Situation And SWOT Analysis – Coca-Cola Company Essay Example

The first stage in creating a successful marketing plan for a brand or product is conducting a thorough Situation and SWOT Analysis. Marketers can utilize the information gleaned from a SWOT analysis to assess the state of a brand’s internal and external environments and formulate more effective advertising strategies. This essay will do a Situation and SWOT Analysis of Coca-Cola as a prominent company in the soft drink market. The organization’s SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats) will be assessed. This essay will also provide suggestions for the management team to implement to address these issues and set the company up for continued success. By conducting a comprehensive SWOT analysis of the Coca-Cola brand, excellent marketing advice will be offered by pinpointing the brand’s strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats.

Executive Summary

Coca-Cola, the most well-known and lucrative beverage brand, is the subject of this Situation and SWOT Analysis. This paper examines Coca-current Cola’s standing in the market and provides recommendations for a communications strategy that will help the company face challenges and exploit opportunities. Coca-brand Cola’s identity, market share, distribution network, product offerings, sales history, and profitability history will all be investigated here. In addition, the company will be evaluated using the SWOT framework.

The statistics show that Coca-Cola is a highly recognizable brand with a good image among consumers. The corporation provides a wide variety of products and operates an efficient distribution system. The company needs help overcoming several challenges, including declining sales because of shifting consumer preferences, the perception that the product is unhealthy due to its high sugar content, and the potential for adverse environmental impact caused by the packaging and production of the product. Due to these issues, the organization needs help attracting and retaining skilled staff. The corporation also faces challenges from increased competition in the soft drink sector, more health regulations, and a shift in consumer preference towards more healthful beverages, such as water.

The communications strategy recommends that Coca-Cola emphasize innovation and diversity to handle these concerns successfully. The company would benefit greatly from offering non-carbonated and non-additive beverage options. The plan suggests that Coca-Cola ramp up its efforts to discuss and emphasize environmental responsibility and sustainability to combat unfavorable public opinion. The plan also recommends that Coca-Cola put more resources into digital marketing to appeal to a younger audience and to fortify its position in emerging areas. The company’s ability to compete in such markets would improve.

Situation Analysis

The Industry

The soft drink industry is very competitive, with significant players like Coca-Cola, PepsiCo, and Dr. Pepper Snapple Group all battling for customers. The company’s development pattern has slowed in recent years because of increased health concerns and a shift in consumer preferences towards items that are better for their health, such as water and sports drinks. People in developing nations increasingly embrace Western lifestyles, including soft drinks. Therefore there is room for growth in these markets.

Inventions of new sweeteners and packaging materials are just two examples of the many technological advances in the corporate world. For instance, Coca-Cola has developed the Plant Bottle, a plastic bottle made partly from components derived from plants that are 100% recyclable. A trend towards healthier options has also emerged, with companies creating low-calorie and reduced-sugar varieties of their products to appeal to health-conscious consumers.

Vending machines, grocery stores, gas stations, and fast-food establishments are just a few retail outlets where one can buy soft drinks. Advertising, sponsorships, and discounts are just a few of firms’ standard promotional methods (Abebe n.p). Several companies specifically aim their products and marketing at consumers in certain countries or regions, demonstrating the importance of geography.

Profit trends in the soft drink industry may be affected by shifts in commodity prices and marketing expenses. For instance, if sugar costs rise, the production and distribution of soft drinks might become more expensive. Furthermore, marketing costs may pile up quickly, with many companies spending large sums on various types of advertising and promotion to keep their market share stable.

The Company

The Coca-Cola corporation began as a modest soda business in Georgia in 1886, but since then, it has spread to countries worldwide. It offers clients various products, including beverages and soft drinks, and has steadily expanded over the years while maintaining a solid profit margin. The flavor of Coca-Cola Classic, a carbonated soft drink made by the company, is well-known, and its distinctive bottle is just as well-known. In addition to sodas, the company’s product line includes juices and sports drinks. The company’s pricing structure and the overall packaging of Coca-Cola products are well-known and esteemed. Coca-Cola Classic, the brand’s original soft drink and the basis of its name, is a hugely well-liked product worldwide. Despite this, the company has struggled to succeed lately due to clients’ shifting preferences and rising concerns about their health.

The company’s $37.3 billion in revenues, a record high, reflects the sustained sales success of Coca-Cola. During that same year, the company’s unit case volume fell overall, which might indicate that consumers are becoming more interested in healthy items. Coca-Cola saw that consumers’ tastes in soft drinks were changing over time, so the corporation introduced Diet Coke and Coca-Cola Zero Sugar, two non-carbonated, calorie-conscious options. By advertising efforts like “Taste the Feeling,” which emphasizes the sensation one receives from drinking Coca-Cola more than the brand itself, the company also promotes these healthier options to its clients. Sales of Coca-Cola Despite the company’s best efforts, soft drink sales have remained largely the same. In 2020, when the COVID-19 epidemic broke out, people spent more time indoors and consumed less food while out and about, which decreased overall sales (Nair et al. pp 73-92). Coca-Cola has created and introduced a number of cutting-edge new products, such as Coca-Cola with Coffee, to meet its consumers’ demands and stay competitive.

Share of Market

Coca-Cola, which controls a humongous share of the worldwide soft drink market, profits handsomely from its monopoly. Coca-market Cola’s share has declined slightly in recent years as a result of consumers’ increasing preference for healthier alternatives. Because of this change in customer tastes, the company has gained ground in the marketplace. In 2020, Statista predicted Coca-share Cola’s of the U.S. carbonated soft drink market would be at 43.6%. With a market share of 24.8%, PepsiCo ranked in second place. Nonetheless, the overall market for carbonated soft drinks in the United States has been declining due to rising health concerns and increased competition from other types of beverages.

Despite this, the market has plenty of space to grow, especially in developing countries where the middle class and the demand for soft drinks are rising. Coca-Cola has expanded into new markets in Asia, Africa, and Latin America. The corporation has increased the number of locally tailored products and advertising campaigns it launches in these areas better to meet the needs and interests of its target consumers. Coca-strong Cola’s brand recognition and marketing resources put it in a solid position to take advantage of the growth opportunities in these regions.

The Market

Coca-Cola has a diverse spectrum of age groups, genders, and socioeconomic backgrounds among its customer base. The company produces a wide selection of soft juices and sports drinks to attract many customers. Yet, the company additionally segments its market based on demographic information such as age, lifestyle, and location. Coca-Cola targets customers of all ages, from infants and toddlers to retirees and older people. Coca-Cola Classic, Sprite, Fanta, and Minute Maid are just some of the company’s many beverages that appeal to a wide range of customers. With its energizing taste and bold branding, Sprite aims at a younger demographic, whereas Minute Maid, focusing on health and nutrition, aims at parents.

Coca-Cola emphasizes an active and social lifestyle in its advertising to consumers. Coca-advertising Cola’s campaigns often highlight the brand’s social character, primarily focusing on the idea of sharing Coca-Cola with friends and family. Coca-Cola also provides a variety of sports drinks, such as Powerade, for those with active lives. Coca-Cola operates in every region of the world, and its advertising campaigns are created with the local tastes of consumers in mind. Coca-Cola, for instance, has created new brands throughout Asia, including Georgia Coffee and Ayataka Green Tea, to cater to the preferences and interests of local consumers. Coca-Cola has been successful for many decades because consumers enjoy the brand’s taste, high quality, and rich heritage. The company has built a strong brand identity through unique branding, effective advertising, and sponsorship of major events like the Olympics and the World Cup (Piehler et al. pp. 197-201). Coca-Cola has also been recognized for its commitment to sustainability, which appeals to customers who care about doing their part to protect the planet.

Distribution

As a result of Coca-Cola’s extensive distribution network, its products are offered in a range of retail establishments, including pharmacies, supermarkets, and vending machines, to mention a few. The business has introduced trade advertising, deals, and co-op programmers successfully in the past, and it continues to have a good working relationship with the channel through which it sells its goods. To better serve its customers, Coca-Cola has also been working to diversify its direct-to-consumer distribution methods (Brondoni pp. 16-27). The internet’s use for ordering and providing services that transport goods straight to customers’ homes are two examples of these distribution channels. This enables the business to adapt to shifting consumer preferences and behaviors, which is crucial given the rise in popularity of online purchasing among consumers.

Pricing Policies

Coca-Cola pricing, consumer preferences, industry rivalry, and production costs are just a few elements in Cola-cola’s strategic planning. The firm employs a pricing method known as value-based pricing, which sets prices for products and services in accordance with how much customers in a given market value them (Mandal pp. 1-15). The market demand for the firm’s products and services and the high esteem in which the company’s brands are regarded justify the premium prices charged by the company.

To maximize profits and recuperate development costs, Coca-Cola adopts a pricing technique known as “skimming” when releasing new products. But the company will eventually reduce the price as demand increases and the product becomes more well-known. It is important to remember that Coca-Cola has always responded to market conditions like rising competition and shifting consumer tastes by modifying its price strategy. In recent years, the company has been experimenting with new pricing structures and smaller, more convenient packaging to win over thrifty consumers.

Competition

Coca-Cola’s main rival is PepsiCo, which sells a similar range of goods and has a similar market share to Coca-Cola (Dai n.p). Companies like the Dr. Pepper Snapple Group and Nestle Waters compete in this industry. Companies in the soft drink industry regularly compete for consumer dollars and other sales metrics. While the company’s size, product quality, and sales characteristics are vital, declining sales due to changing consumer tastes is one weakness.

Coca-Cola has taken several steps to ensure its continued success, including broadening its product offering to include healthier options and ramping up its marketing to reflect shifting consumer tastes (Guo et al. n.p). The company has also engaged in advertising and discounting to attract and retain customers. Coca-Cola has a leg up on the competition thanks to the strength of its brand name and the width and depth of its distribution network, both of which are present in nearly every country across the globe. The company’s declining sales of its flagship product and customers’ increased desire for healthier solutions are two areas it must focus on to maintain its competitive edge.

Promotion

Customers have been affected by several Coca-Cola advertising initiatives over the years, both successful and unsuccessful. The corporation spends a fortune on marketing yearly to maintain its market supremacy and boost public awareness of the brand. The Coca-Cola “Sharing Cola’s a Coke” campaign was a successful marketing effort for the business. The effort, which printed people’s names on personalized Coke bottles and distributed them, created a lot of talks online. The “Taste the Feeling” campaign, which played on consumers’ emotional interest in the product, was another effective marketing effort.

Yet, Coca-Cola has attempted and failed with marketing initiatives in the past, as evidenced by the disastrous “New Coke” blunder of the 1980s. The company experimented with modifying the Coca-Cola recipe at this time, only to have consumers reject the change and compel a return to the original recipe. Because it routinely spends the most money on advertising, Coca-Cola is one of the most well-known brands in the world. The company uses several avenues to distribute its marketing budget (television, radio, print, digital, and social media). Coca-Cola also employs a sizable and skilled sales team, it is responsible for establishing connections with the company’s retail and distribution partners. All merchandising and marketing initiatives within the store, such as point-of-purchase displays and in-store promotions, fall under the purview of the sales staff.

SWOT Analysis

S-Strengths

Several factors have contributed to Coca-Cola’s commercial success.

  • Widespread Confidence in The Brand Among Consumers: The Coca-Cola brand and logo are recognizable worldwide. (Chu n.p). A unique brand identity has developed through years of consistent quality and effective marketing.
  • Extensive Range of Product Offerings: Coca-Cola sells a variety of other beverages besides its famous soft drink, including other kinds of soft drinks, juices, and even sports drinks. Coca-Cola has many products to satisfy customers with a wide range of preferences.
  • Established Distribution Network: Coca-Cola boasts a reliable distribution network. Its wares are sold in numerous types of retailers, from supermarkets to corner markets. The company enjoys cordial ties with its wholesalers and has had prior success with trade advertising, joint ventures, and cooperative endeavors.
  • Successful Past Marketing Campaigns: Coca-Cola is a tried-and-true marketing strategy. Share a Coke and Taste the Feeling were initiatives that helped make the brand famous and instantly identifiable.
  • Consistent Profitability and Market Share: Coca-Cola has proven time and time again that it can dominate its industry and turn a profit. The company is now recognized worldwide and continues to dominate the soft drink market.

W- Weaknesses

  • Declining Sales Due to Changing Consumer Preferences: this is evident, especially in the trend toward more nutritious beverage choices (Chua et al. pp.43-54). Companies that produce healthier options, such as bottled water and sports drinks, now face more competition.
  • Criticisms Of Being Unhealthy Due to High Sugar Content: The excessive amounts of sugar in Coca-Cola’s beverages have been criticized and have contributed to the company’s unhealthful reputation. As a result, consumers are opting for healthier options, which is terrible news for Coca-Cola’s bottom line.
  • Relying Too Heavily On The Sales Of Carbonated Soft Drinks: Although the corporation has expanded its product line, carbonated soft drinks remain a key revenue generator.
  • Potentially Harmful Effects Of Packing And Manufacturing On The Environment: The corporation has been criticized for producing excessive garbage and employing single-use plastics. Coca-brand Cola’s image and bottom line could take a hit if consumers become increasingly concerned about the company’s environmental effects.

O-Opportunities

  • Potential for expansion in developing economies: The expansion of Coca-Cola’s line product to include non-carbonated beverages, including tea, coffee, and sports drinks, creates a huge business opportunity for the company.
  • Changing consumer preferences for healthier options could spur creativity and new product development: There has been a recent uptick in demand for vitamin- and mineral-fortified, and naturally vitamin-rich beverages. Coca-Cola might capitalize on this trend by introducing new products or altering existing ones to appeal to health-conscious consumers. Thanks to its strong distribution network and established brands, the company is ideally positioned to expand into new markets with fast-growing middle classes and a penchant for soft drinks.
  • More Emphasis on Eco-Friendliness and Responsibility: Coca-Cola may appeal to customers who place a premium on environmental friendliness by decreasing waste and carbon emissions in its production and packaging.

T-Threats

  • Intense Rivalry in The Soft Drink Market: There is constant competition for market share and sales features from companies like PepsiCo, Dr. Pepper Snapple Group, and Nestle Waters. Coca-bottom Cola’s line may take a hit if the beverage market heats up, leading to price wars and higher advertising costs.
  • Increasing Health Concerns and Regulations: People becoming more health conscious will likely choose healthier beverage options, which could hurt sales of sugary soft drinks like Coca-Cola’s. Coca-bottom Cola’s line could take a hit if countries pass laws that limit the marketing or sale of sugary beverages.
  • Constantly Changing Commodities Prices and Economic Downturns: Sales could fall if consumers cut back on their spending during tough economic times. Sugar, aluminum, and plastic are just some examples of commodities whose prices are volatile and can impact the bottom- line of Coca-Cola.
  • Changing Consumer Tastes Favoring Non-Cola Drinks and Water: Energy drinks, sports drinks, and juices are rising as consumers seek alternatives to traditional soft drinks. In addition, many are ditching sugary soft drinks in favor of water. Coca-Cola’s income and earnings may take a hit if traditional product sales fall due to this trend toward non-cola beverages.

Conclusions/Recommendation

In conclusion, the data suggest that the Coca-Cola Company benefits from a well-recognized brand name, a well-established distribution network, and a wide range of product offerings. Yet, it faces challenges like declining sales due to customers’ evolving preferences and the notion that it is hazardous due to its high sugar content. Coca-Cola is urged to respond to the rising demand for healthier options by broadening its product line to include non-carbonated beverages and other healthier options. The company shows its dedication to sustainability and environmental responsibility by investing in environmentally preferable production techniques and packaging materials. However, Coca-Cola must keep pouring money into advertising if it wants to maintain the strength of its brand and continue to set itself apart from the competition (Liu n.p). It is also essential for the company to keep an eye on emerging markets for growth opportunities.

Works Cited

Abebe, Rahel. Effect of Sales Promotion on Consumer Buying Behavior: In Case of Coca-Cola Soft Drink, Bahir Dar City. Diss. 2020.

Brondoni, Silvio M. “Shareowners, stakeholders & the oversize global economy. The coca-cola company case.” Symphony. Emerging Issues in Management 1 (2019): 16-27.

Chu, Bodi. “Analysis on the Success of Coca-Cola Marketing Strategy.” 2020 2nd International Conference on Economic Management and Cultural Industry (ICEMCI 2020). Atlantis Press, 2020.

Chua, Ju Yun, et al. “Challenges and solutions: A case study of Coca-Cola company.” Journal of the Community Development in Asia (JCDA) 3.2 (2020): 43-54.

Dai, Yueqian. “Comparison of Emphasis Point Towards Marketing Strategies Between Pepsi & Coca-Cola.” 6th International Conference on Financial Innovation and Economic Development (ICFIED 2021). Atlantis Press, 2021.

Guo, Xueyao, and Manyu Wen. “Research on Competitive Strategy of Coca-Cola Company.” 2021 3rd International Conference on Economic Management and Cultural Industry (ICEMCI 2021). Atlantis Press, 2021.

Liu, Shuhan. “A Report on Strategic Analysis and Recommendations of Coca-Cola.” International Journal of Frontiers in Sociology 3.17 (2021).

Mandal, Pratap Chandra. “Pricing and Ethical Issues for Global Markets: Strategies and Initiatives.” International Journal of Business Strategy and Automation (IJBSA) 2.2 (2021): 1-15.

Nair, Rajesh Kumar, et al. “The impact of COVID-19 towards international business strategy: A study of Coca-Cola company.” International Journal of Accounting & Finance in Asia Pacific (IJAFAP) 4.2 (2021): 73-92.

Piehler, Rico, Debra Grace, and Christoph Burmann. “Internal brand management: introduction to the special issue and directions for future research.” Journal of Brand Management 25.3 (2018): 197-201.

The Francis Turbine Essay Example For College

Purpose of Experiment

This experiment aims to test a Francis turbine with a fixed head and obtain numerical data related to its efficiency, output, and vane opening. The nominal values of discharge and output are then determined to establish operating curves.

Theory

The Francis is a type of hydroelectric power generator. It converts the flowing water’s potential energy into mechanical power. It features a runner with curved vanes and a shaft that drives its generator.

The power output and efficiency of a hydraulic turbine are affected by various factors. Some of these include the water’s flow rate, its height, the opening of the vanes, and the speed of the turbine. The head of water determines the energy the turbine can use. The flow rate is the volume of water that flows through the turbine at a given rate.

The efficiency of a hydraulic turbine is a measure of how much power it produces when compared to its input. It can be affected by various factors, such as leakage, turbulence, and friction. The power output of a turbine is mainly attributed to its rotational speed and torque. Water’s head and flow rate are also considered to determine its torque.

The Francis test analyzes a turbine’s power output and vane opening characteristics. It can also determine its efficiency. This method involves plotting the variables’ values on curves, which can then be used to establish operating curves. The operating curves show the vane opening and the turbine’s power output. These curves can be utilized to determine the ideal conditions for the operation of a turbine, which can help optimize its efficiency and power output. This information can be useful in designing and operating a hydroelectric power plant.

The power output of a Francis turbine can be calculated using the following equation:

P = ρQHη

The power output of a device is measured by comparing its output with the density of water in its kg/m3. The head H measures the turbine’s efficiency, while the Q is the volume of flowing water. A flow meter can determine the flow rate, while a pressure transducer can measure the head H.

The following equation gives the efficiency of the turbine:

η = Pout / Pin

The input power of a device is represented by the Pin, while the Pout represents the output power. In the case of a Francis turbine, the input power Pin can be expressed as:

Pin = ρQHg

Where; g is the acceleration due to gravity (9.81 m/s^2). Therefore, the efficiency can also be expressed as:

η = Pout / (ρQHg)

In addition to the above equations, the power output of the turbine can be related to its rotational speed (RPM) using the following equation:

P = 2πNT / 60

The power output of a device is represented by the watts. The rotational speed of the device is represented by the N, while the torque is represented by the T. The torque can be determined by measuring the force on the turbine blades and the radius of the turbine runner.

The efficiency of a Francis turbine is influenced by various factors, such as the design and quality of its components. The most common causes of these losses are frictional issues in the seals and bearings, flow separation, and turbulence. It is possible to improve the efficiency of a turbine by analyzing its performance in different operating conditions.

Procedure

Apparatus

Apparatus

Figure 1 Set Up

Procedure

  1. The elbow and pipe were removed from the water exit, which had been in place for the pump lab, and the turbine inlet adapter was installed (as seen in FIG.5). For instance, the guide vane of the Francis turbine was adjusted to a full open position.
  2. The delivery and pump inlet valves were opened.
  3. The Turbine Dynamometer’s torque adjustment control was removed so the band brake could be loose. The back of the device was also checked to ensure the brake was properly fitted.
  4. The device’s side was gently tapped. Then, the button was held, and the torque was set to zero.
  5. Rrpm control knob was turned until a turbine inlet pressure of approximately 90% of the maximum (p3 =.73 bars ± 2) was achieved. The turbine started turning.
  6. The torque of the Turbine Dynamometer was slowly adjusted using the tensioning knob while keeping the turbine inlet pressure (p3) at 0.73 bars to set the turbine rpm to the first rpm on the data sheet (1800 ± 20). If the turbine inlet pressure dropped, the pump motor rpms were increased. All pressure lines were purged as in the pump lab.
  7. Δp1, p3, the turbine shaft power output (read from the panel), and the turbine rpm were recorded.
  8. Steps 6 and 7 were repeated until all the rpms for 100% were completed.
  9. Steps 6 to 8 were repeated at 75%, 50%, and 25% of turbine vane openings.

Results

Table 1 Table of all Calculated Values – Turbine

Guide

Vane

Openings

%

Turbine

RPM

± 20

P3

(±0.02 bars)

ΔP1

(bars)

Turbine

Shaft

Power

Output

WTS

(Watts)

ΔP1

(Pa)

P3

(Pa)

Qv (m3/s) Input power from the pump

WTH=Qv*P3

(W)

Efficiency (%) (WTS / WTH) x100
100 1800 0.73 0.25 64 25000 73000 0.002295 167.5535 38.19677
1600 0.73  0.33  97 33000 73000 0.002637 192.5043 50.3885
1400 0.73  0.34  96 34000 73000 0.002677 195.3992 49.13018
1200 0.73  0.35  91 35000 73000 0.002716 198.2519 45.9012
1000 0.73  0.35  80 35000 73000 0.002716 198.2519 40.3527
800 0.73  0.35  66 35000 73000 0.002716 198.2519 33.29098
600 0.73  0.32  48 32000 73000 0.002597 189.5651 25.32112
75 1800 0.73  0.22  58 22000 73000 0.002153 157.1791 36.90059
1600 0.73  0.26  76 26000 73000 0.002341 170.8717 44.47782
1400 0.73  0.31  90 31000 73000 0.002556 186.5796 48.23678
1200 0.73  0.31  83 31000 73000 0.002556 186.5796 44.48503
1000 0.73  0.32  74 32000 73000 0.002597 189.5651 39.03672
800 0.73  0.31  61 31000 73000 0.002556 186.5796 32.69382
600 0.73  0.31  47 31000 73000 0.002556 186.5796 25.19032
50 1700 0.73  0.19  52 19000 73000 0.002001 146.0697 35.59944
1600 0.73 0.21 58 21000 73000 0.002104 153.5653 37.76896
1500 0.73  0.21  60 21000 73000 0.002104 153.5653 39.07133
1400 0.73  0.25  73 25000 73000 0.002295 167.5535 43.56819
1200 0.73  0.25  69 25000 73000 0.002295 167.5535 41.18089
1000 0.73  0.25  61 25000 73000 0.002295 167.5535 36.40629
800 0.73  0.25  52 25000 73000 0.002295 167.5535 31.03487
600 0.73  0.25  40 25000 73000 0.002295 167.5535 23.87298
25 1500 0.73 0.15  35 15000 73000 0.001778 129.7863 26.9674
1400 0.73  0.15  36 15000 73000 0.001778 129.7863 27.73789
1300 0.73  0.17  44 17000 73000 0.001893 138.1681 31.84526
1200 0.73  0.17  40 17000 73000 0.001893 138.1681 28.95024
1100 0.73  0.18  42 18000 73000 0.001948 142.1738 29.5413
1000 0.73  0.18  40 18000 73000 0.001948 142.1738 28.13458
900 0.73  0.18  39 18000 73000 0.001948 142.1738 27.43121
800 0.73  0.19  36 19000 73000 0.002001 146.0697 24.64577
700 0.73  0.19  31 19000 73000 0.002001 146.0697 21.22274
600 0.73  0.18  28 18000 73000 0.001948 142.1738 19.6942

Francis Turbine Power Against Speed

Figure 2

Francis Turbine Efficiency Against Speed

Figure 3

Discussion

We tested a Francis turbine with a fixed head and obtained various curves related to its efficiency, power output, and vane opening. The nominal values of discharge and output were also established. The results indicated that the vane opening of the turbine shaft greatly affects its efficiency. A unit’s efficiency and power output were higher when it was at 100% open than when it was at 25% open. This is because the flow at the lower vane openings is less than at, the higher openings.

The results of the study revealed that the rpm of the turbine shaft has a significant impact on its efficiency. As the rpm increases, the unit’s efficiency decreases, and the shaft power increases. This is because the turbine experiences higher losses, which leads to a reduction in efficiency. On the other hand, the increase in rpm resulted in a power output increase. The lines connecting the high and low rpm components eventually drop off, which indicates that the turbine is not operating at its design capacity. This issue could cause it to experience losses, leading to lower power output and efficiency.

Conclusion

The results of the Francis turbine test revealed that the relationship between the power output, rpm, efficiency, and vane opening could be explained by the various factors that affect its operation. The data collected during the experiment were then used to generate different power outputs against different speed curves for the different openings in the vane. The variations in supply voltage can affect the accuracy of data collected during the experiment. Also, minor deviations in readings during the study can contribute to the uncertainty in results. Overall, the data collected during the experiment support the assumption that the power output and efficiency of the Francis turbine can be directly related to the rpm and vane opening. In future tests, it’s important to identify the sources of error and improve the efficiency of the power output by implementing more precise instruments.

References

Noon, A. A., & Kim, M. H. (2021). Review of latest experimental and numerical sediment and cavitation erosion techniques in Francis turbines. Energies14(6), 1516. https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/14/6/1516/pdf

Presas, A., Luo, Y., Wang, Z., & Guo, B. (2019). Fatigue life estimation of Francis turbines based on experimental strain measurements: Review the actual data and future trends. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews102, 96-110. https://upcommons.upc.edu/bitstream/handle/2117/175488/pagination_RSER_8826.pdf?sequence=1

Unterluggauer, J., Sulzgruber, V., Doujak, E., & Bauer, C. (2020). Experimental and numerical study of a prototype Francis turbine startup. Renewable Energy157, 1212-1221. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960148120306947

Zhou, X., Wu, H. G., & Shi, C. Z. (2019). Numerical and experimental investigation of the effect of baffles on flow instabilities in a Francis turbine draft tube under partial load conditions. Advances in Mechanical Engineering11(1), 1687814018824468. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/1687814018824468

A Case Study On Sources Of Competitive Advantage And Its Relevance To Management: Starbucks Sample College Essay

Introduction

Starbucks is known for its high-quality coffee and excellent service. The company has become a household name and industry legend. This case study examines Starbucks’ success and relevance to corporate management. According to the report, Starbucks’ branding, customer experience, and product innovation have helped them stand out in a crowded market. The study also examines how Starbucks expanded into new markets and added products. This case study teaches managers and business leaders about competitive advantage and how to retain it. Ultimately, every firm pursuing long-term growth and profitability may learn from Starbucks.

Theories of Competitive Advantage

Five Factors Analysis by Porter

Porter’s Five Forces is a typical framework for examining an industry’s competitive factors. Gao, Wang and Zhang (n.d) assert that Porter’s Five Forces comprises the threat of new entrants, supplier negotiating power, customer bargaining power, the danger of alternative goods, and the intensity of competitive rivalry. According to the framework, the larger the strength of these pressures, the lower the industry’s profitability. Starbucks sees very little competition from new entrants due to the high investment necessary to join the coffee sector. Moreover, suppliers need more negotiation leverage because of Starbucks’ scale and buying strength (Zhang and Xue, 2022). However, customers’ negotiating power is great since they have several coffee supplier choices to pick from. Consumers may buy coffee from other businesses or supermarkets or make it at home, creating a substantial threat from replacement items. Numerous major coffee sector players include McDonald’s, Dunkin’ Donuts, and Costa Coffee; thus, competition is fierce. Although being a valuable paradigm for understanding industrial competitiveness, Porter’s Five Forces have certain drawbacks. The deleterious effects of internal factors on the final product, the company’s resources, and its capabilities are mitigated as Hamadamin and Atan (2019) state. The framework assumes that all businesses in a particular industry employ the same strategy, which is only sometimes the case.

Resource-Based Vision

The Resource-Based Vision (RBV) theory says a company’s fundamental competitive advantages are its resources and skills. In other words, a company’s ability to create value depends on its distinct resources and competencies, which are difficult to replicate or replace (Lee and Yew, 2022). Starbucks’ assets and skills include brand awareness, a strong supply chain, and the ability to provide a unique customer experience. Starbucks has a devoted following of customers prepared to pay a premium for its goods due to its dedication to quality and consistency. According to Fischer and Roy (2019), Starbucks’ strong supply network allows them to get excellent coffee beans and other components. Starbucks is recognized for its distinct customer experience, excellent rooms, free Wi-Fi, and helpful personnel. The RBV model is a helpful framework for understanding the roots of a company’s competitive advantage; nevertheless, it does have a few drawbacks (Lee and Falahat, 2019). For instance, it does not consider external variables like shifts in the market or competition. In addition, the idea operates on the presumption that the resources and competencies of a firm are difficult to replicate or replace, which is only sometimes the case.

Dynamic Capabilities

According to the Dynamic Capabilities idea, the ability to innovate and respond to changing market conditions is crucial for businesses to keep their competitive advantage. The extent to which a corporation may improve its operations and grow despite its current limitations. Starbucks has proved its inventiveness and adaptability to changing market circumstances. Starbucks currently provides a wide range of gourmet meals in addition to coffee, such as tea and pastries (Mohammed, 2022). Starbucks once solely sold coffee. In addition, the firm has invested in mobile ordering and payment technologies to enhance the overall quality of the consumer experience.

Moreover, Starbucks’ leadership in sustainable practices has enabled it to differentiate itself from rivals. The Dynamic Capabilities model offers a helpful view of an organization’s innovative and adaptable capabilities; nevertheless, it has certain limits (Lee and Falahat, 2019). For instance, the theory needs to provide a comprehensible framework for evaluating the factors that contribute to the market advantage enjoyed by a particular organization, as Foguesatto, Martins and Balestrin (2022) state. In addition, it gives the impression that creative thinking and adaptability are always in one’s favour, which is not always the case in all circumstances. For example, innovation often calls for a significant commitment of time and money, but more is needed to provide a profit for that capital.

Theories Relevance on Starbucks Corporation

The management team at Starbucks Corporation will use all three of the abovementioned theories of competitive advantage. The corporation will analyze the competitive forces in the coffee sector with the help of Porter’s Five Forces and then adjust its strategy following the findings. For example, given the high level of competition in the coffee sector, Starbucks will need to increase its marketing and advertising budget (Gao, Wang and Zhang (n.d). The business must also prioritize developing a singular customer experience to stand out in the competitive coffee supply industry. Second, from a resource-based viewpoint, Starbucks is significant because its resources and capabilities are the foundation of its competitive advantage. The success of Starbucks may be attributed to the difficulty imitating brand awareness, supply chain, and unique consumer experience that the company provides (Fischer and Roy, 2019). Starbucks will be able to preserve its market leadership position in the long run if it continues to invest in the tools mentioned above and resources.

According to Saidi et al. (2019), Starbucks is key to the framework because its growth and flexibility to changing market circumstances were critical to the company’s ascension to the top of its sector. Both of these elements have been critical to the success of the Dynamic Capabilities framework. Starbucks’ capacity to retain a competitive edge and stay ahead of the competition is directly tied to the company’s development into new product categories, innovation in online order and payment systems, and dedication to sustainability (Fischer and Roy, 2019). These elements have aided the company’s development into new product areas. Starbucks may preserve its top position in the coffee business if it continues to spend extensively on research and development.

Discuss how such theories could inform Starbucks’ senior management in their quest to gain sustainable competitive advantage.

Starbucks, the most popular coffee company in the world, has climbed to the top of its industry by combining innovative business strategies, excellent brand recognition, and a never-ending quest for excellence. This has allowed Starbucks to become the industry leader. Starbucks’ top management must always seek out creative ways to separate Starbucks from its rivals and establish a durable competitive advantage in order for the firm to stay at the forefront of its industry and retain a competitive edge. Starbucks will only be able to preserve its leadership position in the business. Starbucks must do this to keep its competitive edge over its rivals. Three theoretical frameworks, namely Porter’s Five Forces, the Resource-Based Perspective, and Dynamic Capabilities, are available to serve as potential guides for senior management at Starbucks as they seek to achieve a sustainable advantage in the market.

The framework known as Porter’s Five Forces may be used to analyze the competitive factors that define industries and have an effect on the potential for profit. The intensity of competitive rivalry is one of the five factors, along with the threat of new entrants, the negotiating strength of suppliers, the bargaining power of customers, and the danger of alternative goods (Hamadaminand Atan, 2019). The upper management of Starbucks may utilize Porter’s Five Forces to determine the parts of the business that are most susceptible to the influence of competitors and then design plans to mitigate the effects of those weaknesses. For example, Starbucks has solid brand recognition and a sizable following of devoted consumers, but the possibility of competition from newcomers poses a risk to the company’s overall market share. According to Zhang and Xue (2022), if Starbucks invested in cutting-edge technology and creative product development, it might avoid this danger while staying competitive. Moreover, Starbucks’ suppliers’ negotiating power may have an influence not just on the company’s supply chain but also on its profitability. Starbucks may be able to offset the negotiating power of its suppliers if it maintains excellent connections with them and diversifies its supply chain.

RBV conceptual framework that highlights an organization’s internal resources and skills as a possible source of competitive advantage. The model depicts that a company’s resources and abilities must be precious, uncommon, one-of-a-kind, and irreplaceable to acquire and retain a competitive edge in the marketplace, as Foguesatto, Martins and Balestrin (2022) explains. Starbucks’ senior management might use the RBV to identify the company’s strengths and devise strategies to capitalize on those qualities to gain a competitive edge. For example, Starbucks’ broad supply chain and tight ties with coffee makers may be used to maintain a consistent supply of high-quality coffee beans, making it a significant resource. This would allow Starbucks to capitalize on its competitive edge. Leveraging Starbucks’s partnerships with coffee-producing firms might be one way to achieve this goal. It is possible that Starbucks’ human resources strategy, which promotes staff training and development, contributes to the company’s high levels of customer happiness (Saedi et al., 2019). Starbucks is expected to be able to sustain its position as a market competitor if it continues to invest in the resources mentioned above and its competencies.

According to Lee and Yew (2022), the Dynamic Capabilities model is a conceptual framework that highlights a company’s ability to react to changing market circumstances and capitalize on new possibilities. A corporation must be able to monitor market developments, grasp opportunities as they emerge, and rearrange the resources and capabilities at its disposal to build a sustained competitive advantage and satisfy the goals of the Dynamic Capabilities framework (Arsawan et al., 2022). Starbucks’ upper management might use Dynamic Capabilities to identify areas where the corporation may pivot its business model and capitalize on new trends. The application might be used to accomplish this goal. For instance, Starbucks might use its massive retail network to provide other products and services, such as meal delivery or a subscription service. This would need to take advantage of the retail network that the corporation has established. According to Lee and Falahat (2019), if Starbucks gathers information about its consumers and utilizes that data to construct a profile for each client, the corporation may adjust its marketing techniques to give customers who purchase their products a more personalized experience. There is a fair probability that Starbucks can keep its market relevance and effectiveness for a long time if the corporation is ready to explore the possibilities of adaptation and innovation aggressively.

Conclusion

In conclusion, a company’s competitive advantage is crucial to business strategy, and several theories will be used to examine it. Porter’s Five Forces, Resource-Based Perspective, and Dynamic Capabilities guide Starbucks’ business management. Starbucks can sustain its worldwide coffee market leadership and capitalize on possibilities if it properly understands and incorporates these principles into its business strategy. Suppose Starbucks applied these frameworks to identify vulnerabilities, optimize strengths, and adjust to changing market conditions. In that case, it might sustain its industry leadership, grow and innovate, and adapt to new market conditions.

Reference List

Arsawan, I.W.E., Koval, V., Rajiani, I., Rustiarini, N.W., Supartha, W.G. and Suryantini, N.P.S., 2022. Leveraging knowledge sharing and innovation culture into SMEs sustainable competitive advantage. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management71(2), pp.405-428.

Fischer, D. and Roy, K., 2019. Market entry in India: The curious case of Starbucks. Rutgers Business Review4(2).

Foguesatto, C.R., Martins, B.V. and Balestrin, A., 2022. How social media and dynamic capabilities impact innovation performance?. In ISPIM Conference Proceedings (pp. 1-9). The International Society for Professional Innovation Management (ISPIM).

Gao, J., Li, X., Wang, Z. and Zhang, H., The Financial Statement Analysis of Starbucks.

Hamadamin, H.H. and Atan, T., 2019. The impact of strategic human resource management practices on competitive advantage sustainability: The mediation of human capital development and employee commitment. Sustainability11(20), p.5782.

Lee, C.S. and Yew, L.Y., 2022. Enhancing Customer Satisfaction through Open Innovation Communities: A Comparison of Knowledge Management Approaches. Knowledge Management & E-Learning14(1), pp.81-102.

Lee, Y.Y. and Falahat, M., 2019. The impact of digitalization and resources on gaining competitive advantage in international markets: Mediating role of marketing, innovation and learning capabilities. Technology Innovation Management Review9(11).

Mohammed, M., 2022. Exploration of Dynamic Capabilities Needed for Digital Transformation and Business Model Innovation in the Swedish Automobile Industry.

Saeidi, P., Saeidi, S.P., Sofian, S., Saeidi, S.P., Nilashi, M. and Mardani, A., 2019. The impact of enterprise risk management on competitive advantage by moderating role of information technology. Computer standards & interfaces63, pp.67-82.

Zhang, L. and Xue, B., 2022. Strategic Analysis of Starbucks. Financial Engineering and Risk Management5(7), pp.106-113.