Managing the Multibusiness Corporation OUTLINE Structure of the

Managing the Multibusiness Corporation OUTLINE • Structure of the Multidivisional Company o Theory of the M-form o The divisionalized firm in practice • The Role of Corporate Management • Managing the Corporate Portfolio o Portfolio planning techniques o Value-creation through corporate restructuring • Managing Individual Businesses • Managing Internal Linkages • Recent Trends

The Multidivisional Structure: Theory of the M-Form • • • Efficiency advantages of the multidivisional firm: Recognizes bounded rationality—top management has limited decision-making capacity Divides decision-making according to frequency: —high-frequency operating decisions at divisional level —low-frequency strategic decisions at corporate level Reduces costs of communication and coordination: business level decisions confined to divisional level (reduces decision making at the top) Global, rather than local optimization: - functional organizations encourage functional goals. M-form structure encourages focus on profitability. Efficient allocation of resources through internal capital and labor markets Resolves agency problem-- corporate management an interface between shareholders and business-level managers.

The Divisionalized Firm in Practice • Constraints upon decentralization. – Difficult to achieve clear division of decision making between corporate and divisional levels. – On-going dialogue and conflict between corporate and divisional managers over both strategic and operational issues. • Standardization of divisional management – Despite potential for divisions to develop distinctive strategies and structures—corporate systems may impose uniformity. • Managing divisional inter-relationships – Requires more complex structures, e. g. matrix structures where functional and/or geographical structure is imposed on top of a product/market structure. – Added complexity undermines the efficiency advantages of the Mform

The Functions of Corporate Management Managing the Corporate Portfolio —Decisions over diversification, acquisition, Managing the individual businesses — Business strategy formulation —Monitoring and controlling business Managing linkages between businesses divestment —Resource allocation between businesses. performance —Sharing and transferring resources and capabilities

The Development of Strategic Planning Techniques: General Electric in the 1970’s Late 1960’s: GE encounters problems of direction, coordination, control, and profitability Corporate planning responses: § Portfolio Planning Models —matrix-based frameworks for evaluating business unit performance, formulating business strategies, and allocating resources § Strategic Business Units —GE reorganized around SBUs (business comprising a strategically-distinct group of closely-related products § PIMS —a database which quantifies the impact of strategy on performance. Used to appraise SBU performance and guide business strategy formulation

Portfolio Planning Models: Their Uses in Strategy Formulation • Allocating resources-- the analysis indicates both the investment requirements of different businesses and their likely returns • Formulating business-unit strategy-- the analysis yields simple strategy recommendations (e. g. . : “build”, “hold”, or “harvest”) • Setting performance targets-- the analysis indicates likely performance outcomes in terms of cash flow and ROI • Portfolios balance-- the analysis can assist in corporate goals such as a balanced cash flow and balance of growing and declining businesses.

Industry Attractiveness Portfolio Planning Models: The GE/ Mc. Kinsey Matrix B High H Medium H A R Low O L U I L D D V E S T Medium High Business Unit Position Industry Attractiveness Criteria Business Unit Position - Market size - Market growth - Industry profitability - Inflation recovery - Overseas sales ratio - Market share (domestic, global, and relative) - Competitive position - Relative profitability

Portfolio Planning Models: The BCG Growth-Share Matrix HIGH low, unstable, growing Cash flow: negative Earnings: high stable, growing Strategy: Cash flow: neutral Strategy: invest for growth analyze to determine whether business can be grown into a star, or will degenerate into a dog Earnings: LOW Annual real rate of market growth (%) Earnings: low, unstable ? Earnings: high stable Cash flow: neutral or negative Cash flow: high stable Strategy: divest Strategy: milk LOW Relative market share HIGH

Cable Film production Magazine Publishing 0 4 8 12 Cable TV Networks Bakery division -4 -8 Annual real rate of market growth (%) Applying the BCG Matrix to Time Warner Inc. Music AOL Relative market share Position in 2003 Position in 2000. (Area of circle proportional to $ sales)

Do Portfolio Planning Models Help or Hinder Corporate Strategy Formulation? ADVANTAGES • Simplicity: Can be quickly prepaired • Big picture: Permits one page representation of the corporate portfolio & the strategic positioning of each business • Analytically versatile: Applicable to businesses, products, countries, distribution channels. • Can be augmented: A useful point of departure for more sophisticated analysis DISADVANTAGES • Simplicity: Oversimplifies the factors determining industry attractiveness and competitive advantage • Ambiguous: The positioning of a business depends critically upon how a market is defined • Ignores synergy: the analysis takes no account of any interdependencies between businesses

Corporate Restructuring to Create Value: The Mc. Kinsey Pentagon Current market value 1 Current perceptions gap Company 2 value as is Strategic and operating opportunities Maximum raider opportunity RESTRUCTURING FRAMEWORK Potential value 3 with internal improvements Disposal/acquisition opportunities 4 Optimal 5 restructured value Total company opportunities Potential value with external improvements

Exxon’s Strategic Planning Process Economic Review Energy Review Stewardship Review Discuss-ion with contact director Business Plans Stewardship Basis Investment Reappraisals Financial Forecast Annual Budget Approval by Mgmt. Committee Corporate Plan

Corporate Control over the Businesses 2 basic approaches Input control Output (or performance) control Monitoring & approving business level decisions Setting & monitoring the achievement of performance targets Primarily through strategic planning system & capital expenditure approval system Primarily through performance management system, including operating budgets and HR appraisals

Goold & Campbell’s Corporate Management Styles: Financial and Strategic Control High CORPORATE INFLUENCE Centralized Strategic planning Strategic control Low Financial control Holding company Flexible strategic Tight strategic CONTROL INFLUENCE Tight financial

Corporate Management Applications of PIMS Analysis • Setting performance targets —feeding business unit strategic and industry data into the PIMS regression model gives performance norms for the business (PAR ROI). • Formulating business unit strategy — PIMS model can simulate the impact of changing strategic variables. • Allocating investment funds between businesses — PIMS Strategic Attractiveness Scan comparison different business units’ strategic attractiveness and their cash flow characteristics

Managing Linkages between Businesses KEY ISSUE—How does the corporate center add value to the business? BASIS OF BUSINESS LINKAGES—Sharing of resources and capabilities. SHARING OCCURS AT TWO LEVELS: • Corporate level—common corporate services • Business level—sharing resources, transferring capabilities PORTER’S ANALYSIS OF BUSINESS LINKAGES AND CORPORATE STRATEGY TYPES • Portfolio management— Parent creates value by operating an internal capital market • Restructuring—Parent create value by acquiring and restructuring Inefficiently-managed businesses • Transferring skills—Parent creates value by transferring capabilities between businesses • Sharing activities—Parent creates value by sharing resources between businesses ROLE OF DOMINANT LOGIC—importance of corporate managers’ perception of linkages

What Corporate Management Activities are Implied by Porter’s “Concepts of Corporate Strategy” (1) Portfolio Management • Using superior information and analysis to acquire attractive companies at favorable prices (e. g. Berkshire Hathaway). • Minimizing cost of capital (e. g. GE) • Create efficientt internal system for capital allocation (e. g. Exxon-Mobil) • Efficient monitoring of business unit performance (e. g BP-Amoco). (2) Restructuring: Intervening to cut costs and divest under performing assets (e. g. Hanson during 1980 s & early 1990 s) (3) Transferring skills: —Transferring best practices (e. g. Hewlett-Packard) —Transferring innovations (e. g. Sharp) —Transferring key personnel between businesses (e. g. Sony) (4) Sharing activities: —Common corporate services (e. g. 3 M) —Sharing operational resources and functions (e. g. sales and distribution, manufacturing facilities).

Rethinking the Management of Multibusiness Corporations: Lessons from General Electric Jack Welch’s transformation of GE’s structure and management systems: • Delayering --- from 9 or 10 layers of hierarchy to 4 or 5 • Decentralizing decisions. • Reformulating strategic planning—from formal, document-intensive analysis to direct face-to-face discussion of key issues. • Redefining the role of HQ—from checker, inquisitor, and authority to facilitator, helper, and supporter. • Coordinating role of HQ— corporate HQ to lead in creating the “boundaryless corporation” where innovations and ideas flow and where horizontal coordination occurs to respond to new opportunities. • HQ as change agent— corporate HQ driving force for continual organizational change (e. g. “workout”, “six-sigma”).

Rethinking the Management of Multibusiness Corporations: Lessons from ABB Key features of ABB’s corporate management system: Matrix organization—both product and country / regional coordination; flexible reporting requirements • Radical decentralization—ABB’s corporate HQ was tiny (<100 staff). Decision making authority lay with individual national subsidiaries (mostly small or medium-sized businesses). • Bottom-up management. Each business had its own balance sheet and could retain 1/3 of net income. • Informal collaboration and integration. Yet, for all of ABB’s apparent success at reconciling coordination with decentralization, by 2002 -03, deteriorating profitability and complexity of matrix structure caused ABB todismantle its matrix and adopt simpler line of business structure

Rethinking the Management of Multibusiness Corporations: Bartlett & Ghoshal’s Analysis of Key Management Processes Managing the tension between short-term ambition Managing operational interdependencies and personal networks RENEWAL PROCESS Creating and maintaining organizational trust INTEGRATIO Shaping and embedding corporate purpose N PROCESS Developing and Linking skills, knowledge, nurturing organizational and resources ENTREPRE values NEURIAL P Creating and pursuing ROCESS opportunities Establishing Reviewing, developing, and strategic mission & supporting initiatives performance standards Front-line Management Middle Management Top Management