Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
Nike
Critical Success Factors
Weig
ht
Rati
ng
Consumer Loyalty
Brand Recognition
Price Competitiveness
Product Quality
Product R&D
Market Share
Technology
Advertising
Public Perception
Product Diversity
New Product Lines
0.08
0.10
0.09
0.07
0.10
0.08
0.09
0.10
0.10
0.10
0.09
3
4
3
4
4
3
4
2
2
3
3
Total
1.0
Weig
ht
Scor
e
0.24
0.40
0.27
0.28
0.40
0.24
0.36
0.20
0.20
0.30
0.27
3.16
Adidas
Rati
ng
3
4
3
4
3
4
3
3
3
4
4
Weig
ht
Scor
e
0.24
0.40
0.27
0.28
0.30
0.32
0.27
0.30
0.30
0.40
0.36
Under
Armour
Ratin Weig
g
ht
Scor
e
3
0.24
3
0.30
4
0.36
3
0.21
3
0.30
2
0.16
2
0.18
2
0.20
2
0.20
2
0.20
2
0.18
3.44
2.53
Among the three main players in sporting goods industry in Malaysia, Adidas is
known to be the leader of the market. Adidass total weighted score is the highest. And
according to CPM Matrix, Nike is known as the market challenger who is trying to
overtake Adidas in Malaysia market, and Under Armour is the follower.
target groups of consumers which are athletes, sports lovers, age group of 20-29 year
old people and high school athletes of 14- 19 year old teenagers.
Under Armour is selling high-performance products that cater mostly to
professional and college athletes. Its products are manufactured by third-party
manufacturers, in collaboration with the in-house product development team. This
provides two benefits. First, it reduces the cost of production which enables Under
Armour to be get higher weighted score under product competitiveness. Second, it
enables the firm to concentrate on developing new products that will meet the needs of
a changing market.
Nikes main competitive advantages according to Porters generic strategies are
cost advantage and differentiation advantage. Products differentiation is able to help a
firm to boost its profit through the sale of different product. One of the Nikes strengths is
its superior product R&D and this is crucial for Nike to success in its differentiation
strategy. Nike has been struggled on its negative public reputation due to its poor
employment practices like employment child labor. Although these practices negatively
affected Nikes reputation but these practices indeed helped Nike to lower its cost of
production.