Development of a Blue Ocean Strategy Concept. Perspective from German Courier, Express and Parcel (CEP) Market

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

List of Abbreviations

List of Figures

List of Tables

1 Introduction
1.1 Problem Statement
1.2 Objective
1.3 Research Method
1.4 Relevance of the Topic
1.5 Structure of the Work

2 Theories and Concepts of Strategy
2.1 Strategy
2.1.1 Definition of Term
2.1.2 Goals and Purpose
2.2 Market-Based View according to Porter
2.2.1 Poters Five Forces
2.2.2 Generic Competitive Strategies
2.3 Resource-Based View and Core Competence
2.3.1 Resource-Based Approach
2.3.2 Core Competence Approach according to Prahalad and Hamel

3 Fundamentals of Blue Ocean Strategy
3.1 Framework
3.2 Red Ocean vs. Blue Ocean
3.3 Value Innovation
3.4 Six Principles of Blue Ocean Strategy

4 Formulation and Execution of Blue Ocean Strategy
4.1 Analytical Tools and Frameworks for Formulation
4.1.1 Strategy Canvas
4.1.2 Four Actions Framework
4.1.3 ERRC Grid
4.1.4 Strategy Characteristics
4.2 Formulation Principles
4.2.1 Search Risk
4.2.2 Planning Risk
4.2.3 Scale Risk
4.2.4 Business Model Risk
4.3 Execution Principles
4.3.1 Organizational Risk
4.3.2 Management Risk
4.4 Successful Examples of Blue Oceans
4.4.1 Ford Model T
4.4.2 CJ-Global Logistics Service

5 General Information about the CEP Market
5.1 CEP Market in General
5.1.1 Courier
5.1.2 Express
5.1.3 Parcel
5.2 CEP Market in Germany
5.2.1 Market Leaders
5.2.2 Trends in B2B
5.2.3 Trends in B2C

6 Blue Ocean Strategy applied in German CEP Market
6.1 Status Quo Analysis of Industry Determinants
6.2 Status Quo Analysis of Competition
6.2.1 DHL
6.2.2 UPS
6.2.3 TNT
6.2.4 Determinants according to Helmke
6.3 Classification of Data
6.3.1 Price
6.3.2 Speed
6.3.3 E-solutions
6.3.4 Value Added Services
6.3.5 Level of Surcharges
6.3.6 Reaction Time
6.3.7 Professionalism
6.4 Strategy Canvas applied
6.5 Analysis to Formulate Blue Oceans in the German CEP Market
6.5.1 Application of Four Actions Framework
6.5.2 Application of ERRC Grid
6.6 Strategy Characteristics applied

7 Results, Critical Analysis and Recommendation
7.1 Summary of Findings
7.1.1 Opportunities
7.1.2 Threats
7.2 Recommendations

8 Conclusion and Outlook

Appendix 1: Der KEP Markt 2011

Appendix 2: Price Enquiry DHL Homepage

Appendix 3: Price Enquiry UPS Homepage

Appendix 4: TNT Correspondence via Email

Bibliography

Internet Sources

List of Abbreviations

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

List of Figures

Figure 1: Levels of Strategy

Figure 2: Traditional Bain/Mason Industrial Organization Paradigm

Figure 3: Forces Driving Industry Competition

Figure 4: Three Generic Strategies

Figure 5: Resource-Conduct-Performance Paradigm

Figure 6: Red Ocean versus Blue Ocean Strategy

Figure 7: Value Innovation: The Cornerstone of Blue Ocean Strategy

Figure 8: The Six Principles of Blue Ocean Strategy

Figure 9: The Strategy Canvas of the U.S. Wine Industry in the Late 1990s

Figure 10: The Three Tiers of Noncustomers

Figure 11: The six Stages of the Buyer Experience Cycle

Figure 12: How Fair Process Affects People’s Attitudes and Behaviour

Figure 13: Own Illustration CEP Market in Germany

Figure 14: Own Illustration Top 10 Logistic Providers German CEP Market

Figure 15: Reaction Time German CEP Providers

Figure 16: Index of Professionalism German CEP Providers

Figure 17: Strategy Canvas German CEP Market

Figure 18: ERRC Grid applied on German CEP Market

Figure 19: New Strategy Canvas German CEP Market

List of Tables

Table 1: Own illustration Public Postal Companies Acquisitions

Table 2: DHL Comparison with Regard to Price and Transit Time

Table 3: UPS Comparison with Regard to Price and Transit Time

Table 4: TNT Comparison with Regard to Price and Transit Time

Table 5: Factors of Competition German CEP Market Scoring

Table 6: Adjusted Factors of Competition in German CEP Market Ranking

1 Introduction

1.1 Problem Statement

For years the Federal Republic of Germany was the world’s export champion until China secured the title in 2009.¹ A lot is known and valued about products made by German companies such as BMW, Adidas, or Bayer just to name a few. But next to the manufacturing trade the logistic services sector is also important to satisfy worldwide demand for German products. Within this context the German Courier, Express and Parcel (CEP) market is accentuated. The market itself is considered to be one of the most labour-intensive industries in Germany² which underlines its relative importance for German economy. But for years there has been a downward going price spiral and destructive competition which has increased cost pressure for the market participants.³ This also might be a reason why the reputation of CEP companies in the media is negative.⁴

1.2 Objective

As there are four big players so called integrators and many local small and medium sized companies in the market, this thesis shall investigate if it is possible to create blue oceans for the German CEP industry to supply service at higher prices again independent from the current market development. It shall provide a summary of established corporate strategies in comparison to the new strategic management approach of blue ocean strategy. The main objective is to investigate current levels of competition within the German CEP market via the research of CEP market leaders in each segment to finally develop a BOS concept.

1.3 Research Method

To formulate a potential BOS it is necessary to gain valid data about current levels of competition in the market which will be researched by existing literature and studies supported by the help of publicly available homepage data from market leading CEP providers. Both will be combined to create a dataset out of the observation. Overall the research methodology is non-experimental and quantitative. The acquired data will be used to derive potential statements for the development of a BOS.

1.4 Relevance of the Topic

From the founders of BOS it is assumed that BOS supports corporate growth different from known corporate strategies via the creation of new markets instead of concentrating on competition based theories which will be further reviewed in chapter 3.2 Red Ocean vs. Blue Ocean. To check the assumption, the topic of this thesis is therefore representative for the competitiveness in the German CEP market and approaches to create potential new market space via innovation.

1.5 Structure of the Work

The beginning of chapter two defines the term of strategy and and why companies need it and is followed by market-based and resourced-based view to give a general overview of established corporate strategies. In particular the work of Porter added by Prahalad and Hamel is highlighted within this context. After this is done the fundamentals of BOS are examined in chapter three to distinguish from established corporate theories and concepts. To research BOS in more detail the process from formulation to execution is probed in chapter four and introduces analytical tools and frameworks which will be required to develop a BOS after the CEP market and its characteristics and trends are described in chapter five. The theoretical framework shall help to receive a general appreciation of BOS and the German CEP market. In chapter six the theory is finally applied. The levels of competition are researched via the status quo analysis of current market leaders. Furthermore the mentioned tools from BOS formulation like strategy canvas and ERRC grid will be adopted. The overall focus is set on formulation and development so there will be no application of final execution. Eventually findings and recommendations are summed up in chapter seven and will be supplemented by a conclusion and outlook in chapter eight.

2 Theories and Concepts of Strategy

2.1 Strategy

2.1.1 Definition of Term

To begin with, strategies have existed much longer than the social market economy. Originally it is derived from Xenophon, an ancient Greek writer and illustrates the art of war.⁵ Newman and Morgenstern transferred the term from a military context to game theory and described it as a calculation between players, of all possible options that might occur in different situations.⁶ Even though there is no overall definition, Alfred D. Chandler defined the term as “(…) the determination of the basic long-term goals and objectives of an enterprise, and the adoption of courses of action and the allocation of resources necessary for carrying out these goals”⁷. In 1965 Harry Igor Ansoff published corporate strategies based on his researches to integrate science into management models. He perpetuated the approaches of Taylor and Fayol and established the basis for strategic management to evolve.⁸

2.1.2 Goals and Purpose

The founder of Boston Consulting Group, Bruce D.Henderson suggested that competition has existed much longer than strategy itself. He refers to Gause´s law of competitive exclusion which says two creatures cannot coexist while they share the same resources.⁹ When transferred to business administration it also describes the social market economy. Next to survival and growth purposes, companies do act in highly competitive markets and have to formulate their desired objectives by a strategy. To set theses purposes up, companies use written down business missions and business visions.¹⁰ These statements are part of strategic planning and important to meet requirements. They can also be described as the connection for a company to make profit with motivated employees.¹¹ Mission statements clarify the business of a company in the long run to distinguish from the competition while vision statements are often simple and define what a company wants to become.¹² In accordance with Plunkett there is a hierarchy of strategy which differs on corporate, business and functional strategy levels.

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

Figure 1: Levels of Strategy¹³

Strategy in general depends on the ability to estimate future impacts of current actions.¹⁴ Before companies can start the implementation of a successful strategy to meet business objectives, a neutral analysis of the status quo is necessary.¹⁵ This analysis is provided by external and internal environment to match the best strategy available for the company. On top of the pyramid the corporate strategy is mentioned for all subordinated strategies undertaken. As figure 1 demonstrates it to be an initial point, the fundamentals of established corporate strategies are reviewed in the following subchapter.

2.2 Market-Based View according to Porter

2.2.1 Poters Five Forces

In the early 1980´s the market-based view (MBV) was one important reason for corporate strategies to develop.¹⁶ Michael Porter, who founded this MBV, reverted to theoretical background of Bain and Mason and their structure-conduct-performance paradigm.¹⁷ In its main idea Porter summarizes the industry structure to determine conduct and performance.¹⁸ Conduct is therefore equal to strategy and performance equals success. The main focus is set to gain an outside-in perspective.¹⁹

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

Figure 2: Traditional Bain/Mason Industrial Organization Paradigm²⁰

With MBV Porter wanted to find out why some companies managed to be successful while other companies under the same conditions and circumstances could not manage to survive.²¹ To answer the question he isolated two factors: industry attractiveness in a given industry and the relative position of a company. Finally the industry attractiveness led Porter to so called five forces to analyse the external market environment.

Rivalry among competitors is right in the centre of Porters model. One explanation for it to be right in the centre argues because it is an ongoing process while companies try to gain market share from each other.²² Especially highly unstable forms of price competition can escalate and cause a whole industry to be worse off in profitability than before.²³ It can be derived that as long as there is no monopoly built by the company this force will always be present.

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

Figure 3: Forces Driving Industry Competition²⁴

Pressure from substitute products can always happen because substitution effects can emerge easily from future trends for instance in electronics. For example Email is a substitute for express mail or fax machines²⁵ because it has a similar function and can replace and fulfil the need of a buyer’s product from the past. It is also a reason for companies to be less profitable when prices get limited due to cheaper substitutes.²⁶ Consequently if profitability is affected the potential for existing products in existing markets to grow seems to be low.

Substitution effects also connect the threat of new entrants to Porter’s model because either a new company can enter a business for the first time or existing companies can enter new markets to grow.²⁷ When companies already made experiences with substitution products or services the decision to enter depends on the attractiveness of an industry and barriers to enter²⁸ which will not be considered in this thesis.

Bargaining power of suppliers is so meaningful to companies because all of them rely on their services or products provided. In case of rise in prices or lowered quality offered by the supplier, companies can not react effectively when the supplier industry consists of just a few firms.²⁹ Other threats due to suppliers might occur when suppliers become substantial because of a unique service or product, or vice versa when the supplier is not an important customer and the overall loss is not significant due to its purchases.³⁰ Porter also mentioned forward integration to be another threat of suppliers because they can become suppliers and rivals at the same time.³¹

In this context the buyer’s side needs to be taken into account which is linked to the previous threat of suppliers. Especially the volume of purchases a buyer is able to demand affects the level of sales discount offered by the seller.³² This can directly have a negative impact on margin for the seller. Beyond that it is also a threat if the product or service is not unique and the buyer can switch to other companies with lower prices. In addition buyers can learn to produce the demanded product themselves which simultaneously underlines the threat of new entrants again and is called backward integration.³³

2.2.2 Generic Competitive Strategies

When Porter developed generic competitive strategies he recommended companies to stick with one certain strategy because otherwise companies will not gain competitive advantages and result as he called it, being stuck in the middle.³⁴ He derived three generic strategies out of his research. There are overall cost leadership, differentiation and focus strategy.³⁵ Companies which are stuck in the middle will not manage to grow but instead of that they will suffer losses.

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

Figure 4: Three Generic Strategies³⁶

The chosen strategy should be equivalent to a company’s strengths to secure advantages with regard to other industry competitors.³⁷ To be successful with overall cost leadership a company needs high supply combined with low prices in comparison to competitors. For this strategy certain characteristics like standardization and efficient distribution is observable. In addition a low cost position is based on the experience curve concept to build economies of scale and economies of scope to protect a company from rivalry.³⁸

Differentiation means to create a unique service or product. There are no requirements for the uniqueness but it needs to be perceivable for the customer like for instance additional quality or service etc. to be different from competitors offering.³⁹ Because of the perceived additional value, differentiation might build stronger loyalty and willingness to pay higher prices. Porter also referred to not all customers being willing or able to pay higher prices but in general differentiation products or services are better protected from substitutes.⁴⁰

Last but not least focus strategy is pointed out which can be based on either differentiation focus or cost focus. The strategic target is set narrowly on particular segments rather than a broad industry.⁴¹ When companies serve a specific niche there are also limitations between profitability and sales volume once it becomes economically attractive due to Porter.⁴²

2.3 Resource-Based View and Core Competence

2.3.1 Resource-Based Approach

Beside MBV there is also the resource-based view (RBV). The main focus set here is to gain an inside-out-perspective.⁴³ In theory it is not about the environment a company acts in but about the present resources a company might have. The foundation of RBV was possible because of the research of Penrose in 1959 while innovation is highlighted to secure long-term success.⁴⁴ In 1990 Prahalad and Hamel added the importance of core competence to gain a competence-based view (CBV) which connects the idea of MBV and RBV.⁴⁵

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

Figure 5: Resource-Conduct-Performance Paradigm⁴⁶

Grant classified the resources mentioned by Penrose in detail and distinguished between tangible, intangible and human resources.⁴⁷ Tangible assets are easy to determine because they are part of a company’s balance sheet. But as important as tangible resources a company should be aware of its intangible assets even though they are harder to define for instance, corporate culture, know-how in technology, image, etc. Human resources summarize all the human capital like know how, experiences and motivation of employees.⁴⁸

2.3.2 Core Competence Approach according to Prahalad and Hamel

Simon argues that nowadays there are many concepts to improve a company’s daily business like, for example lean management, kaizen or total quality management just to name a few. But often these instruments get implemented too late when companies already suffer from decline in sales due to missing investments in the past.⁴⁹ One approach for companies to gain competitive advantages and not to get into crisis situations was made by Prahalad and Hamel. They extended RBV and connected it with MBV and established their concept of core competence⁵⁰ so called CBV. The challenge for most companies is to identify their core competencies first and afterwards to enhance them. Core competencies can be seen as a pool of capabilities and technologies which represent single competencies. To build core competencies the single abilities needs to be combined to a new and unique core competency.⁵¹ With regard to Prahalad and Hamel, core competency is the root cause of competitive advantage.⁵² Companies can test their core competencies via the following three criteria: variety to access markets, perceived customer value and uniqueness to be protected from imitation.⁵³ The overall target of top management for a company is to create a “Portfolio of competencies, core products and businesses”⁵⁴ to secure survival and growth. To get this closer one example from Trent for the logistic sector is examined. If there was a survey about the core competency of an express logistic provider like for instance FedEx, probably most participants would answer a core competency to be overnight delivery. Even though the service is valued by customers and enables to enter new markets, it is not unique. While he refers to Prahalad and Hamel, Trent argues that core competencies shift over time from core competency to core capability.⁵⁵ Due to the fact that developments can happen all the time, so products or services get obsolete, the example about core competencies and FedEx also implicates the importance of innovation especially in the logistic market. Therefore BOS might be an alternative to established approaches.

3 Fundamentals of Blue Ocean Strategy

3.1 Framework

In 2005 W. Chan Kim and Renée Mauborgne, both professors of international management at Insitut Européen d´Administration des Affaires published their book “Blue Ocean Strategy - How to Create Uncontested Market Space and Make the Competition Irrelevant”⁵⁶. It is the result of eight management articles they published earlier from 1997 to 2004. In business administration theory the focus to formulate corporate strategies is generally based on competition analysis to gain competitive advantages.⁵⁷ That means to chase for growth via the comparison of competitors portfolios and offerings which bears the risk to copy each other. When products get too similar because companies try to gain market shares while they imitate market leaders, the only differentiation left for customers to decide is price itself. The pressure to reduce prices to meet customers demand is always present and characterizes competitive markets.⁵⁸ Primary the goal of BOS is not to gain competitive advantages to better compete with other companies but rather to create niches and non-existing market spaces because it is free from competition at all.⁵⁹

3.2 Red Ocean vs. Blue Ocean

According to Kim and Mauborgne, the business world is distinguished into red and blue oceans. The so called red oceans are all existing markets today and the kind of environment most of the companies act in. Because it is marked by bloody competition the colour red was chosen.⁶⁰ While having a look at established corporate strategies the focus is always set to competition in existing markets. Porter’s earlier mentioned generic strategies suggest companies to position themselves either on differentiation or on lower cost structure. As a result they try to beat the competition and red oceans occur. As market conditions are known in red ocean industries the only way left for market participants to survive and profitably grow is to beat other companies within this highly competitive ocean. Blue oceans instead represent unexplored and not yet defined markets and opportunities for companies. The idea of BOS recommends, “The only way to beat the competition is to stop trying to beat the competition”⁶¹, which is a contrary point of view in comparison to the previous referred established corporate strategies based on competition. Even though the expression of BOS is relatively modern, the urgency to create new markets to avoid shrinking market shares is long known in business theory.⁶² When companies can create new demand rather than satisfy existing demand they also create value for buyers and thus they will find themselves in an environment without competition.

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

Figure 6: Red Ocean versus Blue Ocean Strategy⁶³

3.3 Value Innovation

Blue Ocean Strategy is a result of years of research after they first published “Value Innovation - The Strategic Logic of High Growth” in Harvard Business Review in 1997.⁶⁴ The basis of BOS findings is based on a study of 150 strategic moves in 30 industries, researched between the years of 1880 an 2000.⁶⁵ Kim and Mauborgne realized successful companies to strategically act different from other red ocean companies. Value innovation is what they called those strategic moves to ignore competition and create new market places.⁶⁶ While Porter focuses on value-cost trade- off, companies which search for blue oceans need to find alternatives that represent both at the same time. Often innovation happens because of technological development or market pioneers, but when innovation lacks value for customers they are not willing to pay the companies intended price.⁶⁷ To create a real value innovation for customers it is necessary to connect value with utility, price and cost position.

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

Figure 7: Value Innovation: The Cornerstone of Blue Ocean Strategy⁶⁸

As seen in figure 7 the value innovation area matches the cost and value side of a product or service. Therefore it means to break the conventional borders given by an industry. When value for buyer’s perception can be raised through the creation of key commonalities while simultaneously cost structure is reduced then true value innovation is generated.⁶⁹ If companies can manage to create a new and non-existing demand they can benefit from higher margins as the price is based on the perceived value of customers neither on willingness of competitors to sell at lower margins.⁷⁰

3.4 Six Principles of Blue Ocean Strategy

Overall BOS is dominated by so called six principles. Four of these principles give guidance for the formulation and two principles assist for the execution process. Kim and Mauborgne identified risk factors which they tried to weaken by the help of there principles which are described in the figure below.

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

Figure 8: The Six Principles of Blue Ocean Strategy⁷¹

As seen by figure 8 Kim and Mauborgne described the risks as followed.⁷² First of all search risk can be attenuated by the reconstruction of market boundaries which means companies do not accept their industry to be static or given but instead of that they can shape their environmental conditions.⁷³ Planning risk can be weakened by putting the focus on the big pictures like environmental trends instead of just single numbers. BOS wants to support classical strategic planning process to create value innovation. Another formulation principle indicates to reach beyond existing demand and attenuate scale risk. The idea is to maximize a potential blue ocean instead of just exploiting it. As business models are essential for sustainable growth and survival in the long run BOS wants to assist to formulate the right strategic sequence. Even if companies can manage to formulate a valid BOS the execution process can be blocked by organizational hurdles which need to be overcome. In a final step BOS argues to build execution into strategy which is described as fair process to make sure companies staff to voluntary help within the implementation and execution process of a new BOS.

4 Formulation and Execution of Blue Ocean Strategy

4.1 Analytical Tools and Frameworks for Formulation

4.1.1 Strategy Canvas

To formulate a strategy, managers can use a broad variety of modern tools such as Boston Consulting Group’s business portfolio Matrix or the analysis of a company’s strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats, the so called SWOT analysis. But Koontz and Weihreich argue that these tools are not effective when formulating alternative strategies.⁷⁴ That further proves the demand and need of new concepts. Within development of a BOS concept, the formulation process can be supported by the help of their set of analytical tools. Nevertheless Kim and Mauborgne underline their tools not to be appropriate to completely replace analytics.⁷⁵ Instead it shall help managers to analyse the competitive status quo in an industry and reveal yet untouched market areas with potential for innovation and differentiation.⁷⁶ Even BOS cannot fully substitute risk minimisation but at least it can support it. Strategy canvas is a tool to visualise at what parameters market participants compete in an industry.⁷⁷ The idea is to specify all factors in products, service and delivery but the bases differ on the industry a company acts in.⁷⁸ There is no overall solution or guidance on which factors to choose but ideally it consists of the main features and aspects an industry relies on. As soon as factors are pointed out they are listed on the horizontal axis of strategy canvas. On the vertical axes it can be seen at which extent the current players in the market invest into the mentioned factors.⁷⁹ To make it less abstract there is a strategy canvas designed by Kim and Mauborgne from the U.S. Wine Industry in the late 1990s. The result of the derived graphic is a so called “value curve”⁸⁰ which determines “[…] a company’s relative performance across its industry’s factors of competition”⁸¹.

¹ Cp. Peng, M. (2011), p. 145.

² Cp. Manner-Romberg, H., Symanczyk, W., Miller J. (2012), p. 4.

³ Cp. Eurotransport.de, (2012)

⁴ Cp. Verdi.de, (2012)

⁵ Cp. Prasad, K. (2009), p. 1.

⁶ Cp. Mintzberg, H. (2003), p. 4.

⁷ Cp. Chandler, A. (1962), p. 13.

⁸ Cp. Ansoff, H. (1987), p. 15.

⁹ Cp. Henderson, B. (2000), p. 20.

¹⁰ Cp. Prasad, K. (2009), p. 54.

¹¹ Cp. David, F. (2001), p. 56.

¹² Cp. David, F. (2001), p. 9.

¹³ Figure taken from Plunkett, R. (2011), p. 110.

¹⁴ Cp. Henderson, B. (2000), p. 20.

¹⁵ Cp. Thompson, J., Martin, F. (2010), p. 502.

¹⁶ Cp. Hungenberg, H., Wulf, T. (2011), p. 61.

¹⁷ Cp. Kolbe, C. (1991), p. 11 ff.

¹⁸ Cp. Figure 1

¹⁹ Cp. De Wit, B., Meyer, R. (2010), p. 124.

²⁰ Cp. Porter, M. (1981), p. 611.

²¹ Cp. Thiele, M. (1997), p. 27.

²² Cp. Hill, C., Jones, G. (2010a), p. 46.

²³ Cp. Porter, M. (1980), p. 19.

²⁴ Porter, M. (1980), p. 4.

²⁵ Cp. Hoskisson, R. (2008), p. 83.

²⁶ Cp. Porter, M. (2008), p. 17.

²⁷ Cp. Bamford, C., West, P. (2010), p. 103.

²⁸ Cp. Porter, M. (1980), p. 7.

²⁹ Cp. Peng, M. (2009), p. 41.

³⁰ Cp. Hill, C., Jones, G. (2010b), p. 61.

³¹ Cp. Porter, M. (1980), p. 29.

³² Cp. Porter, M. (1980), p. 24.

³³ Cp. Peng, M. (2009), p. 42.

³⁴ Cp. Runia, P.(2011), p. 131f.

³⁵ Cp. Cp. Porter, M. (1980), p. 35.

³⁶ Cp. Porter, M. (1980), p. 39.

³⁷ Cp. Porter, M. (2008), p. 71.

³⁸ Cp. Runia, P. (2011), p. 132.

³⁹ Cp. Drescher, W. (2005), p. 175.

⁴⁰ Cp. Porter, M. (1980), p. 38.

⁴¹ Cp. Figure 4

⁴² Porter, M. (1980), p . 40.

⁴³ Cp. De Wit, B., Meyer, R. (2010), p. 127.

⁴⁴ Cp. Bea, F., Haas, J. (2000), p. 28.

⁴⁵ Cp. Hinterhuber, H. et al. (2003), p. 186f.

⁴⁶ Cp. Cp. Voigt, K. (2008), p. 265.

⁴⁷ Cp. Bea, F., Haas, J. (2000), p. 29.

⁴⁸ Cp. Bea, F., Haas, J. (2000), p. 29.

⁴⁹ Cp. Simon, W. (2008), p. 261.

⁵⁰ Cp. Prahalad, C.K., Hamel, G. (1990), p. 79-91.

⁵¹ Cp. Becker, J., et al. (2003), p. 88.

⁵² Cp. Prahalad, C.K., Hamel, G. (1990), p. 81.

⁵³ Cp. Prahalad, C.K., Hamel, G. (1990), p. 83f.

⁵⁴ Prahalad, C.K., Hamel, G. (1990), p. 86.

⁵⁵ Cp. Trent, R. (2007), p. 155.

⁵⁶ Kim, C., Mauborgne, R. (2005)

⁵⁷ Cp. Thompson, J., Martin, F. (2010), p. 159.

⁵⁸ Cp. Meyer, P. (2002), p. 5.

⁵⁹ Cp. Lowe, K. (2009), p. 15.

⁶⁰ Cp. Kim, C., Mauborgne, R. (2004), p. 3.

⁶¹ Kim, C., Mauborgne, R. (2005), p. 4.

⁶² Cp. Meyer,P. (2002), p. 3f.

⁶³ Kim, C., Mauborgne, R. (2004), p. 5.

⁶⁴ Kim, C., Mauborgne, R. (1997)

⁶⁵ Cp. Kim, C., Mauborgne, R. (2004), p. 2.

⁶⁶ Cp. Kim, C., Mauborgne, R. (1997), p. 106.

⁶⁷ Cp. Hollensen, S. (2007), p. 116.

⁶⁸ Kim, C., Mauborgne, R. (2004), p. 7.

⁶⁹ Cp. Kim, C., Mauborgne, R. (1997), p. 106.

⁷⁰ Cp. Meyer, P. (2002), p. 5f.

⁷¹ Kim, C., Mauborgne, R. (2005), p. 21.

⁷² Cp. Kim, C., Mauborgne, R. (2005), p. 19-22.

⁷³ Cp. Kim, C., Mauborgne, R. (1997), p. 106.

⁷⁴ Cp. Koontz, H., Weihrich, H. (2010), p. 112.

⁷⁵ Cp. Kim, C., Mauborgne, R. (2005), p. 23.

⁷⁶ Cp. Kotler, P., Pfoertsch, W. (2010), p. 95.

⁷⁷ Cp. Ference, T., Thurman, P. (2009), p. 174.

⁷⁸ Cp. Koontz, H., Weihrich, H. (2010), p. 116.

⁷⁹ Cp. Ference, T., Thurman, P. (2009), p. 174.

⁸⁰ Cp. Kim, C., Mauborgne, R. (2005), p. 26.

⁸¹ Kim, C., Mauborgne, R. (2005), p. 27.