Masters Programmes: Assignment Cover Sheet
Masters Programmes: Assignment Cover Sheet
Masters Programmes: Assignment Cover Sheet
Submitted by:
Number of Pages: 25
“I declare that this work is entirely my own in accordance with the University's Regulation 11
and the WBS guidelines on plagiarism and collusion. All external references and sources are
clearly acknowledged and identified within the contents.
No substantial part(s) of the work submitted here has also been submitted by me in other
assessments for accredited courses of study, and I acknowledge that if this has been done it
may result in me being reported for self-plagiarism and an appropriate reduction in marks
may be made when marking this piece of work.”
IB9FB0 Business in Practice
Introduction
GD-Motors is a global automobile-manufacturer operating in the U.S., Europe, and China,
producing conventional-cars with combustion-engines. GD-Motors’ vision is to become a
sustainable-provider for customers through innovation, and its objective to create a better
world through sustainability. The automobile-industry is undergoing a dramatic shift towards
sustainable-mobility and electrification. Governments are promoting electric-cars through
financial-incentives and discouraging conventional-cars using carbon-emissions regulations.
This firm-analysis critically scrutinizes the performance of GD-Motors using academic theories
and frameworks to explain its decisions. It further uses real-world examples to support and
contrast this analysis. The author worked as the innovation-director in GD-Motors, as a part
of the executive-team of directors. This firm-analysis evaluates GD-Motors’ three functions
across different chapters: Strategy, Innovation, and Marketing, to explain the what, how, and
why of decisions taken to increase the value-added by the company. These three functions
are analyzed due to their strong individual-connections and their holistic-influence on the
company’s performance. The firm-analysis also helped to understand the challenges of
incorporating contrasting functional needs in GD-Motors.
Overall, this firm-analysis argues that firms that shape corporate-strategy around their core-
competencies and competitive-advantages achieve success by harmonizing their activities
(internal-environment). It also posits that successful firms leverage their business-situations
to their advantage, taking opportunities, and calculated-risks (external-environment). As the
three functions have interdependencies and intertwining of decisions, this firm-analysis uses
many concepts and explanations that repeatedly appear in multiple-chapters (highlighted at
Page 1 of 25
IB9FB0 Business in Practice
Strategy
This chapter uses the structure in Table.1 to critically-analyze the strategy-creation process
used to formulate GD-Motors’ corporate-strategy. GD-Motors used the ESCO-framework
theorized by Heracleous et al. (2009) as the foundation for this process. ESCO helped the
company evaluate its strategic-fit to the environment, strategy, competencies, and
organization to develop its corporate-strategy (Paroutis et al., 2016).
Page 2 of 25
IB9FB0 Business in Practice
The short-term objective involved gradually replacing the existing conventional-cars with
hybrid-cars. This action responded to the threat of existing-cars straining available resources,
reducing CO2 penalties, and shifting towards the long-term objective of zero-emissions. This
strategy resulted in higher-revenues and a greater investment-budget to invest in technologies
like in-house battery-factories for future electric-cars, aligning with GD-Motors’ strategic-
orientation (explored in PESTEL-analysis). Its long-term goal was zero-emissions and being
a market-innovator via electric-cars and capture the luxury-entry segment (reasoning
explained in Marketing-chapter). Tesla’s strategy of innovation in electric-cars and bringing
radical-technologies to mainstream markets is a good illustration of GD-Motors’ strategies
(Furr and Dyer, 2020).
Page 3 of 25
IB9FB0 Business in Practice
Page 4 of 25
IB9FB0 Business in Practice
Regarding the dramatic-shift in GD-Motors’ strategies after launching electric-cars, Miller and
Friesen’s (1984) quantum theory of strategic-change explains this trend. They postulate how
organizations follow a two-pronged behavior contingent on context: a specified-strategy based
on stability (continuous improvement), and rapid responses to environmental-shifts (strategic
revolution) (Mintzberg, 1987). Applying this to GD-Motors, the company followed a steady
hybridization-strategy that balanced its product-fleet between conventional-cars and CO2
penalties. As the environment radically shifted to sustainability (through changing consumer-
preferences and regulations), GD-Motors transformed its established plans (hybrid-cars with
price-premium differentiation) to attain a new steady-state (electric-cars with price-premium
differentiation). This process created a new strategic-orientation for GD-Motors with unique
plans, designs, and culture, as predicted by Broekstra (1991) and Mintzberg (1987).
The quantum theory is evident in the case of Volkswagen (1950-1970), where it neglected
radical market-shifts, clinging to a rigid strategy and a bureaucratic-structure. Between 1968-
1971, the strategic revolution posited by the theory transformed Volkswagen, resulting in a
new strategic-orientation led by a new leader (Mintzberg, 1987; Rieger, 2010), galvanizing
innovation and making it the market-leader. The quantum theory also explains how GD-
Motors’ innovative strategies were initially restrained as they were unsuitable for its early
hybridization-strategy. After the strategic revolution of launching electric-cars, these strategies
became suitable and alleviated the need to craft new strategies or reproduce its competitors’
tactics (Miller and Friesen, 1984; Mintzberg, 1987).
Page 5 of 25
IB9FB0 Business in Practice
Page 6 of 25
IB9FB0 Business in Practice
Innovation
What follows is an account of GD-Motors’ innovation-function involving: launching products
with the right features to maximize return-on-investment, investing in new mobility-
technologies, and capitalizing innovation-opportunities to enhance product-offerings. As
discussed in the Strategy-chapter, innovation drives GD-Motors’ corporate-strategy. Likewise,
its three competitive-advantages: sustainability, customer-convenience, and large-scale lean-
manufacturing are driven by its fourth: innovation-capital (explored below). Similarly, GD-
Motors’ innovation-capital increases the perceived-value of its products and justifies the price-
premium, aligning to the competitive-strategy of differentiation.
With the long-term objective of 100% electric-car fleet, GD-Motors aimed to build value. The
company recognized the future of mobility is electric-cars (SWOT-analysis). Innovation is
driven by the capacity to identify connections and opportunities to leverage them (Tidd and
Bessant, 2013). Therefore, GD-Motors started early with large-investments in electrification,
alongwith autonomous- and connectivity-technologies to complement them. This fundamental
industry-shift offered high-growth potential and the prospect of capturing the new market, with
the trade-off of a delayed-breakeven (Barnes, 2020). The delayed-breakeven is evident when
examining the value-added KPI (Figure.3 above) indicating a dramatic decline of 66.14%
between Q5 ($1344.5m) and Q13 ($455.2m). The aforementioned large-investments in
innovative-technologies explain this trend, resulting in tighter-liquidity and higher capital-costs.
Page 7 of 25
IB9FB0 Business in Practice
Starting with Q14 ($612.4m), the value-added KPI shows a phenomenal growth of 480% to
Q28 ($2640.5m), driven by the high-growth potential of innovation.
GD-Motors further paired Open Innovation with Innovation-funnels and stage-gate processes
(Figure.4 below) to filter ideas, assess alternative innovation-pathways, and develop unique
products (Wang, 2017). Using this process, GD-Motors firstly broadened the funnel’s opening
(seeking ideas from all directors and real-world cases), that helped enhance product-ideas.
Secondly, the company tightened the funnel’s neck by assessing the viability of its product-
ideas on strategic-fit and return-on-investment (matching against its competitive-advantages
and activities using activity-systems mapping: Figure.2, p.6). Thirdly, it confirmed through
data-analysis, that these products match expectations post-launch. This is illustrated by GD-
Motors’ high-end luxury electric-car, a product-idea generated through innovation-funnels and
stage-gate processes, which became the most successful product in the market. In contrast,
many critics argue this process is bureaucratic, promotes groupthink, and assumes ideas are
universally-applicable (see Bertoluci et al., 2013; Nichols, 2007). A clear example of these
weaknesses is the failure of GD-Motors’ micro electric-car (detailed case-study later in this
chapter), developed through innovation-funnels. Critically-examining the reasons reveal the
executive-team’s groupthink during the idea-generation and stage-gate processes, thus failing
to recognize the drawbacks of the product-idea. The performance of both these products is
critically-evaluated below.
Page 8 of 25
IB9FB0 Business in Practice
Page 9 of 25
IB9FB0 Business in Practice
At the same time, GD-Motors also provided a cheaper micro electric-car option ($20k-$27k)
to increase its brand-accessibility to a wider-range of consumers. This strategy emulates real-
world examples of luxury-entry brands offering a cheaper entry-level option as a gateway to
their higher-priced models. A classic example is the Audi A1 starting at an accessible price of
$27k, appealing to young affluent customers (Audi, 2020). As appealing to millennials is a key-
strength of GD-Motors’ strategic-positioning, its micro electric-car aimed at sustainable urban-
mobility and customer-convenience, aligning to its competitive-advantages (activity-systems
map: Figure.2, p.6). Another example closer to GD-Motors’ product-strategy is Tesla’s Model-
3, its entry-level electric-car at $35k with autonomous- and connectivity-technologies. Since
Model-3’s 2017-launch, its price-accessibility made it the highest-sold electric-car in history
and exponentially increase Tesla’s earnings and share-price (WSJ, 2020).
However, GD-Motors’ micro electric-car failed to make an impact, capturing only a 1.7%
market-share. Critically-analyzing the product’s performance, the main reason for failure was
its poor autonomous- and connectivity-features alongwith short battery-range. The model’s
performance was in contrast to previously-mentioned products like Tesla Model-3 that offered
advanced technologies and long battery-range. The model’s failure is further explained by
Schneider and Hall (2011) with product-limbo, where a product’s differences and benefits are
inadequate to sway the buyers (analyzed in Marketing-chapter: marketing-mix). Product-limbo
is exemplified with their case of Coca-Cola C2 (halved calories and sugars) failing to
differentiate itself, in contrast to the distinctive Coca-Cola Zero (no calories and sugars) that
achieved great success. Another reason was also the product’s misalignment with GD-Motors’
strategic-positioning in the luxury-entry segment and its competitive-strategy of price-premium
differentiation. Launching the micro electric-car with poor autonomous- and connectivity-
features misaligned with the competitive-advantages of innovation-capital and consumer-
convenience (explored in Strategy-chapter), thus leading to negative-synergies with existing
activities that established GD-Motors’ inimitable strategic-positioning (Beer et al., 2005;
Heracleous and Werres, 2016). For the future, this firm-analysis suggests using independent
brands to launch cars outside the original brand’s target-market and strategic-positioning.
Toyota’s success with its luxury-brand Lexus illustrates this approach’s benefits (Kohli, 1997).
Page 10 of 25
IB9FB0 Business in Practice
Marketing
This chapter explores the marketing-function, involving marketing-strategies, product-
positioning, and other elements. Drucker (2011) argues how businesses only have two
fundamental functions: innovation (covered previously) and marketing. Drucker highlights
these functions as the sole-drivers for results, with marketing being the distinctive-aspect of
businesses. GD-Motors’ competitive-strategy was differentiation with a price-premium, and its
innovation created the perceived added-value adequate to sustain the products’ price-
premium. Hence, marketing provided the means to advertise GD-Motors’ products and how
they are different, positioning them as a sustainable mobility-option for customers.
Page 11 of 25
IB9FB0 Business in Practice
price (-5.1%), and “widened” the distribution by increased factory-capacity in Europe (through
Operations). As a result, the electric-SUV’s European market-share grew from 17.2% to
29.7% (Q23-Q28), generating $2.19 billion in revenue from the European-market. A real-world
example demonstrating the significance of consumer-insights is Toyota’s focus on harvesting
driving-patterns data through its investment in Grab (Reuters, 2018).
Purposeful-positioning. GD-Motors market-positioned itself through three key brand-
objectives suggested by De Swaan Arons et al. (2014). These are: functional-benefits
(customers buying its cars for mobility); emotional-benefits (its cars are status-symbols:
luxury-entry positioning; its customers perceived as innovation-adopters); and societal-
benefits (customers promoting sustainability using its electric-cars). Thus, GD-Motors’ vision
to become sustainable-mobility providers for customers using innovation improved its
marketing-strategy via a consistent message and identity (Brook, 2020; Holbrook et al., 2016).
Total-experience. Businesses are augmenting their product-values through personalized
customer-experiences created using the previously-mentioned big-data and insights (De
Swaan Arons et al., 2014). However, GD-Motors only partly adopted this through pricing-
adjustments across different markets, owing to a limited product-line being a trade-off in its
strategic-position (detailed in Strategy-chapter).
Continuing with marketing-mix and studying the case of GD-Motors’ convertible electric-car,
its features were designed aiming uniqueness relative to competition. GD-Motors’ product
offered a long battery-range compared to the short battery-range by the competitor-products.
Also, it offered Level-IV autonomous- and connectivity-technologies, in contrast to Level-I
technologies by the competitor-products. Using absolute marketing-mix, GD-Motors
concentrated its marketing-expenses during this car’s introduction- and growth-stages of the
product-lifecycle to create awareness and brand-loyalty. On marketing, emerging-brands like
Page 12 of 25
IB9FB0 Business in Practice
Hyundai spent 8.4% of its model-specific revenue, while established-brands like Ford spent
4.6% of its model-specific revenue in the U.S. (2018-19) (Ad Age, 2020). Hence, GD-Motors’
initial marketing-spend was 5-7% of the model-specific revenue, supported by an aggressive
TV- (+10.5%) and print-campaign (+7.5%) to build product-awareness. As the car moved to
its maturity- and decline-stages, the company reduced its marketing-spend (seen in Figure.5
below), as recommended by the product-lifecycle implications-framework: Table.6, p.19).
Page 13 of 25
IB9FB0 Business in Practice
Page 14 of 25
IB9FB0 Business in Practice
Thus far, the Marketing-chapter critically-analyzed how GD-Motors shaped its marketing-
strategy around its competitive-advantages, creating a differentiation-based marketing-mix
supported by 4Ps. GD-Motors also posed questions to define its marketing-objectives and
used “winning characteristics” to maximize its marketing-resources. GD-Motors also analyzed
its market-segmentation process and reasoning, aligning it with the company’s corporate-
strategy. This chapter completes a full-circle, leading to the Conclusion.
Conclusion
In conclusion, this firm-analysis critically-analyzed GD-Motors’ performance and its decision-
making using academic theories and frameworks. It structured this analysis across three
chapters, evaluating key functions: Strategy, Innovation, and Marketing. Real-world examples
of these functions helped ground the firm-analysis, and find the balance between theory and
practice. Studying these functions completes a full-circle: GD-Motors’ innovation underpinning
its strategy, and the company’s marketing actualizing its strategy. After extensive scrutiny, this
firm-analysis concludes that firms designing corporate-strategies around their core-
competencies and competitive-advantages achieve success by harmonizing their activities
(internal-environment). It also argues that successful firms turn business-situations to their
benefit by taking opportunities and calculated-risks (external-environment). Critically-
analyzing GD-Motors’ successes and failures in this firm-analysis led to these conclusions.
These three functions worked together to realize GD-Motors’ vision of becoming sustainable-
mobility providers for customers through innovation, and its objective to create a better world
through sustainability.
Page 15 of 25
IB9FB0 Business in Practice
Appendix
Page 16 of 25
IB9FB0 Business in Practice
Page 17 of 25
IB9FB0 Business in Practice
Car project offering $30 in incentives for per gram CO2 • Lithium-ion electric-battery costs decreased by 50%
below allowance). between 2016-2019 due to technological progress and
• The government is promoting electric-car infrastructure energy-efficiency (Bloomberg New Energy Finance,
through targeted schemes like the E-Mobility 2022 2019). As the battery comprises 25% of the total
project, investing $20 billion in charging stations across manufacturing costs for electric-cars (Renault, 2020), this
the country. trend results in lower component costs and higher profit-
• New tariffs are being imposed, predicted to increase the margins.
cost of raw materials, requiring re-evaluation of GD-
Motors’ sourcing and manufacturing processes.
• The trade war between the U.S. and China is hampering
manufacturing and exporting owing to increasing tariffs.
Social Technological
• The growing prevalence of carbon-neutral style of living • The industry shift towards electrification marks a
and sustainable energy choices provide GD-Motors an fundamental technological change in mobility. This
opportunity to market its electric-cars to new consumer- change provides GD-Motors the chance to leverage its
demographics (Schwanen et al., 2012). innovative capabilities and extend its basic productivity
• Consumer preferences for electric-cars and autonomous frontier (Porter, 1996).
technologies have increased exponentially (Deloitte, • Rapid changes in technologies present obsolescence
2020). risks in GD-Motors’ products (Burges, 2016).
• Car-sharing ideas are growing in popularity across every • Consumer preferences for autonomous and connectivity
consumer-demographic. Environmental concerns and technologies are increasing, and customers indicate
personal-budget savings are driving their demand (Bardhi willingness to pay a premium for them (Deloitte, 2020).
and Eckhardt, 2012). GD-Motors has identified this area • GD-Motors has opportunities to reduce manufacturing
as a future revenue-generator aligning with its products. costs through modular designs and automation in
• The growing disposable incomes in GD-Motor's core - production processes.
markets (U.S., Europe, and China) presents opportunities
to introduce more customers to the luxury-entry segment
(also through price-accessibility).
• An increasing number of consumers are seeking price-
accessibility in purchasing their next car (Bucklin et al.,
2008). So, by offering the option to lease (36-months at
3.49% pa), GD-Motors provides easy convenience for
customers to upgrade to the luxury-entry car segment and
increase sales.
Environmental Legal
• The carbon emissions regulations are getting stringent, • As automotive connectivity technologies advance, data
specifying the CO2 allowance per car sold with a financial security and privacy become a key element. Legislation
penalty for exceeding them. There is also speculation of a on the data-sharing framework in automobiles is
complete prohibition of conventional-cars in the future. undeveloped and can create many concerns (like the
• GD-Motors can capitalize on rising environmental General Data Protection Regulation compliances).
regulations by aligning its product-fleet with the market • As autonomous driving and technologies advance, GD-
shift to sustainable mobility using electric-cars. Motors' criminal and civil liability risks increase owing to
• Increasing regulations on sustainable waste disposal and car accidents and fatalities (Daimler, 2020).
energy consumption require a re-evaluation of the • Malfunctioning software and technologies expose GD-
sourcing and manufacturing processes (EIA, 2020; EPA, Motors to product liabilities arising from the global
2020). Consumer Protection Acts (Ryan, 2020).
• The sales of diesel-engine cars are anticipated to decline • The changes in insurance legislation triggered by
by 20% owing to the CO2 emissions scandal. autonomous driving and technologies need increased
scrutiny.
Page 18 of 25
IB9FB0 Business in Practice
Protect share /
Strategic-Focus Expand market Penetration Productivity
innovation
Product awareness /
Brand-Objective Brand preference Brand loyalty Brand exploitation
trail
Maintaining
Creating awareness / Creating awareness /
Promotion awareness / repeat Elimination
trial trial / repeat purchase
purchase
References
Ad Age. (2020). Ad Age Leading National Advertisers 2020. [online] Crain Communications Inc., pp.1-36.
Available at: <https://adage.com/article/datacenter/ad-age-leading-national-advertisers-2020-index/2266001>
[Accessed 17 August 2020].
Alesina, A. (1989). Politics and business cycles in industrial democracies. Economic Policy. 4(8). pp.55-98.
Bahadir, S., Bharadwaj, S. and Srivastava, R. (2015). Marketing mix and brand sales in global markets:
Examining the contingent role of country-market characteristics. Journal of International Business Studies. 46(5).
596-619.
Bardhi, F. and Eckhardt, G. (2012). Access-Based Consumption: The Case of Car Sharing. Journal of Consumer
Research. 39(4). pp.881-898.
Page 19 of 25
IB9FB0 Business in Practice
Barnes, S. (2020). Business in Practice: Innovation and Entrepreneurship. Online lecture: Warwick Business
School.
Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management. 17(1). pp.99-
120.
Barney, J., Wright, M., Ketchen, D.J., Jr. (2001). The resource-based view of the firm: ten years after 1991.
Journal of Management. 27(6). pp.625-641.
Beer, M., Voelpel, S.C., Leibold, M., Tekie, E.B. (2005). Strategic management as organizational learning:
developing fit and alignment through a disciplined process. Long Range Planning. 38(5). pp.445-465.
Bertoluci G., Yannou B., Attias D., Vallet E. (2013). A Categorization of Innovation Funnels of Companies as a
Way to Better Make Conscious Agility and Permeability of Innovation Processes. In: Chakrabarti A., Prakash R.
(eds) ICoRD’13. Lecture Notes in Mechanical Engineering. Springer. pp. 721-734.
Bloomberg. (2019). Tesla is the decade’s best-performing auto company. [online] Available at:
<https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2019-12-23/tesla-is-decade-s-best-performing-automaker>
[Accessed 9 August 2020].
Bloomberg New Energy Finance. (2019). Battery pack prices fall as market ramps up with market average at
$156/kwh in 2019. [online] Available at: <https://about.bnef.com/blog/battery-pack-prices-fall-as-market-ramps-
up-with-market-average-at-156-kwh-in-2019/> [Accessed 17 August 2020].
Boulding, W. and Lee, E. (1992). Differentiation via the Marketing Mix. Marketing Letters. 3(4). pp.343-356.
Broekstra G. (1991). Organizational Closure and the Quantum View of Organizations. In: Jackson, M.C., Mansell,
G.J., Flood, R.L., Blackham, R.B. and Probert, S.E. (eds.). Systems Thinking in Europe. Boston, MA: Springer.
pp.145-150.
Brook, O. (2020). Business in Practice: Marketing at Jaguar-Land Rover. Online lecture: Warwick Business
School.
Brooks, C. (2016), Organizing Volkswagen: A Critical Assessment. Working USA. 19. pp.395-417.
Bucklin, R., Siddarth, S. and Silva-Risso, J. (2008). Distribution Intensity and New Car Choice. Journal of
Marketing Research. 45(4). pp.473-486.
Burges, J. (2016). Obsolescence / Innovation. In: Burges, J. and Elias, A. (eds.), Time: A Vocabulary of the
Present. New York: NYU Press. pp.82-96.
Capgemini (2019). The Autonomous Car: A Consumer Perspective. [online] Capgemini Inc. pp.1-36. Available at:
<https://www.capgemini.com/gb-en/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2019/05/30min-%E2%80%93-Report.pdf>
[Accessed 17 August 2020].
Page 20 of 25
IB9FB0 Business in Practice
Chesbrough, H.W. (2003). Open Innovation: The new imperative for creating and profiting from technology.
Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
Child, J. (1997). Strategic Choice in the Analysis of Action, Structure, Organizations and Environment:
Retrospect and Prospect. Organization Studies. 18(1). 43-76.
Claycamp, H. and Massy, W. (1968). A Theory of Market Segmentation. Journal of Marketing Research. 5(4).
pp.388-394.
CleanTechnica. (2020). Tesla Passes 1 Million EV Milestone & Model 3 Becomes All Time Best Seller. [online]
Available at: <https://cleantechnica.com/2020/03/10/tesla-passes-1-million-ev-milestone-and-model-3-becomes-
all-time-best-seller/> [Accessed 13 August 2020].
Cyert, R.M. and March, J.G. (1953). A Behavioral Theory of the Firm. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Daimler. (2020). Automated and Autonomous Driving: Legal Framework. [online] Available at:
<https://www.daimler.com/innovation/case/autonomous/legal-framework.html> [Accessed 17 August 2020].
Deloitte (2020). 2020 Global Automotive Consumer Study. Analysis. [online] Deloitte US. Available at:
<https://www2.deloitte.com/us/en/pages/manufacturing/articles/automotive-trends-millennials-consumer-
study.html> [Accessed 11 August 2020].
De Swaan Arons, M., Van den Driest, F. and Weed, K. (2014). The Ultimate Marketing Machine. Harvard
Business Review. 92(7/8). pp. 54-63.
EIA. (2020). Summary of legislation and regulations included in the annual energy outlook 2020. Independent
Statistics & Analysis. [online] Washington, DC: Energy Information Administration, U.S. Department of Energy.
pp.1-44. Available at: <https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/aeo/assumptions/pdf/summary.pdf> [Accessed 17 August
2020].
EPA. (2020). Regulatory Information by Topic: Waste. [online] Available at: <https://www.epa.gov/regulatory-
information-topic/regulatory-information-topic-waste> [Accessed 17 August 2020].
Fredrickson, J.W. (1986). The strategic decision process and organizational structure. Academy of Management
Review. 11(2). pp.280-297.
Furr, N. and Dyer, J. (2020). Lessons from Tesla’s approach to innovation. [online] Harvard Business Review.
Available at: <https://hbr.org/2020/02/lessons-from-teslas-approach-to-innovation> [Accessed 10 August 2020].
Germeraad, P. (2010). Integration of intellectual property strategy with innovation strategy. Research Technology
Management. 53(3). pp.10-18.
Page 21 of 25
IB9FB0 Business in Practice
Grant, R.M. (1991). The Resource-based theory of competitive advantage: implications for strategy formulation.
California Management Review. 33(3). pp.114-135.
Hall, R. (1992). The strategic analysis of intangible resources. Strategic Management Journal. 13(2). pp.135-144.
Hannan, M.T. and Freeman, J. (1986). Where do organizational forms come from?. Sociological Forum. 1(1).
pp.50-72.
Hart, S. (1992). An Integrative Framework for Strategy-Making Processes. The Academy of Management
Review. 17(2). pp.327-351.
Harvard Business Review (2018). Finding the Perfect Pace for Product Launches. Harvard Business Review.
96(4), pp. 20-22.
Heracleous, L., Wirtz, J., and Pangarkar, N. (2009). Flying High in a Competitive Industry. Singapore: McGraw-
Hill Education.
Heracleous, L. and Werres, K. (2016). On the Road to Disaster: Strategic Misalignments and Corporate Failure.
Long Range Planning. 49(4), pp.491-506.
Holbrook, M., Lehmann, D. and Schmitt, B. (2016). Marketing. In: The Faculty of Columbia Business School and
Thomas, B. (Ed.). Columbia Business School: A Century of Ideas. New York: Columbia University Press. pp.81-
106.
Hooley, G., Piercy, N., Nicoulaud, B. and Rudd, J. (2016). Marketing Strategy and Competitive Positioning. 6th
ed. Harlow, England: Pearson.
IEA (2019a). Global EV Outlook 2019: Scaling-Up the Transition to Electric Mobility. Paris: International Energy
Agency (IEA).
IEA. (2019b). Global Fuel Price Changes, 2005-2018. [online] Available at: <https://www.iea.org/data-and-
statistics/charts/global-fuel-price-changes-2005-2018> [Accessed 16 August 2020].
Jarzabkowski, P. and Wilson, D. (2006). Actionable Strategy Knowledge: A Practice Perspective. European
Management Journal. 24. pp.348-367.
Johnson, G., Scholes, K. and Whittington, R. (2008). Exploring Corporate Strategy: Text and Cases. 8th ed.
Harlow, England: Financial Times-Prentice Hall.
Joshi, A. and Giménez, E. (2014). Decision-Driven Marketing. Harvard Business Review. 92(7/8). pp. 64-71.
Kohli, C. (1997). Branding consumer goods: insights from theory and practice. Journal of Consumer Marketing.
14(3). pp.206-219.
Page 22 of 25
IB9FB0 Business in Practice
Lawton, T. (1999). The limits of price leadership: needs-based positioning strategy and the long-term
competitiveness of Europe’s low fare airlines. Long Range Planning. 32(6). pp.573-586.
Levitt, T. (1965). Exploit the product life cycle. [online] Harvard Business Review (November 1965 Issue).
Available at: <https://hbr.org/1965/11/exploit-the-product-life-cycle> [Accessed 16 August 2020].
McCarthy, Jerome E. (1964). Basic Marketing: A Managerial Approach. Homewood, IL: Irwin.
Miles, R.E., Snow, C.C., Meyer, A.D. and Coleman, H.J., Jr. (1978). Organizational strategy, structure, and
process. Academy of Management Review. 3(3). pp.456-462.
Miles, R.E. and Snow, C.C. (1984). Fit, failure and the hall of fame. California Management Review. 26(3). pp.10-
28.
Miles, R.E., Snow, C.C., Mathews, J.A., Miles, G., and Coleman, H.J., Jr. (1997). Organizing in the knowledge
age: anticipating the cellular form. Academy of Management Executive. 11(4). pp.7-20.
Miller, D. and Friesen, P. (1978). Archetypes of Strategy Formulation. Management Science. 24(9). pp.921-933.
Miller, D. and Friesen, P.H. (1984). Organizations: A Quantum View. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Mintzberg, H., Raisinghani, D. and Théorêt, A. (1976). The Structure of ‘Unstructured’ Decision Processes.
Administrative Science Quarterly. 21(2). pp.246-275.
Mintzberg, H. (1979). Patterns in Strategy Formation. International Studies of Management & Organization. 9(3).
pp.67-86.
Mintzberg H. and Waters J.A. (1985). Of strategies, deliberate and emergent. Strategic Management Journal.
6(3). pp.257-272.
Nichols, D. (2007). Why innovation funnels don't work and why rockets do. Market Leader. Autumn issue. pp.26-
31.
Paroutis, S., Angwin, D. and Heracleous, L. (2016). Practicing Strategy: Text and Cases. 2nd ed. Thousand
Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, pp.1-19.
Pathak, A.A. (2016). Tata Motors’ successful cross-border acquisition of Jaguar Land Rover: key take-aways.
Strategic Direction. 32(9). pp.15-18.
Peteraf, M.A. (1993). The cornerstones of competitive advantage: a resource-based view. Strategic Management
Journal. 14(3). pp.179-191.
Page 23 of 25
IB9FB0 Business in Practice
Porter, M.E. (1985). The Competitive Advantage: Creating and Sustaining Superior Performance. Free Press,
New York.
Porter, M.E. (1996). What Is Strategy?. Harvard Business Review. 74(6), pp. 61-78.
Porter, M.E. (1998). Competitive Strategy: Techniques for Analyzing Industries and Competitors. Revised Ed.
New York: Free Press.
Prahalad, C.K. and Hamel, G. (1990). The core competence of the corporation. Harvard Business Review. 68(3).
pp.79-91.
Quinn, J.B. (2013). IBM (A) case. In: Lampel, J.B., Mintzberg, H., Quinn, J.B. and Ghoshal, S. The Strategy
Process: Concepts, Contexts, Cases. 5th ed. London: Pearson.
Renault. (2020). The price of an electric car battery. [online] Available at:
<https://easyelectriclife.groupe.renault.com/en/day-to-day/what-is-the-price-of-an-electric-car-battery/> [Accessed
16 August 2020].
Reuters. (2018). Toyota Captures Data Goldmine In $1 Billion Grab Bet. [online] Available at:
<https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-toyota-grab/toyota-captures-data-goldmine-in-1-billion-grab-bet-
idUKKBN1JG0VS> [Accessed 17 August 2020].
Rieger, B. (2010). From People’s Car to New Beetle: The Transatlantic Journeys of the Volkswagen Beetle. The
Journal of American History. 97(1). pp.91-115.
Rudd, J.M. (2020). Business in Practice: Marketing. Online lecture: Warwick Business School.
Ryan, M. (2020). The Future of Transportation: Ethical, Legal, Social and Economic Impacts of Self-driving
Vehicles in the Year 2025. Science and Engineering Ethics. 26. pp.1185-1208.
Schneider, J. and Hall, J. (2011). Why Most Product Launches Fail. Harvard Business Review, [online] (April).
Available at: <https://hbr.org/2011/04/why-most-product-launches-fail> [Accessed 13 August 2020].
Schwanen, T., Banister, D. and Anable, J. (2012). Rethinking habits and their role in behaviour change: the case
of low-carbon mobility. Journal of Transport Geography. 24. pp.522-532.
Sheau-Ting, L., Mohammed, A.H. and Weng-Wai, C. (2013). What is the optimum social marketing mix to market
energy conservation behaviour: An empirical study. Journal of Environmental Management. 131. pp.196-205.
Smith, W.R. (1956). Product Differentiation and Market Segmentation as Alternative Marketing Strategies.
Journal of Marketing. 21(1). pp.3-8.
Teece, D.J., Pisano, G. and Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic
Management Journal. 18. pp.509-533.
Page 24 of 25
IB9FB0 Business in Practice
Tidd, J. and Bessant, J. (2013). Managing Innovation: Integrating Technological, Market and Organizational
Change. 5th ed. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
Tolliday, S. (1995). From “Beetle Monoculture” to the “German Model”: The Transformation of Volkswagen, 1967-
1991. Business and Economic History. 24(2). pp.111-132.
Valentin, E. (2001). SWOT Analysis from a Resource-Based View. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice.
9(2). pp.54-69.
Vlados, C. (2019). On a correlative and evolutionary SWOT analysis. Journal of Strategy and Management.
12(3). pp.347-363.
Voelpel, S.C., Leibold, M., Tekie, E.B. (2006). Managing purposeful organizational misfit: exploring the nature of
industry and organizational misfit to enable strategic change. Journal of Change Management. 6(3). pp.257-276.
Wernerfelt, B. (1984). A resource-based view of the firm. Strategic Management Journal. 5(2). pp.171-180.
Wang, J. (2017). Structuring innovation funnels for R&D projects under uncertainty. R&D Management. 47. 127-
140.
Wawarta, C. (2020). Business in Practice: Strategy. Online lecture: Warwick Business School.
WSJ. (2020). Tesla posts fourth-quarter profit on record deliveries. [online] Available at:
<https://www.wsj.com/articles/tesla-posts-fourth-quarter-profit-on-record-deliveries-11580334615> [Accessed 13
August 2020].
Zhou, K. and Li, C. (2012). How knowledge affects radical innovation: Knowledge base, market knowledge
acquisition, and internal knowledge sharing. Strategic Management Journal. 33(9). pp.1090-1102.
Page 25 of 25