Presentasi sedang didownload. Silahkan tunggu

Presentasi sedang didownload. Silahkan tunggu

PB#2 ANALISA STRATEGIK Rudy Suryanto, SE.,M.Acc. ANALISA STRATEGIK 1.Analisa Eksternal 1.Analisa Makro 2.Analisa Industri 3.Analisa Value Chain 2.Analisa.

Presentasi serupa

Presentasi berjudul: "PB#2 ANALISA STRATEGIK Rudy Suryanto, SE.,M.Acc. ANALISA STRATEGIK 1.Analisa Eksternal 1.Analisa Makro 2.Analisa Industri 3.Analisa Value Chain 2.Analisa."— Transcript presentasi:

1 PB#2 ANALISA STRATEGIK Rudy Suryanto, SE.,M.Acc

2 ANALISA STRATEGIK 1.Analisa Eksternal 1.Analisa Makro 2.Analisa Industri 3.Analisa Value Chain 2.Analisa Internal 1.Analisa Business Model Generation 2.Analisa Balanced Scorecard

3 ANALISA MAKRO Analisa makro terdiri dari analisa Politik, Ekonomi, Sosial dan Budaya (Poleksosbud). Analisa makro adalah analisa yang berlaku untuk satu daerah (Yogyakarta), negara (Indonesia) atau kawasan tertentu (Asia).

4 Socio-cultural Economic Political/Legal Technological GlobalDemographic Industry Environment Analisa Makro Interdependencies across dimensions

5 Analisa Makro akan memberikan 1.Pandangan umum akan iklim bisnis di masa depan di suatu negara/kawasan apakah kondusif atau tidak 2.Pandangan umum tentang potensi ekonomi di sebuah negara/kawasan 3.Pandangan umum tentang resiko bisnis di sebuah negara/kawasan

6 Analisa Industri Analisa industri adalah analisa untuk mengukur tingkat persaingan / dinamika persaingan di dalam industri.

7 SUPPLIERS POTENTIAL ENTRANTS SUBSTITUTES BUYERS INDUSTRY RIVALRY Rivalry among existing firms Bargaining power suppliers Bargaining power buyers Threat of new entrants Threat of substitutes Porter’s Five Competitive Forces

8 DINAMIKA PERSAINGAN 1.Penentuan strategi sangat erat terkait dengan dinamika persaingan yang terjadi di suatu industry 2.Dinamika strategi di sebuah industri di pengaruhi oleh empat faktor utama yaitu bargaining power supplier, thread of new entrants, thread of substitutes

9 Pengaruh Faktor-Faktor NONO FAKTORPENGARUH 1Daya tawar supplier tinggiPersaingan Meningkat 2Daya ancam pemain baru tinggiPersaingan Meningkat 3Daya tawar buyer tinggiPersaingan Meningkat 4Ancaman barang pengganti tinggi Persaingan Meningkat

10 RESPONS 1.Menurunkan daya tawar supplier 2.Menurunkan daya tawar buyer 3.Menghalangi pemain baru masuk 4.Menurunkan ancaman barang pengganti

11 ANALISA RANTAI NILAI (VALUE CHAIN) Rantai nilai adalah suatu tahapan proses produktif (fungsi) dari penyediaan input spesifik ke produksi utama, perubahan bentuk, pemasaran sampai kepada konsumen akhir 1.Analisa Rantai Nilai Eksternal 2.Analisa Rantai Nilai Internal



14 14 Today’s Objectives You should: Understand the difference between Porter’s and the RBV’s approach to strategy and CA Be knowledgeable about the main tenets of the RBV Know the difference between resources and capabilities Know how to identify distinctive resources or capabilities Be aware of the “dark side” of distinctive capabilities.

15 15 Recall: Firm profitability is determined by industry structure (Week 4) and by individual firm characteristic. Firm effect > industry effect (in almost all studies)! Proportion of firm performance explained by: Rumelt (1991) McGahen&Porter (1997) Hawawini et al (2003) Industry Effect 4.0%18.7%8.1% Firm Effect 45.8%36.0%35.8%

16 16 Some firms outperform their industry

17 17 Porter’s route to CA “Choices”: 1985: Choose a generic strategy that promises protection from competitive forces. 1996: Choose a position -- performing different activities or performing similar activities differently from rivals –- that creates value for customers and is difficult to imitate by competitors. Easier said than done!

18 18 The “Resource-based” route to CA Stalk et al (1992, p.58) article: Why does Walmart have lower cost structure, why can they “afford” greeters and strong service despite “everyday low prices”?  Because of underlying distinctive capabilities The Resource-based View (RBV) brings a more subtle understanding of competition. Firms are constrained in their choices by existing resources/ capabilities and the rate at which new resources/capabilities can be built.

19 19 Resource-Based View (RBV) Origins in mid-1980s, take-off in early 1990s. Many scholars contributed. Each firm seen as a “ bundle of resources & capabilities ” – Resources … what the company “ has ”, i.e. the productive assets controlled by the firm. – Capabilities … what the firm “ does ” with its resources, i.e. its ability to bring together multiple resources for a particular purpose. Thrust: Creation of competitive advantage through the creation and exploitation of distinctive resources and capabilities.

20 20 Key Assumptions of RBV Resource heterogeneity – firms represent unique bundles of resources/capabilities Limited resource mobility – many resources and especially capabilities cannot be built rapidly (or bought in the market) E.g. brands, patents, trust of customers and employees can only be built over time, requiring considerable investments and incurring significant risk. Without these assumptions, firms could follow any strategy  profits would rapidly erode as desirable strategies are emulated.

21 21 Tangible Resources – Financial resources Cash, accounts receivable, capacity to borrow… – Physical resources Property, production facilities, raw materials… Tangible resources recorded in financial statements.

22 22 Intangible Resources – Information: customer data, competitor intelligence… – Knowledge in its many forms: copyrights, trade secrets, patents, insights into customers … – Relationships with customers, employees, suppliers, alliance partners and the public: brands, reputation as employer, buyer, partner, corporate citizen – HR: skills, knowledge and experience of employees, their ability to work as a team, their commitment to the firm, top management leadership… Intangible resources mostly missing from the firm’s financial statements  difference between book values and values assigned by investors (see next slide).

23 23 The growing value of intangible resources Top 150 largest companies in the world (Bryan and Zanini 2005 McKinsey Quarterly)

24 24 Intangible Resources: The World’s Most Valuable Brands Rank CompanyBrand Rank Company Brand value value (US$b) (US$b) 1 Coca-Cola Mercedes Microsoft Citigroup IBM Hewlett-Packard GE American Express Intel Gillette Nokia BMW Disney Cisco McDonalds Louis Vuitton Toyota Honda Marlboro Samsung14.9 (Source: Interbrand 2005)

25 25 Resources (on their own) and Performance: The Analogy of Soccer LeagueTeams with best on-field performance Teams with highest player expenditure ItalyJuventusLazio ItalyAC MilanInter Milan ItalyParmaJuventus SpainValenciaReal Madrid SpainReal MadridBarcelona SpainDeportivo La CorunaReal Betis UKManchester UnitedChelsea UKArsenalManchester United UKLiverpoolArsenal Source: Grant 2005 Superior resources alone (here: highest paid players) do not necessarily translate into superior (on-field) performance  capabilities. Italian, Spanish and English premier soccer leagues ( )

26 26 Capabilities: Definition “…an organisation’s capacity to deploy tangible and intangible resources… to bring about a desired end.” (Dess et al 2007: p.93) “…the ability to perform a task or activity that involves complex patterns of coordination and cooperation between people and other resources.” (McGee et al 2005: p.252) – A hospital’s emergency response capability: anaesthetist + surgeon + triage nurse + theatre nurse + operating theatre – Wal-Mart’s “cross docking” capability (Stalk et al 1992): Private satellite network (warehouses, stores and suppliers) + IT-based control systems + Video links with all stores + Dedicated fleet of trucks + Stock ownership and profit sharing to motivate employees + …

27 Bukti Empirik RBV Proportion of firm performance explained by: Rumelt (1991) McGahen&P orter (1997) Hawawi ni et al (2003) Industry Effect 4.0%18.7%8.1% Firm Effect 45.8%36.0%35.8%

28 Sumberdaya Perusahaan Berwujud – Sumberdaya Keuangan – kas, piutang, kemampuan untuk mendapatkan pinjaman – Sumberdaya fisik – bangunan, fasilitas produksi, persediaan bahan baku dll – > tercatat dalam laporan keuangan

29 Sumberdaya Perusahaan Sumberdaya tidak berwujud – Informasi: data pelanggan, market intelligent, competitor intelligence… – Knowledge (pengetahuan): copyrights, trade secrets, patents, insights into customers … – Jaringan (Relationships) with customers, employees, suppliers, alliance partners and the public: brands, reputation as employer, buyer, partner, corporate citizen – Sumberdaya manusia: ketrampilan, pengetahuan, dan pengalaman karyawan, kemampuan karyawan bekerja dalam tim, loyalitas karyawan, kepemimpinan manajemen puncak. Sumbedaya tidak berwujud tidak nampak dalam laporan keuangan. Namun terlihat pada selisih harga pasar dan nilai buku Price per book ratio(Dell 40x, Microsoft 7x, Google 130x)

30 Sumber Daya tidak Berwujud

31 Intangible Resources: The World’s Most Valuable Brands (Source: Interbrand 2005)

32 Sumbedaya = Kapasitas?

33 Kapasitas..kapasitas organisasi untuk mengelola tangible dan intangible resource guna mencapai tujuan tertentu (Dess et al 2007 p 93)..kemampuan untuk melaksanakan tugas atau aktivitas yang memerlukan pola koordinasi yang kompleks dan kerjasama banyak orang dan banyak sumberdaya (McGee et al 2005, p. 252) Contoh : unit IRD dalam sebuah rumah sakit

34 Pengemangan Kapabilitas Kapabilitas berkembang dan dibangun memerlukan waktu dan cenderung bergantung pada tacit knowledge (bukan eksplisit knowledge) Pengembangan kapabilitas ini dilakukan secara berjenjang (sehingga apabila kompetitor ingin melakukan imitasi butuh waktu dan proses yang lama)

35 Kapabilitas Perusahaan Telkom.

36 Distinctive Resource & Capabilities Strategy is interested chiefly in distinctive resources and capabilities, i.e..those that distinguish the firm from competitors; that give it CA and above-average profitability. NB: Stalk et al 1992: “strategic capability” = “distinctive capability” Capabilities are a more likely source of SCA than resources!

37 Sustainablitiy Competitive Advantage

38 38 Conditions for CA Valuable The resource/capability must create value (see Week 3) Rare Unless rare, a valuable resource/capability cannot be the basis for CA. Needed “to be in the game” (competitive parity – see below) E.g. in engineering industry, CAD technology is very valuable but since every firm has adopted it, it no longer confers CA.

39 39 Conditions for Sustainable CA Inimitable Competitors find it very difficult/costly to imitate the particular resource/capability due to: – property rights / physical uniqueness to prevent imitation (e.g. patent, copyright, mining lease) – causal ambiguity: lack of comprehension of the distinctive resource/capability elements (often tacit knowledge components) – social complexity: some resources/capabilities inherently difficult to manage (e.g. culture, alliance relationships) – historical path dependence: resources/capabilities that have been cultivated over time cannot be replicated quickly (e.g. brand, supplier relationships, technical knowledge)

40 40 Codified knowledge can be made independent of knowledge carrier, i.e. it can be captured (instructions, mathematical equations, flow charts, etc.) and readily transmitted to others. Tacit knowledge cannot be expressed/captured by the knowledge carrier and thus cannot readily be transmitted. “We know more than we can tell” (Polanyi 1966) Transfer of tacit knowledge typically requires prolonged observation of, and interaction with, the knowledge carrier. KNOWLEDGE SPECTRUM Tacit Knowledge Codified Knowledge Distraction: Tacit knowledge – a likely source of inimitability

41 41 Distraction: Tacit knowledge – a likely source of inimitability Tacit knowledge… … is path dependent … tends to be causally ambiguous … tends to be socially complex  Resources/capabilities with tacit knowledge components are difficult to imitate!

42 42 Non-Substitutable (or “Difficult to substitute”) Resource/capability must not have a (non-rare) substitute E.g. astute management team vs. advanced decision support system; physical location vs. website; Conditions for Sustainable CA

43 43 Conditions and their Implications for CA Is the Resource/Capability… Valuable?Rare?Inimitable and Non-substitutable? Implications for CA No**Comp. Disadvantage YesNo*Comp. Parity Yes NoTemporary CA Yes Sustainable CA Source: adapted from Barney (1991) *…inconsequential (Yes or No)

44 44 Appropriability In addition to the four conditions, SCA requires appropriability. I.e. the value created by a particular resources/capabilities must not be captured entirely by its provider. Organisation-based capabilities vs. an individual’s capabilities (compare Week 4: NHL players as internal suppliers)

45 45 Examples Distinctive Resources/Capabilities Cochlear’s product innovation capability Toyota’s “lean manufacturing” capability Cisco’s capability in integrating acquired companies Macquarie Bank’s capability in acquiring, “packaging” and re-selling assets.

46 46 Can distinctive resources/capabilities be bought in the market? Many distinctive resources/capabilities cannot be “traded” (org. culture, brand, relationships with communities…) Some resources/capabilities can be bought in the market, however… Non-exclusive purchase, i.e. they may also be purchased by other competitors (e.g. superior production equipment)  parity Exclusive purchase: we are likely to pay “full” price, i.e. the purchase price reflects the value-creating potential of the resource/capability  Distinctive resources/capabilities that provide CA invariably have to be built/cultivated within the firm.

47 47 The dark side of distinctive capabilities When the (industry-)environment changes, or customer demands change, distinctive capabilities may act as distinctive rigidities (“core rigidities”). Being used to success on the basis of particular capabilities, managers find it hard to grasp and/or accept that they are no longer valuable. “Success doesn’t beget success. Success begets failure because the more that you know a thing works, the less likely you are to think that it won’t work. When you’ve had a log string of victories, it is harder to foresee your own vulnerabilities.” Leslie Wexner, CEO, The Limited, Inc., quoted in Hanson et al (2002: p.111)

48 48 The dark side of distinctive capabilities Even if the need for change is recognised, firms may still find it hard to change: Distinctive resources and capabilities often linked to a firm’s power structure  resistance to change by powerful interests who reached positions of power precisely because of their association with the existing set of distinctive capabilities; they are powerful and have the most to lose. Beyond such political resistance, there is also an in-built inertia -- resources and capabilities are extensively specialised. Recall: capabilities have evolved over an extended period of time; they are well honed routines  difficult to refocus these highly specialised capabilities and resources.

49 49 Possibilities for overcoming in-built inertia Accessing new resources/capabilities to augment existing ones: M&A, strategic alliances, internal development (?) Notion of dynamic capabilities, a kind of meta-capability: Ability to continually rebuild and reconfigure resources and capabilities. Flexibility / learning

Download ppt "PB#2 ANALISA STRATEGIK Rudy Suryanto, SE.,M.Acc. ANALISA STRATEGIK 1.Analisa Eksternal 1.Analisa Makro 2.Analisa Industri 3.Analisa Value Chain 2.Analisa."

Presentasi serupa

Iklan oleh Google