Strategic Analysis: External and Internal Environment — Practice

Question 1

A packaged food company is evaluating expansion into a new country that has recently introduced a sugar tax on processed foods, has a rapidly growing urban middle class, and has unstable currency exchange rates. Classify each of these three factors under the correct PESTLE category and state its implication for the company.

Accepted Answer

The sugar tax on processed foods is a Political/Legal factor, since it represents a government policy and regulatory intervention directly targeting the company's product category, and its implication is that the company may need to reformulate products to reduce sugar content, absorb or pass on the additional tax cost, or focus its expansion on lower-sugar product lines to remain price-competitive in this market. The rapidly growing urban middle class is a Social/Economic factor, reflecting demographic and income-level change, and its implication is generally favourable, signalling a growing base of consumers with rising disposable income who may increasingly be able to afford and demand packaged food products, representing a genuine market growth opportunity worth the company's attention. The unstable currency exchange rates are an Economic factor, and their implication is that the company faces currency risk on any revenue or costs denominated in the local currency, which could affect the profitability of the investment when translated back to the company's reporting currency, and this risk should factor into the company's financial evaluation of the expansion, potentially requiring hedging or a pricing strategy that can absorb currency volatility.

Question 2

A regional airline is evaluating entry into a domestic aviation market characterised by: very high capital requirements for aircraft and airport slots; only two or three existing major carriers, each roughly similar in size; increasing popularity of high-speed rail as an alternative for medium-distance routes; a large number of price-comparison booking platforms giving customers full visibility into fares across carriers; and fuel suppliers being a small number of large refiners with no viable substitute fuel readily available. Apply Porter's five forces to assess whether this industry structure is attractive, addressing each of the five forces explicitly.

Accepted Answer

Threat of new entrants is low, since the very high capital requirements for aircraft and airport slots constitute a substantial barrier to entry, discouraging new competitors from entering easily, which supports industry attractiveness. Rivalry among existing competitors is likely to be intense, since only two or three major carriers of roughly similar size compete directly, a classic condition for intense head-to-head rivalry, particularly if the underlying market growth is slow, which works against industry attractiveness. Threat of substitutes is significant specifically for medium-distance routes, given the increasing popularity of high-speed rail as an alternative serving the same underlying travel need, constraining how the airline can price on those specific routes, which works against attractiveness on that segment though it may matter less for longer-distance routes rail cannot practically serve. Bargaining power of buyers is high, since the large number of price-comparison booking platforms gives customers full visibility into fares across carriers and makes switching between airlines easy for a given route, which works against industry attractiveness by compressing achievable pricing. Bargaining power of suppliers, specifically fuel suppliers, is high, since fuel is supplied by a small number of large refiners with no viable substitute readily available, giving those suppliers considerable pricing power over a major cost input, which also works against attractiveness. Overall, this industry structure is only moderately attractive at best: the high entry barrier is a genuine positive, but intense existing rivalry, meaningful substitute threat on key routes, high buyer power, and high supplier power over a critical input together suggest margins in this industry are likely to be structurally compressed, and the regional airline should weigh this analysis carefully, potentially seeking a differentiated positioning or route focus that mitigates some of these unfavourable forces, before committing to entry.

Question 3

Explain the conceptual difference between the threat of substitute products and the threat of new entrants within Porter's five forces, using the example of a traditional taxi company facing competition from ride-hailing apps.

Accepted Answer

The threat of new entrants concerns the ease with which new competitors can enter to compete directly within the same industry, offering essentially the same type of product or service as existing firms; the threat of substitutes, by contrast, concerns the availability of a different type of product or service, from what might be considered a different industry altogether, that can nonetheless satisfy the same underlying customer need. For the traditional taxi company, a new entrant would be another company setting up to operate traditional metered taxis directly competing within the same taxi industry; a ride-hailing app, however, is better understood as a substitute, since it represents a genuinely different model of providing point-to-point urban transport, using a different technology and business model, that satisfies the same underlying customer need for convenient transport from one point to another, potentially at a more attractive price-performance trade-off, without being a taxi company in the traditional sense at all. In practice, this distinction can blur, since ride-hailing platforms could also be analysed as new entrants transforming the industry's definition altogether, which is itself a useful observation — a rigid application of the five forces framework can sometimes miss disruptive competition that does not fit neatly into either category, and a strong answer should note this nuance rather than forcing the example rigidly into only one force.

Question 4

A mid-sized domestic pharmaceutical company has strong regulatory approval expertise and a well-established distribution network within its home country (strengths), but limited manufacturing scale compared to larger global competitors and weak research and development capability for genuinely novel drugs (weaknesses). The government has just announced incentives for domestic generic drug manufacturing (opportunity), while a global competitor is aggressively cutting prices to gain market share (threat). Construct a SWOT-based strategic recommendation that explicitly matches these factors against each other, rather than listing them separately.

Accepted Answer

The company's strength in regulatory approval expertise and established distribution network matches directly against the opportunity of government incentives for domestic generic drug manufacturing: since generic drug approval and distribution within the home market are exactly where the company's existing strengths lie, and the new government incentives specifically favour domestic generic manufacturing, the company is well positioned to expand its generic drug portfolio and capture disproportionate benefit from these incentives relative to competitors lacking the same regulatory and distribution strengths, representing the company's clearest strategic opportunity to pursue. At the same time, the company's weakness in limited manufacturing scale is directly threatened by the global competitor's aggressive price-cutting: a company with weaker manufacturing scale typically has a higher per-unit cost structure than a larger global competitor, meaning it is poorly positioned to sustain a price war, and this weakness-threat combination represents the company's clearest strategic vulnerability, one it should actively seek to avoid being drawn into rather than competing head-on against the price-cutting competitor's evidently stronger cost position. The overall strategic recommendation is therefore to lean deliberately into the strength-opportunity match, expanding aggressively into domestic generic manufacturing to capture the new government incentives, while deliberately avoiding direct price competition against the global competitor in weakness-threat territory where the company is structurally disadvantaged, instead differentiating on the regulatory speed and distribution reliability its genuine strengths provide, rather than attempting to match the global competitor purely on price and scale.

Question 5

Two companies own an identical fleet of delivery trucks, a tangible resource. One company consistently achieves faster, more reliable delivery times than the other. Explain, using the distinction between resources and capabilities, why identical resources can produce different competitive outcomes.

Accepted Answer

Resources are the specific assets a firm possesses, and in this case both companies possess an identical tangible resource, the delivery truck fleet, meaning the resource itself cannot explain the difference in delivery performance between them. Capabilities are the firm's capacity to deploy resources effectively, typically in combination with other resources and organisational routines, to achieve a desired outcome, and it is capability, not the mere possession of a resource, that more directly determines competitive performance; the company achieving faster, more reliable delivery times evidently possesses a superior capability in areas such as route optimisation, driver scheduling, real-time tracking systems, or logistics coordination that allows it to extract more effective performance from the identical underlying truck fleet than its competitor manages to achieve. This illustrates precisely why strategic analysis distinguishes resources from capabilities: possessing the same resources as a competitor guarantees nothing about competitive outcomes, since the capability to deploy those resources effectively is a separate, and often harder-to-observe and harder-to-replicate, source of genuine competitive difference.

Question 6

A technology company has developed a proprietary algorithm that significantly improves its product's performance, but the underlying mathematical approach is well documented in academic literature and could, in principle, be reimplemented by any sufficiently skilled engineering team within about six months. Apply the VRIN criteria to assess whether this algorithm constitutes a sustainable source of competitive advantage.

Accepted Answer

Assessing the algorithm against each VRIN criterion: it is likely Valuable, since it significantly improves product performance, directly contributing to the value customers perceive in the product. It may be Rare in the sense that competitors have not yet implemented an equivalent, meaning the company currently enjoys a performance edge few or no others currently possess. However, it fails the Inimitable criterion in any durable sense, since the underlying mathematical approach is well documented in academic literature and a sufficiently skilled team could reimplement an equivalent within roughly six months, meaning the barrier to replication is genuinely low and time-limited rather than a deep, causally ambiguous or resource-intensive barrier that would be difficult for a determined competitor to overcome. Because it fails the inimitability criterion despite satisfying value and rarity for now, this algorithm should be assessed as, at best, a temporary competitive advantage rather than a genuinely sustainable one: the company should expect competitors to close this specific performance gap within roughly the timeframe stated, and should not rely on this algorithm alone as a durable strategic asset, instead using whatever lead time it currently provides to build additional, harder-to-replicate advantages, such as accumulated proprietary data, network effects, or brand positioning built on top of the current performance edge, that could sustain an advantage even after the algorithmic edge itself is eventually matched.

Question 7

Classify each of the following as a primary activity or a support activity within value chain analysis, and briefly justify each

Accepted Answer

A

Question 8

Explain why a firm operating in a structurally unattractive industry, as identified by Porter's five forces (intense rivalry, high buyer power, low entry barriers), might still be highly profitable, drawing on the concept of core competence to explain the apparent contradiction.

Accepted Answer

Porter's five forces analyses the average structural attractiveness of an industry as a whole, indicating the general level of profitability firms within that industry are likely to face given the intensity of competitive pressure from the five forces collectively; it does not claim that every individual firm within an unattractive industry will necessarily earn only average or poor returns, since firm-level performance also depends heavily on that specific firm's own internal position, particularly whether it possesses a genuine core competence. A firm possessing a core competence, a capability or bundle of resources and capabilities that is valuable, rare, difficult for competitors to imitate, and not readily substitutable, can use that competence to insulate itself, at least partially, from the very competitive pressures that depress average industry profitability for less well-positioned firms — for instance, a firm with a genuinely difficult-to-replicate cost advantage can remain profitable even amid intense rivalry and low entry barriers, since new entrants and existing rivals alike are unable to match its cost structure regardless of how many of them compete for the same customers. This is precisely why strategic analysis combines external, industry-level analysis through Porter's five forces with internal, firm-level analysis through core competence and VRIN: average industry attractiveness sets a general expectation, but a firm's own distinctive internal position can allow it to outperform that average expectation substantially, and the apparent contradiction dissolves once both levels of analysis, external and internal, are considered together rather than relying on industry structure alone to predict any individual firm's actual profitability.

Question 9

Explain how high exit barriers within an industry contribute to intense rivalry among existing competitors, even when demand for the industry's product is declining.

Accepted Answer

Exit barriers are factors that make it costly or difficult for a firm to leave an industry, such as highly specialised assets with little resale value outside the industry, long-term contractual obligations, significant redundancy or closure costs, or emotional and strategic attachment to a particular line of business. When demand for an industry's product is declining, firms with low exit barriers can relatively easily redeploy their capital elsewhere and leave the industry, allowing remaining supply to shrink roughly in line with declining demand and keeping competitive pressure comparatively contained; firms facing high exit barriers, by contrast, remain in the industry even as it becomes less profitable, because leaving would itself be costly, and this continued presence of struggling competitors, fighting for a share of a shrinking market rather than exiting gracefully, intensifies rivalry considerably, often manifesting as aggressive price competition among firms all trying to sustain volume from a declining customer base rather than exiting and cutting their losses, precisely because exiting is not a realistic option available to them.

Question 10

A component supplier sells almost exclusively to two large automobile manufacturers who together account for 90% of its sales, while the automobile manufacturers each purchase similar components from several alternative suppliers. Assess the bargaining power of buyers in this relationship and explain the specific factors driving your assessment.

Accepted Answer

The bargaining power of the buyers, the two automobile manufacturers, is very high in this relationship, driven by two specific, mutually reinforcing factors. First, buyer concentration relative to the supplier: the two manufacturers together account for 90% of the supplier's sales, meaning the supplier is heavily dependent on retaining their business, and losing either manufacturer as a customer would represent a substantial, difficult-to-replace loss of revenue, giving each manufacturer considerable leverage in any price or terms negotiation with the supplier. Second, ease of switching for the buyers: since the manufacturers can purchase similar components from several alternative suppliers, they face low switching costs and can credibly threaten to shift their purchasing elsewhere if the current supplier does not offer competitive terms, while the supplier has no equivalent ability to easily replace such a large share of its customer base if the relationship deteriorates. Together, this asymmetry, the supplier's high dependence on a concentrated buyer base that itself has low switching costs and multiple alternatives, gives the buyers very high bargaining power, likely allowing them to negotiate favourable pricing and terms that compress the supplier's margins.

Question 11

A software company has excellent engineering talent and a strong product but has historically struggled to retain customers past their first annual renewal, with a churn rate significantly above the industry average. Identify this as a strength or weakness, and explain what further internal analysis the company should undertake to understand its root cause before it can be meaningfully addressed.

Accepted Answer

The above-average customer churn rate is a weakness, an internal characteristic putting the company at a disadvantage relative to competitors, notwithstanding its genuine strengths in engineering talent and product quality, since strong engineering and a strong product have evidently not translated into strong customer retention, indicating some other internal factor is undermining the value those strengths would otherwise be expected to deliver. To understand the root cause, the company should undertake further internal analysis along its value chain, examining activities beyond product development itself, particularly the service and marketing and sales primary activities, investigating specific questions such as whether onboarding and customer support are inadequate, whether pricing or contract terms are creating dissatisfaction at renewal time, or whether the sales process is setting customer expectations that the product then fails to meet in practice; identifying a weakness through SWOT is only the first step, and the value chain framework introduced in this chapter provides exactly the tool needed to trace that weakness back to the specific underlying activity or activities responsible for it, rather than leaving the weakness as a vague, unexplained observation.

Question 12

A consumer electronics company has built a core competence in miniaturisation, the ability to fit more functionality into smaller physical devices than competitors can achieve. Explain how this core competence could be leveraged across multiple, seemingly unrelated product markets, and why this cross-market leverage is itself considered part of what makes a capability a genuine core competence rather than merely a product-specific strength.

Accepted Answer

A core competence in miniaturisation is not tied to any single product category but represents an underlying capability that could plausibly be applied across multiple, seemingly unrelated markets wherever fitting more functionality into a smaller space is valuable to customers — the same underlying competence could be leveraged in wearable devices, where compact size is essential for wearability, in medical devices, where miniaturised diagnostic or monitoring equipment is increasingly valued, and in automotive electronics, where space within a vehicle's dashboard or control systems is at a premium, among other possible applications. This potential for cross-market application is itself part of the definition of a genuine core competence, distinguishing it from a strength that is merely useful within one specific product line: a capability that only ever benefits a single product is a narrower, product-specific strength, valuable but limited in scope, whereas a capability that can be deployed to create customer value across several genuinely different markets represents a more foundational, more strategically valuable asset for the company, since it opens multiple avenues for growth and diversification that a narrower, single-product strength could not support, which is precisely why cross-market applicability is treated as one of the hallmarks of a true core competence in strategic analysis.

Question 13

Explain why environmental scanning, the systematic monitoring of PESTLE-type factors, is described as needing to be an ongoing, continuous activity rather than a one-time exercise conducted before a single strategic decision.

Accepted Answer

Environmental scanning must be ongoing because the factors it monitors, political, economic, social, technological, legal and environmental conditions, are themselves continuously changing rather than fixed at a single point in time, and a strategy formulated based on a one-time scan conducted at a specific moment can become poorly matched to the environment as those underlying conditions shift afterward, exactly the same reasoning that made strategic management itself a continuous rather than one-time process, as the previous chapter established. A firm relying on a single, historical scan risks being caught unprepared by a subsequent shift, such as a new regulation, an economic downturn, or an emerging technology, that a more current, ongoing scanning process would have flagged in time for the firm to adjust its strategy proactively rather than reactively; continuous environmental scanning is therefore what feeds the evaluation stage of the strategic management cycle with fresh, current information, allowing the firm to detect when its existing strategy, however sound at the time it was formulated, needs to be reconsidered in light of environmental change that has occurred since.

Question 14

Explain what benchmarking is as a technique of internal analysis, and why comparing a firm's performance only against its direct industry competitors, rather than also against best-in-class performers from other industries, can limit the value of the exercise.

Accepted Answer

Benchmarking is the technique of systematically comparing a firm's own processes, performance metrics or practices against those of other organisations, typically those recognised as achieving superior performance in the relevant area, in order to identify specific gaps and opportunities for improvement. Comparing a firm's performance only against its direct industry competitors can limit the value of benchmarking because direct competitors, operating within the same industry, are often subject to broadly similar constraints, conventions and levels of best practice, meaning a firm that merely matches its direct competitors' performance may still be considerably behind what is genuinely achievable, if a more innovative approach practised in an entirely different industry, not directly comparable on product but comparable on the underlying process being benchmarked, such as order fulfilment speed, customer service responsiveness, or inventory management efficiency, could reveal a materially higher standard of performance; benchmarking against best-in-class performers from other industries, on whatever specific process or capability is being assessed, therefore often surfaces more ambitious, genuinely transformative improvement opportunities than a narrower, same-industry-only comparison would reveal, which is why broader, cross-industry benchmarking is generally considered the more valuable form of the technique wherever a genuinely comparable process can be identified elsewhere.

Question 15

Explain how internal analysis, drawing together resources, capabilities, core competence and value chain analysis, produces what can be called an organisation's overall 'capability profile,' and how this profile should genuinely inform the strategic choices examined in the next chapter, rather than being treated as a purely descriptive exercise.

Accepted Answer

An organisation's capability profile emerges from combining the outputs of these related internal analysis tools: an inventory of the firm's tangible and intangible resources, an assessment of which combinations of those resources the firm has genuine capability to deploy effectively, an identification of which specific capabilities rise to the level of a true core competence by satisfying criteria such as VRIN, and a value-chain-level understanding of specifically which activities across the firm's operations are the source of its strongest performance and which are comparatively weak. Together, these pieces build a rounded picture of what the organisation is genuinely good at, not good at, and where its most defensible, hardest-to-replicate strengths actually lie, rather than simply what the organisation currently does across its various activities. This profile should genuinely inform strategic choice, examined in the next chapter, because a sound strategic choice, whether a specific generic strategy such as cost leadership or differentiation, or a specific direction for growth or diversification, should be built on, and consistent with, the organisation's actual capability profile rather than chosen independently of it; choosing to compete on differentiation without possessing genuine differentiating capabilities identified through this internal analysis, for instance, sets the firm up to pursue a strategy its actual internal position cannot credibly support, which is precisely why internal analysis is treated as a necessary input to strategic choice rather than a separate, purely descriptive exercise conducted for its own sake.

Practice — Strategic Analysis: External and Internal Environment

Sign in to save attempts to your dashboard and track your accuracy over time

Find a verified tutor

Join a live course

Browse coaching centres

About

Categories

Support

Documentation

Get Study Tips & Updates

Download Our App

Download for iOS

Download for Android

Popular Cities