Submitted to Prof.

H P Mathur

Submitted by Manali kumari ojha Roll no 52

Strategic management is all about Formulation Implementation & evaluation of strategies So our project will revolve on these critical parameters.

Bill Hewlett & Dave Packard graduated in electrical engineering from STANFORD university in 1935. The company originated in garage in nearby Palo Alto,California,USA during a fellowship in 1939 with initial capital investment of us $538 Hewlett Packard company commonly referred as HP American multinational information technology corporation headquartered in Palo Alto , California , USA Nearly in each country hp product lines include 01)personal computing devices 02)enterprise servers 03)related storage devices 04)diverse range of printers & imaging products Hp markets its products to household, small to medium size consumers and enterprise directly as well as via online distribution

Vision statement
To view change in market as an opportunity to grow, to use our profit and our ability to develop & produce innovative products , services and solutions that satisfy emerging customers need

Mission Statement

To provide product, services and solution

of highest quality and deliver more value to our customers that earn their respect and loyalty

Strengths
Brand name Low debt Wide range of innovative products Developing of own hardware and software Web technology used for product awareness & sale

Weaknesses
Lack of in-house management consulting division Intellectual capital is underestimated No aggressive investment in R & D No good people retention policy

Opportunities
Expansion of retailed stores for customer convenience Participation in joint venture Make easy to use product for upcoming retirees Computer and cell phone software & hardware

Threats
Competitors technology & pricing low compatibility with non- HP product

Availability of substitute
Less global coverage than competitor

Key Internal factors

Strengths

Weight

Rating

Weighted Score

Brand name
Low debt Wide range of innovative products Developing of own hardware and software

0.14 0.13
0.13 0.11 0.10

4 4
4 4 3

0.56 0.52
0.52 0.44 0.30

Web technology used for product awareness & sale

Weaknesses Lack of in-house management consulting division Intellectual capital is underestimated No aggressive investment in R & D No good people retention policy 0.10 0.08 0.11 0.10 1 2 2 2 0.10 0.16 0.22 0.20

Total

1.00

3.02

Key External factors Opportunity

Weight

Rating

Weighted Score

Expansion of retailed stores for customer convenience

Participation in joint venture Make easy to use product for upcoming retirees Computer and cell phone software & hardware

0.11 0.20 0.09 0.12

3 3 2 4

0.33 0.60 0.18 0.48

Threat Competitors technology & pricing 0.14 0.13 0.10 0.11 4 3 4 2 0.56 0.39 0.40 0.22

low compatibility with non- HP product

Availability of substitute Less global coverage than competitor

Total

1.00

3.16

Critical success factor

weight

HP
Rating

DELL
Rating

CANON
Rating

Score

Score

Score

Innovation Management Technology Financial Position Market share Customer loyalty Brand name Pricing Product Quality Compatibility Promotion
Total

0.11 0.08

2 3

0.22 0.24

4 4

0.44 0.32

3 2

0.33 0.16

0.12 0.10 0.09

0.10 0.11 0.11 0.09

4 4 3
4 2 4 4

0.48 0.40 0.27

0.40 0.22 0.44 0.18

2 3 4
3 4 3 3

0.24 0.30 0.36

0.30 0.44 0.33 0.27

3 2 2
2 3 2 2

0.36 0.20 0.18

0.20 0.33 0.22 0.18

0.10
0.08
1.00

2
3

0.20
0.24
3.29

3
2

0.30
0.16
3.46

4
4

0.40
0.32
2.88

Strengths - S
1. Brand name

Weakness W

TOWS MATRIX

2. Low debt 3. Wide range of innovative products 4. Developing of own hardware and software 5. Web technology used for product awareness & sale

1. 2. 3. 4.

Lack of in-house management consulting division Intellectual capital is underestimated No aggressive investment in R & D No good people retention policy

Opportunities O
1. 2. 3. 4. Expansion of retailed stores for customer convenience Participation in joint venture Make easy to use product for upcoming retirees Computer and cell phone software & hardware

SO - strategies
(S1, S3,O1,)

(must open new retail stores throughout the world to take advantage of financial strength) (S4, O3) (develop easy pc and cell phone for old generation)

WO strategies (W1,W5,O2) (develop new HR policy in order to retain human capital by taking advantage or other firm management )

Threats - T
1.
2. 3. 4.

ST strategies
(S4, T1)

Competitors technology & pricing

low compatibility with non- HP product Availability of substitute Less global coverage than competitor

(developed low price and innovative pc & cell phone than competitors ) (S5,T2) (developed such hardware and software for computer & cell phone which are compatible with other companies software and accessories)

WT strategies (W1,T1) (give attention to management consulting division to have more focus on technology improvements)

Critical Region:
ST

Managerial Decision:
Market development Horizontal Integration

Internal Strategic Position

Financial Strengths (FS)
Return on Investment leverage Working Capital Liquidity Price earning ratio +5 +3 +4 +5 +4

External Strategic position

Environmental Stability (ES)
Technological changes Rate of Inflation Price range of Competing products Competitive pressure Barriers to entry into market Demand variability -3 -2 -3 -5 -4 -2

Total Average

+21 +4.2

Total Average

-19 -3.17

Competitive Advantage (CA)

Market Share Product Quality Customer Loyalty Technological know-how Control over suppliers and distributors -2 -3 -2 -2 -4

Industry Strength (IS) Growth Potential Profit Potential Financial Stability Labor cost
Technological know-how

+5 +5 +4 +3 +4

Total Average

-13 -2.6

Total Average

+21 +4.2

FS

+6

Conservative

Aggressive
X-axis =CA + IS = -2.6+(4.20)

+5 +4 +3

+2
+1 CA -6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 -1 -2 -3

= 1.60

IS

+1

+2

+3

+5

+6

Y-axis = FS + ES = 4.2+(-3.17) =1.03

-4
-5

Defensive

-6 ES

Competitive

According to the space matrix score HP falls in the AGGRESSIVE quadrant . Their strategies should be one of the following: Vertical and horizontal integration Market penetration Market development Product development Diversification

ID
A B C D E

SEGMENTS
ESS HPS SOFTWARE IPG PSG

REVENUE %
19 17 1.4 29.2 32

PROFIT %
2 20 5 30 42

GROWTH RATE %
11 8 14 8 -10

MARKET SHRE %
0.8 0.1 0.6 0.8 0.7

HPHS

2.2

-14

0.2

High 1.0 High +20

Medium .50

Low 0.0

STARS
A

Question Mark

Industry growth rate

II D

I
B

Medium 0

CASH COWS
E

DOGS

Low - 20

III
Relative market share

IV

IFE Total Weighted Score 3.02

4.0 Strong 3.0 4.0 3.0 Average 2.0 2.99 2.0 Weak 1.0 1.99

EFE TOTAL WEIGHTED SCORE 3.16

High 3.0 4.0 3.0

i HP iv

ii v

iii vi

Medium 2.0 2.99 2.0 Low 1.0 1.99 1.0

vii

viii

ix

HP falls in first region of IE matrix and there main focus will be on GROW AND BUILD and they will mainly focus on strategies which are:

Market

development Horizontal integration

Rapid market growth Quadrant II Weak competitive position Quadrant I

HP
Quadrant III Quadrant IV

Slow market growth

Strong competitive position

HP has rapid market growth and strong competitive position so it falls in first quadrant and the most suitable strategies for HP are:

Market

development Horizontal integration

Key Internal Factors

Strengths Brand name Low debt Weight 0.14 0.13

HORIZONTAL INTEGRATION AS 3 3 TAS 0.42 0.39

MARKET DEVELOPEMNT AS 4 2 TAS 0.56 0.26

Wide range of innovative products

Developing of own hardware and software Web technology used for product awareness and sale Weaknesses Lack of in-house management consulting division Intellectual capital is underestimated No aggressive investment in R & D No good people retention policy Total weight

0.13
0.11 0.10

4
4 2

0.52
0.44 0.20

3
3 3

0.39
0.33 0.30

0.10 0.08 0.11 0.10 1.00

2 -3 3

0.20 -0.33 0.30

3 -2 2

0.30 -0.22 0.20

Key External Factors

Opportunities Expansion of retailed store for customer convenience Participation in joint venture Make easy to use product for upcoming retirees Computer and cell phone software and hardware Threats Competitors technology and pricing Low compatibility with non-HP product Availability of substitutes Less global coverage than competitors Total weight Total Attractive Score 0.14 0.13 0.10 0.11 1.00 weight 0.11 0.20 0.09 0.12

HORIZONTAL INTEGRATION AS 3 4 3 3 TAS 0.33 0.80 0.27 0.36

MARKET DEVELOMENT AS 4 2 2 2 TAS 0.44 0.40 0.18 0.24

4 3 4 3

0.56 0.39 0.40 0.33

3 2 3 2

0.42 0.26 0.30 0.22

6.24

5.02

According to the total attractive score of QSPM HP should go for HORIZONTAL INTEGRATION