are the essential capabilities required to deliver that value proposition?

In considering a company operating in multiple businesses (think Siemens, UBS, Unilever, Reliance, and Saudi Aramco), these questions are difficult to answer for the company as a whole — if not meaningless. They can only really be answered for each of the individual businesses within a company. Does this mean that a company’s corporate strategy is just a roll-up and integration of the strategies for its individual businesses? No, not at all. A corporate strategy adds two more critical questions to the list:
4. What businesses should the company be in?
5. How should the company add value to those businesses?

Adding value to the businesses means contributing to the ability of each business to outperform its peers. In other words, the individual businesses should be able to draw on some distinctive capabilities that are available to all parts of the enterprise, and that give the businesses an edge in their own target markets. For PepsiCo, direct store delivery is one of these enterprise-wide capabilities; corporate sales and marketing is one for IBM; General Electric has a distinctive capability in developing general managers; and so on. Those enterprise-wide capabilities that are truly differentiating may reside in the corporate center or in particular businesses. Either way, to the degree that all the businesses are able to benefit from such capabilities, they create a “coherence premium”: the ability of a company to be worth more than its sum-of-parts valuation. Without a coherence premium, there is no economic rationale for the individual businesses to be under the same corporate roof and, thus, there is no raison d’ĂȘtre for the company itself.

A coherent corporate strategy results from an iterative approach to addressing questions 4 and 5. It must be iterative because the answers to these two questions depend a lot on each other. In other words, the businesses that should define a company’s shape depend in part on its capabilities and how they add value to the businesses’ performance. Likewise, how a company should add value to its businesses depends in part on which businesses make up — or could make up — its portfolio.

Unfortunately, most strategists hardly bother with how the company adds value to its businesses (question 5), much less give the question an honest answer. This is why the so-called conglomerate discount is so prevalent, even for companies operating in highly integrated businesses. It also explains why companies such as ConocoPhillips, Fortune Brands, Sara Lee, Kraft, McGraw-Hill, Tyco (again), and ITT (again) have begun to break up or divest businesses in recent years, with shareholders applauding.

Finally, an important nuance: For most large, complex companies, the questions of corporate strategy — questions 4 and 5 — are relevant at multiple levels, not just for the company overall. For example, a division with multiple businesses (consider consumer banking at Citi or GE’s industrials group) represents more of a corporate portfolio than a single business unit. In fact, most divisions, segments, groups, and even business units can be thought of as having a portfolio of smaller businesses within them, thus making the questions of both corporate and business strategy relevant to their strategies.

Business leaders, strategic planners, and even strategy consultants often confuse business and corporate strategy. You can keep them straight by being clear on the questions that are relevant at your level.


AUTHOR PROFILE:
Ken Favaro is a senior partner with Booz & Company based in New York. He leads the firm’s work in enterprise strategy and finance.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

SHORT INTERVIEW OF BRAND PROFESSIONALS IN BANKING AND FINANCE INDUSTRY

As the world of banking continually changes, ushers an era of all things digital. ICE Business Times speaks with the successful brand professional who is making their mark in the financial industry. He explain the dynamics of the new age, the challenges of the market, and their passion for the job.
Anwar Ehtesham, Head of Brand, Dhaka Bank Limited
A Decade of Challenges and Changes We are going through the most significant cultural shifts of our time. Attitude towards getting services, level of expectations from the service providers, service delivery/consumption process, media consumption patterns, information search methods, etc. are changing every day. Customers are getting more powerful and demanding; the banking Industry is also experiencing the same. Innovation and marketing are therefore getting essential not anymore for its growth only, but also for the survival.
Challenges in the Financial Industry As per my understanding, the need of banks will reduce day by day, but the deman…

GO GLOBAL, ACT GLOBAL

Go Global Act Local - one of the commonly used terms probably all of us have come across. Yes, many will vote for it. But is it really as effective as we know? I have my personal observations on this.


In this hyper-connected world, a brand somehow goes global even if you don't want to. It is because someone somewhere looking for a product that exactly matches their needs. And we have social channels, search engines, classified ad sites, and so on. So, a brand has every potential to spread like anything. Now, what that brand really stands for is a different discussion all together and I'm not going into that. I think, products are already global from the very date of its production.

Then why do you act like a local brand while operating in a foreign market? In many situations, I have seen, customers prefer certain products for not being local. So, why pushing that? Moreover, people these days are smarter than ever before. They can tell why a brand desperately tries to act (I t…

WORDS WORTH SHARING