Starbucks External Environment

Starbucks External EnvironmentThis report is prepared for Starbucks hot chocolate Company Starbucks by a Specialist Marketing Consultant, to analyse the strategical position for Starbucks in the Specialty Coffee Indus accent. It volunteers a summary of all the major findings and, explores various strategic options and recommendations for Starbucks in cabaret to increase and maintain its competitive advantage within the application.Starbucks is a global leading brand, well k right awayn for its specialization drinking chocolate. The umber house does non yet sell high-quality deep browns, but besides Italian style beverages, cold beverages, complimentary food items, premium teas and coffee-related accessories. It has further retained its competitive advantage by selling packaged coffees and teas, ready-to-drink beverages, ice creams and many approximately otherwise products in other sell stores such(prenominal) as super commercialises through licensing relationships.Key FindingsStarbucks is facing various issues, nearly of which includeMaintaining the Starbucks Experience for clients and not being seen as just a money making machineStore ExpansionCompetition from fast-food irons and other specialty coffee retailersGenerating more hireLowering input costsKey RecommendationsBased on the strategic findings, the report outlined several recommended strategic options, the mains ones of which areTo improve the subliminal and express aura of Starbucks by supporting more good causes and paying its proper taxes.To increase revenue at trim back costs, Starbucks must try and search for more licensing relationships and expose the brand further.Existing stores could attract more customers, particularly aft(prenominal) the morning peak times by offering non-coffee beverage options or products for specific groups such as retired people.The recommended policies will help to enhance and strengthen Starbucks market share in the specialty coffee patience.Backg round Information on Starbucks Coffee Company (Starbucks)Starbucks was incorporated in the year 1971 by its founding directors Jerry Baldwin, Zev Siegl and Gordon Bowker. The Company was set up to operate as a roaster and retailer of whole bean and ground coffee, tea and spices together with coffee making equipment in Pike Place Market in Seattle, cap (Starbucks 2013b).In the year 1987, the original protesters sold the Starbucks chain to former employee Howard Schultz, who is now the current Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of Starbucks. Schultz re-branded his already existin II Giornale Coffee outlets as Starbucks and quickly began to expand (Grant 2010) as he believed thatFrom the beginning, Starbucks set out to be a distinguishable kind of company. One that not only celebrated coffee and the rich tradition, but that also brought a feeling of connection (Starbucks 2013a).Starbucks has truly essential a unique brand experience, one which is the most respected and acknowledge aro und the world (Starbucks Annual Report 2012). Today, it is known to be one of the gargantuanst and best established American global coffeehouse chains (Grant 2010). It has grown to turn out over 20,800 stores in over 60 countries, with the United States having the highest number of stores, followed by Canada. The UK has approximately 806 stores. However, countries like India, the second most populous country in the world, has only circa 8 stores (Loxcel Starbucks 2013).Critical Evaluation of the door guard Five Forces ConceptAll organisations need to understand the dynamics of their industries and markets in order to compete effectively and intensively in the market place.An American management writer Michael Porter came up with a framework called Porters Five Forces (Porter 2008). The framework abstract the attractiveness of an organisation and or/industry structure, determines the main impertinent competitive threats, and assesses the extent to which the five forces are releva nt to the organisation and/or industry (Hollensen 2003Purcell 2013).The five fundamental competitive forces include (1) Rivalry, (2) Buyer Power, (3) Threat of Entry, (4) Supplier Power and (5) Threat of Substitutes (Porter 2008) (Figure1 Porters Five Forces modeling). These five forces, as explained above, aid an organisation to understand two strengthsThe current competitive built in bed and,The strength of a position it would like to move into (Purcell 2013).Michael Porter simplified the micro-economic theory into the above five major influences. Each of these influences take into account demand and supply, corresponding products as well as substitutes, the relationship between volume and production and the cost of production, and the structure of the market such as oligopoly, monopoly etc. (Grundy 2006Porter 2008).Apart from that, the value of information abstracted from the Framework analysis, assists to fuel three aspects of corporate planningStatistical analysisThe attract iveness and profitability of an organisation/industry can be fixed by victimisation Porters Five Force Analysis, thereof supporting decision making on whether to enter/exit from an industry or market segment (Porter 2008).Furthermore, the framework considers and takes into account the impact of competitive forces on the organization (RAPIDBI 2012) itself versus impacts on its competitors (Ketels 2006). Due to the availability of unalike resources and levels of competences, the competitors may agree different reactions when there is a change in competitive forces, hence influencing the structure of the whole industry (Grundy 2006Ketels 2006).Dynamical AnalysisA combination of two Porters Five Force Analysis and a PEST- Analysis (Political, Economical, Social, Technological), will disclose clues on how attractive the organisation/industry will be in the emerging (Porter 2008). This is because a change in Political, Economical, Socio-demographical and Technological aspects of or ganisations/industry can be influential on the five competitive forces and, hence will impact on the industry structure (Karagiannopoulos et al. 2005).Analysis of OptionsImprovement of an organisations own competitive position can be influenced by having some knowledge on both the compass stay of intensity and power of competitive forces (Recklies 2001). A upstart strategic direction can be derived from this such as new positioning in the market and differentiation for competitive products (Porter 2008).Accordingly, Porters Five Force Framework allows an organization to analyse the market structure and competitive situation in a more magisterial and structured way (Recklies 2001). Once all relevant forces for that particular market are identified and analyzed, managers can find options that influence these forces, subject to the organizations interest (Grundy 2006Ketels 2006Recklies 2001). juvenile research has shown that Porters Five Force Framework has got both strengths and w eaknesses when used in todays dynamic environment, the main weakness highlighted has been the historic nature of its development (Grundy 2006). Cyclical proceeds in the 80s showed that the global economy had been fairly stable and predictable, compared to the current economy (Grundy 2006).Several limitations to the Porters Five Force Framework have been shown asFrom the economic point of view, the framework is under the presumptuousness that the market is perfect (Rivard et al. 2006). As a result, the framework will not be able to deliver meaningful insights on highly regulated industries (Grundy 2006)) .The applicability of the framework is more towards the analysis of simple market structures, rather than those which are in a much more hard industry (Grant 2010). As a result, the framework is limited to focusing on particular segments of such industries. This imposes an increased risk in omitting important elements (Grant 2010) .The framework assumption on having moderate stati c market structures makes it a non suitable framework for todays dynamic markets. caper models, entry barriers and relationships may change along the supply chain within a snapshot due to technological breakthroughs and dynamic market entrants (Karagiannopoulos et al. 2005). As a result, the framework could be a preferred model to be used at a later stage for analyzing new situations however, it is limited to and perhaps not ideal to a certain extent to provide burden actions (Rivard et al. 2006) .Porters Framework is based around the idea of competition, hence the name competitive forces. The assumption made by the framework is that a company will try to attain competitive advantage over the various players in the markets together with suppliers or customers (Aktouf et al. 2005). As a result of this, the framework only focuses on such aspect of strategy rather than taking into consideration the availability of strategic alliances, virtual enterprise- networks or others (Aktouf e t al. 2005).Overall, Porters Five Forces Framework has limitations because it does not take into consideration new business models and the dynamics of the market place (Recklies 2001).This report will now apply the Porters Five Force Framework to Starbucks Coffee Company (Starbucks) which is a spectacular specialty coffee tell on popular in most western countries such as the United States of America, United Kingdom and many others.Critical Analysis of Starbucks External EnvironmentWithin the rapidly changing global picture, companies and consumers are increasingly affected by global forces, represented as non-controllable. These forces are external environmental influences which must be monitored and responded to, on an ongoing basis by marketers, as they will lead to new opportunities and threats (Kotler 2007).An external environmental analysis, using the macro-economic ruminator model was carried out for Starbucks and has been attached at Appendix 2 of this report.It can be see n from the analysis at Appendix 2 that there is currently a negative imbalance in Starbucks external influence matrix. This is because whilst the sociologic factors are favourable, whilst other factors such as Political, Economic and Legal show substantial threats.However, Starbucks has got some strengths that over-come some of these non-controllable influences from the external environment. It has built in flexibility to change, for example, agreeing to pay extra corporation tax in the UK, for the next two years (BBC News bloodline 2013), or relating to the closure of non-profit making stores, and lastly it has developed high powered management decision making process which ensures that is quick at exploiting opportunities (Patton 2012).Critical Analysis of Starbucks business EnvironmentMichael Porter (1985) posits that, in an attempt to find effective sources of competitive advantage, a thorough research should be conducted on the structure of the industry. In this case, an anal ysis of the particularity coffee industry can help to establish the strategic position Starbucks oc formies and wishes to occupy. Porters Five Forces model is a useful tool in this regard. It shows how fundamental elements have shaped the competition in the industry (Hill and Jones 2009).Buyer powerIn the specialty coffee industry today, consumers have wide access to different products at different prices with offend quality services (Hunt et al. 2011). This practically means that individuals have the choice to easily switch from product to product, whichever is the preferred one. This is where Starbucks has an advantage it decides on the prices of the drinks offered to its consumers, by taking into consideration the price-elasticity which is strongly influenced by loyalty to its brand and also current prices at rival stores (Grant 2010).Since Starbucks is known to be an up-market coffee shop with high quality, based on perception and offering vertically differentiated products it is very likely for it to be able to sell its products at high prices, hence leaving no room for price-negotiation with its customers (Grant 2010).Supplier powerIn 2008, Starbucks purchased its input goods from suppliers at a market price which was 23 per cent lower than it is now (Corporation, 2008) It also takes advantage of its size and benefits from economies of scale, however, this does not help Starbucks to increase its number of suppliers due to the circumstances within Starbucks own marketplace (Grant 2010). Prices are usually determined based on the demand and supply ratio, hence, with an increased level of competition (Kotler 2007), substitute suppliers are always available if Starbucks wishes to purchase at a different price point. Despite all the supplier conditions, Starbucks holds a better relationship status with its suppliers than most of its competitors (Starbucks, 2013).Threat of substitutesProduct-for-product analysis together with an analysis of generic surrog ate is an important area to consider for Starbucks, since 14% of coffee drinkers have a favourable opinion for them (Rasmussen Reports 2011).The vast variety of the availability of different beverages such as soda, energy drinks, juices or water, in comparison to coffee, must be taken into consideration by Starbucks. However, this is not of a huge concern to Starbucks since it sells a large selection of these beverages within its stores, the biggest one being tea, a direct substitute to coffee. Starbucks has taken the initiative to sell this direct substitute product under its own Tazo tea leaf brand (Starbucks 2013).There is quite a concern when the threat of customers substituting away from Starbucks and going for direct competitors such as Caf Nero and Costa Coffee (for example in the UK) is considered. These direct competitors are hard to differentiate because they also truly pride themselves on customer services and on the quality of their speciality drinks. Large food chain c ompetitors such as McDonalds are usually known as having a negative undertone of being cheap, often pliable on the quality of coffee. This has no effect on Starbucks targeted customer base (Grant 2010).Threat of entryThe barriers to entry in the specialty coffee market, such as the one Starbucks operates in have increased. This has reduced the probable threat of new entrants (Patton 2012).The capital requirement for handsome coffee shops in this industry is relatively small as the shops require a small amount of floor space and not a high amount of applied science is used, which is normally the biggest start-up cost. As a result the potential for more of these small coffee shops to enter the industry is still present (Articlesbase 2011).Industry RivalryMcDonalds and other fast food chains are key competitors which are diversifying their beverage menu. The direct competitors like Costa Coffee and Caf Nero compete on a much more of a pair with Starbucks compared to the fast food chains, as they attract the same consumer base and offer similar products as in the way Starbucks does.Starbucks differentiates itself from other coffeehouses as it reaps high margins from its specialty drinks. This is because it takes advantage of economies of scale and has a different cost structure in contrast with other competitors in the market. They pay less for the products bought in bulk, such as dairy goods, syrups, paper goods etc (Starbucks 10K 2010).Strategic RecommendationWhether Starbucks coffee has the actual quality to attract customers or whether there is just a perception of it being better than that of competitors has been the subject of much discussion on public media through many recent surveys and reviews. Irrespective of that, some possible strategies to be considered by Starbucks in order to maintain its market position are as followsStrategy to renew the Starbucks brand name.To maintain a strong brand name, Starbucks will have to hold back people that the ir coffee is better than all other beverages, be it McDonalds coffee or Costa Coffee by introducing a more aggressive advertise campaign in order to educate and acquaint customers about the uniqueness that Starbucks quality offers as well as by diversifying advertising channels using internet, visual media etc instead of depending on employee-customer liaison (Starbucks, 2013)Product DifferentiationProduct differentiation is very vital in order to develop new flavour, blends and also roast fusions (Ross Gaddis, 2013) Starbucks should continue its coffee development program efforts through extensive research. This should continue to be done by providing free samples, at first, leading to debut the new product into all stores depending on what response it gets from the samples distributed (Porter, 2008)Due to the recess, consumers try to cut their spending and are less likely to buy a cup of coffee for 2.50, and therefore, differentiation can be a useful tool to overcome economic downturns (Moon, 2010) Starbucks can promote new cost efficient products by selling them at lower prices, hence not affecting its luxury-premium status in the market. This strategy can help Starbucks retain its customers as well as intensify their brand name.Privilege Card and Rewards ProgramStarbucks Card program for consumers to reload credit online has been implemented in order to not only provide customers with rewards on online registering but also benefiting them with complementary beverages after a certain number of purchases, free refills as well as free syrup options (Starbucks, 2013). However, other competitors also have similar strategies for consumers and this leads Starbucks to offer distinct rewards in order to deliver incentives for coffee consumers as compared to its rivals. For instance, Starbucks could cooperate with airline companies and various large retail businesses so as to combine their rewards program with Starbucks (Hill Jones, 2010)Focus on the coffeeStar bucks should also consider cost reduction as well as potential growth strategies especially at the time of economic downturn. For example, Starbucks has begun to invest in new businesses other than coffee, such as films, music and books (Starbucks, 2013) This has led Starbucks to incurring higher costs and lower profit margins but this can be prevented by focusing on different marketing techniques to reach a wider audience. In these recessionary times, involving itself in fewer businesses can help Starbucks cut down costs and more resources can be utilised to improve their core product, which is coffee (Moon, 2010) in effect(p) Store Expansion DecisionThe launch of more stores has had to be reduced or halted completely in order for Starbucks to survive at the time recession in the United States. In the year 2007, Starbucks opened about 1700 stores today it has around 15000 stores and still aims to build the number of stores up to 40000 in the foreseeable in store(predicate) (Corpor ation, 2008) Taking into account its overall financial performance as well as the downfall in the economy, it is best if Starbucks focuses on renewing its brand and customer base rather than opening stores at present (Omer, 2008).The Starbucks FeelPeople enter a Starbucks store not just for a cup of coffee but also for the relaxed environment and the opportunity to de-stress for a while. The initiative to write customers names on their cups adds to this club atmosphere. This Starbucks feel needs to be further developed and sold to the customers.SECTION 6ReferencesAktouf, O., Chenoufi, M., Holford, W.D. 2005. The False Expectations of Michael Porters Strategic Management Framework. Problems Perspectives in Management (4) 181 available from http//connection.ebscohost.com/c/articles/19299836/false-expectations-michael-porters-strategic-management-frameworkArticlesbase 2011. The Initial Capital Investment in jump a Coffee Shop Business. Articlesbase available from http//www.articlesb ase.com/entrepreneurship-articles/the-initial-capital-investment-in-starting-a-coffee-shop-business-5185126.html Accessed 18 April 2013.Business, N., 2011. www.bbc.co.uk. Online Available at http//www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-20573208 Accessed March 2013.BBC News Business 2013. Starbucks rejects tax row threat after Cameron Speech. BBC News Business available from http//www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-21219823 Accessed 12 April 2013.Corporation, S., 2008. www.nytimes.com. Online Available at http//topics.nytimes.com/top/news/business/companies/starbucks_corporation/index.html Accessed 2013.Grant, R.M. 2010. Contemporary Strategy Analysis Text scarce John Wiley Sons.Grundy, T. 2006. Rethinking and reinventing Michael Porters five forces model. Strategic Change, 15, (5) 213-229 available from http//dx.doi.org/10.1002/jsc.764Hill, C. Jones, G., 2010. Strategic Management Theory. USA South-Western Cencage Learning.Hill, C. Jones, G.R. 2009. Strategic Management An Integrated Approach Th eory South-Western/Cengage Learning.Hollensen, S. 2003. Marketing management a relationship approach Financial Times/Prentice Hall.Hunt, K.A., Durango, C.O., Fate, J. 2011. Cultural and Social Influences on the Perception of Beauty A Case Analysis of the Cosmetics Industry. Journal of Business CaseKaragiannopoulos, G.D., Georgopoulos, N., Nikolopoulos, K. 2005. Fathoming Porters five forces model in the internet era. info, 7, (6) 66-76 available from http//dx.doi.org/10.1108/14636690510628328Ketels, C.H.M. 2006. Michael Porter Competitiveness FrameworkRecent Learnings and New Research Priorities. Journal of Industry, Competition Trade, 6, (2) 115-136 available from http//search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=trueAuthType=athens,cookie,ip,urldb=bthAN=22555133site=ehost-liveKotler, P. 2007. Framework For Marketing Management, 3/E Pearson Education.Moon, H.-C., 2010. Porters Generic Strategies. In Global Business Strategy. Singapore World Scientific Publisher Limited, pp. 10-20.Ome r, 2008. Porters Generic Model. Porters Model of Generic Competetive Strategies, 43(3), pp. 55-64.Patton, L. 2012. Starbucks go After Cutting Forecast Below Estimate. Bloomberg Businessweek available from http//www.businessweek.com/news/2012-07-26/starbucks-falls-after-cutting-fourth-quarter-profit-forec Accessed 15 April 2013.Porter, M., 2008. Competitive Strategy. 2nd ed. New York The Free Press.Porter, M.E. 2008. THE FIVE COMPETITIVE FORCES THAT SHAPE STRATEGY. Harvard Business Review, 86, (1) 78-93 available from http//search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=trueAuthType=athens,cookie,ip,urldb=bthAN=28000138site=ehost-live Accessed 25 March 2013.Purcell, S. 2013. The Strategic Planning Process Part 1. Student Accountant Technical available from http//www.accaglobal.com/en/student/qualification-resources/acca-qualification/acca-exams/p3-exams/exams-p33.html Accessed 31 March 2013.RAPIDBI 2012. Porters Five Forces for competitor anaysis and advantage. Porters Five Forces Competi tor Analysis available from http//rapidbi.com/porterfiveforces/ Accessed 24 April 2013.Rasmussen Reports 2011. Coffee Drinkers Buy Starbucks More But Like Dunkin Better. Rasmussen Reports available from http//www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/ lifestyle/general_lifestyle/february_2011/coffee_drinkers_buy_starbucks_more_but_like_dunkin_better Accessed 16 April 2013.Recklies, D. 2001. A Critique of the Critique of Porter. Porters Five Forces available from http//www.themanager.org/Models/P5F_2.htm Accessed 21 April 2013.Rivard, S., Raymond, L., Verreault, D. 2006. Resource-based view and competitive strategy an integrated model of the contribution of information technology to firm performance. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 15, (1) 29-50 available from http//dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jsis.2005.06.003Ross, R. Gaddis, D., 2013. Product Differentiation. Strategic Management Journal , 34(5), pp. 509-532.Starbucks, 2013. www.starbucks.co.uk. Online Available at http//star bucks.co.uk/ Accessed April 2013.Starbucks 2013. Starbucks Tea. Starbucks Corporation available from http//www.starbucksstore.co.uk/tea/tea,en_GB,sc.html?cm_mmc=Google+UK-_-Brand-+Starbucks+Tea+(UK+Lang)+(Exact)-_-Starbucks+General-_-Starbucks+Generalgclid=CPbS6vPW17YCFXIPtAodmVgAgQ Accessed 18 April 2013.Starbucks 10K 2010. Starbucks Annual Report. Starbucks Corporation available from http//www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/829224/000119312510266333/d10k.htm Accessed 19 April 2013.The Boston humankind 2008. Starbucks testing sales of 8-oz. cup of coffee for $1. The Boston Globe available from http//www.boston.com/business/articles/2008/01/24/starbucks_testing_sales_of_8_oz_cup_of_coffee_for_1/ Accessed 18 April 2013.The New York Times 2008. Starbucks Plans Return to Its Roots. The New York Times available from http//www.nytimes.com/2008/03/20/business/20sbux.html?scp=3sq=starbucksst=nyt_r=0 Accessed 19 April 2013.