What is a Diversification Strategy?

Recommend this article to your friends!

Diversification is a strategy that takes a company into new markets with new products or
services. Companies may choose a diversification strategy for different reasons.
Firstly, companies might wish to create and exploit economies of scope, in which the company
tries to utilize its exciting resources and capabilities in other markets. This can oftentimes be the
case if companies have under-utilized resources or capabilities that cannot be easily disposed or
closed. Using a diversification strategy, companies may therefore be able to utilize all its
capabilities or resources, and able to attract new business from market segments not catered to
earlier.
Secondly, managerial skills found within the company may be successfully used in other
markets, where the dominant logic and managerial procedures of management can be
successfully transferred to other markets.
Thirdly, companies pursuing a diversification strategy may be able to cross-subsidize one
product with the surplus of another. This way, companies with a very diverse portfolio of
products catering to different markets may potentially grow in power, and be able to withstand a
prolonged period of price competition etc. When having subsidized one product for a substantial
period of time, the company might possibly be able to win a monopoly, making it the only
supplier in the respective market.
Fourthly, companies may also want to use a diversification strategy to spread financial risk over
different markets and products, so that the entire success of the company is not reliant on one
market or product only.
There may however be other reasons for companies to use a diversification strategy than the four
listed above, and companies may very well benefit from a diversification strategy for other
reasons.
However, it is important for companies to realize the possible danger of diversifying its scope of
operations to much. Companies might risk neglecting its core capabilities and become too
diversified, where too many different products supplied to different markets might have negative
effects on products and services, where e.g. product quality or uniqueness might suffer due to the
shift in focus on different products and markets.
The diversification strategy can be split into two different types:
1. Related diversification
2. Unrelated diversification

Dell's Diversification Strategy: 'A Day Late and a Dollar Short?'
Published: September 01, 2010 in Knowledge@Wharton



Share this Article
Share on facebook Share on twitter Share on email More Sharing Services
When Dell launched its first smartphone in the U.S. on August 24, early product reviews were
dismal. Compared with the slew of other nifty new smartphones available today, critics groused
that the only thing remarkable about the phone -- called the Aero -- was its $99 price tag. They
have deemed its hardware mediocre, its operating system -- running on a 16-month-old version
of Google's Android -- outdated, and the requisite smartphone bells and whistles disappointingly
meager.
If Dell wanted to find a bright side to the phone's debut, it was that it went largely unnoticed, for
two reasons. First, in an increasingly crowded smartphone market, one more new entrant hardly
causes a ripple anymore. Second, the launch was overshadowed by a bigger, more dramatic
event that has been unfolding for weeks at the $53 billion, Texas-based company -- the bidding
war against rival Hewlett-Packard for a small, little known developer of high-end data storage
technology called 3PAR. After having initially offered to buy 3PAR for a little more than $1
billion in what looked like a sure-fire deal in mid-August, Dell found itself in a face-off with
Hewlett-Packard (HP), whose second counter-offer reached $30 a share, or $2 billion. (The one-
upmanship seemed likely to end in HP's favor when Knowledge@Wharton was about to publish
this article on September 1). All this to own a company with just under $200 million in 2009
revenues.
Both the lackluster smartphone launch and the 3PAR tug-of-war make one thing clear -- nothing
about Dell's attempts to reinvent itself from a PC and server maker to an all-encompassing IT
products and services company has been easy, says Daniel A. Levinthal, a Wharton professor of
management. "[Dell] seems to have lost sight of what it's good at and how to find new
opportunities to leverage that." This is in sharp contrast to the Dell of yesteryear, he says, which
confidently won "customers who valued its tightly run business model," designed to churn out
economically priced computers with a snap of the finger. "Dell hasn't become any less wonderful
at doing that," he notes. "But guess what? The world has changed."
The problem, according to Levinthal and other Wharton experts, is that Dell woke up too late to
this changed world, even as competitors like HP snatched away its once enviable market lead by
offering sharper products and services. With founder and chairman Michael Dell back in the
CEO post since 2007 after a three-year break, the company has been at pains to claim a bigger
stake in higher-margin corporate-focused businesses -- like the storage services that 3PAR offers
-- and fast-growing consumer markets such as smartphones. But do Dell's ambitions add up?
Not yet, observers say. Despite the early achievements of its groundbreaking, low-cost business
model, "Dell has leadership issues, it has competitive advantage issues and it has strategy
issues," suggests Saikat Chaudhuri, a Wharton management professor. "Dell sees the need for
diversification, but does it see the need for transformation? There is a big difference."
Forgetting the Customer
In their new book, Strategy from the Outside In: Profiting from Customer Value,George S. Day,
a Wharton marketing professor, and Christine Moorman of Duke University's Fuqua School of
Business write that Dell's plight is typical of a company that becomes so good at what it does --
in this case, manufacturing and delivering low-cost PCs -- that it misses cues from its market that
the company needs to change. Dell has succumbed to what the authors call "inside-out hubris."
"To formulate an effective competitive strategy, we argue that you've got to stand from outside
the firm and look at it through the respective lenses of competitors, customers, channel members
and so forth," says Day, who is also co-director of Wharton's Mack Center for Technological
Innovation. "That worked really well for Dell. It was a company that prospered through the
1980s and a good part of the 1990s with a really clear-cut customer value proposition. It was able
to master logistics and deliver standardized hardware at prices and speeds no one else could
match."
However, like other successful companies, "Dell began to think, 'We know this market better
than anyone else,'" Day notes. "So the focus shifted from the 'outside in' [approach of] looking at
its position in the market to thinking, 'How can we maximize earnings out of our existing
resources and capabilities'" at the expense of, rather than in addition to, thinking about what its
customers need.
Still, that low-cost model -- and what Day refers to as Dell's "monolithic focus on efficiency" --
has served it well, according to experts. "Around 1997, when Dell was the strongest, it was
holding about one week of inventory. All the competitors were holding two or three months,"
says Serguei Netessine, professor of technology and operations management at Insead in France
and co-director of the Insead-Wharton Alliance. "That created a huge difference in the cost
structure -- computers lose value very quickly. Each week that a computer sits on a store shelf, it
loses about 1% of its value. So Dell was winning." According to Netessine's estimates, Dell's
costs were around 8% less compared with competitors at the time, like IBM or Gateway -- a
difference that helped the firm become number one in the global PC market.
And today? Having been usurped by HP as the top PC vendor, Dell is fighting to stay in second
place. "Dell still has an efficient supply chain. It is constantly improving and taking out
inefficiencies," says Netessine. Yet the 8% cost advantage has dwindled to around 2% as other
companies have learned how to improve their own supply strategies. "It's hard to have any kind
of meaningful advantage with 2% because Dell's products are not dramatically better or different,
or more reliable, and the company doesn't offer any better service," he adds. "That's not
sufficient to sustain the dramatic growth that Dell had in, say, 2000."
Not that its growth today isn't enviable, especially considering the beating that many computer
firms -- including Dell -- took during the recession. For the second quarter of the current fiscal
year, which ended July 30, Dell reported a profit of $545 million on revenues of $15.5 billion,
compared with a profit of $472 million on revenues of $12.8 billion a year ago. Meanwhile, cash
and equivalents at the end of July were $13.1 billion. During the results announcement, Brian
Gladden, Dell's chief financial officer, attributed much of the growth to "overdue client refresh" -
- that is, large corporate customers increasing IT spending after the belt-tightening of 2008 and
2009. Sales for its servers, storage and networking products were up 43% to $4.3 billion.
Services revenues increased 57% to $1.9 billion.
As for computers, Dell managed to hold on to its lead over Acer, but just barely, with 10.6
million PCs shipped (up 19.1%), behind HP's 14.8 million units and slightly ahead of Acer's 10.2
million. Server shipments, too, grew in the second quarter: According to Gartner estimates, Dell
was in second place, with nearly 550,000 servers shipped (up 35%), compared with HP's number
one slot at 644,00 units and IBM's number three slot at 270,000.
However, no company in the fast-changing hardware and software sectors can take its market
share for granted. The challenge was made especially clear in the recent jostling in the notebook
computer market. All the big incumbent vendors have been ceding market share to aggressive
rivals over recent months -- and then came Apple's iPad in the spring. According to Deutsche
Bank analyst Chris Whitmore, the new iPad helped Apple double its share of the global notebook
computer market, leapfrogging Dell and other second-tier vendors like ASUS, Lenovo and
Toshiba, and moving it to third place, behind HP and Acer.
Being eclipsed by Apple and the new iPad goes to the heart of Dell's struggle. Dell is no Apple,
says Netessine. "Dell has never invented a notable product. What it has done is deliver a basic
product that someone else has invented but get it to consumers much more efficiently. To be an
Apple requires a little bit more. [Apple] is structured around innovation. It has been innovating
its whole life."
Into the Clouds
That explains why Dell wants to focus less on hardware and more on services -- or what
Netessine calls "servicization." Converting products "that are commoditized into services --
which are ... harder [for consumers] to shop around for and compare with one another -- is
popular among manufacturers nowadays," he notes.
Dell is betting on the growing interest among its corporate customers in cloud computing
services -- Internet-based computing that lets companies access resources, such as software and
storage, which providers like Dell host remotely on their behalf. Dell's $1.4 billion acquisition in
2008 of EqualLogic (which posted $800 million in sales for the first six months of fiscal 2011)
and a partnership with storage giant EMC have already enabled it to begin providing cloud-
computing services for small- and mid-sized companies.
For some companies, Netessine suggests that servicization can be a big shift. "You have to really
change your focus from short-term selling of a product to thinking about five, 10, 15 years down
the road and possibly bundling some kind of service agreement with customers buying those
products," he states. "Thinking carefully about the life cycle of those products -- what kind of
contract do corporate customers want; can you support customers with extended service
agreements; can you offer some kind of multi-tiered services -- requires very different expertise,
but I don't think it is as far removed from Dell's core strengths as, for example, selling
smartphones."
Several recent acquisitions move Dell further in the servicization direction. That includes its
biggest-ever acquisition, the $3.9 billion deal last year to buy (at a 68% premium) IT
management and solutions provider Perot Systems, which is currently being integrated into the
Dell Services unit.
"I'm wondering whether all this is too little too late," says Chaudhuri. "What I'm missing are
some bold moves." Compare Dell's acquisitions with HP's, he adds. In 2008, HP expanded its
services offerings by buying a frontrunner -- Electronic Data Systems -- for more than $13
billion. Shortly after, software company Oracle bought Sun Microsystems for $7.4 billion to get
into the computer hardware market for the first time. What these companies want to do,
according to Chaudhuri, is emulate IBM, which sold its computer manufacturing to Lenovo and
shifted into services by buying PricewaterhouseCoopers Consulting in 2002 for $3.5 billion.
David Hsu, a Wharton management professor, agrees that Dell has the cash and the clout to push
its strategy further than it has been, despite concerns about tougher times ahead if the U.S.
tumbles back into a double-dip recession. "There's a tendency to focus on profitability and
operations, and not make a strategic move, but I don't think the shareholders would like it, even
in an environment like ours," he says.
Smaller acquisitions for a company like Dell shouldn't be overlooked, however, observes
Lawrence G. Hrebiniak, a Wharton professor of management. "It doesn't matter whether an
acquisition is big or small. The question is whether Dell finds something to acquire that fits
logically or extends its strategy. Is Dell buying growth but destroying value?"
As Hrebiniak sees it, while the 3PAR acquisition makes sense as a way for both Dell and HP to
expand their services, the premium both were willing to pay does not. He adds that the bidding
war has been more about HP-Dell politics than 3PAR. "There's a little ego involved," he
suggests. "HP got rid of [CEO Mark Hurd in August] and it wants to prove to the world that it
can still make strategic decisions without him.... And Dell still wants to beat HP badly because
HP has beaten them in PCs."
The 3PAR win, if successful, would be good timing for Michael Dell. In July, he agreed to pay
$4 million, and the company agreed to pay $100 million, to settle a case in which the Securities
and Exchange Commission (SEC) accused Dell executives of misleading investors about its
profitability. A month later, at the company's annual general meeting, one-fourth of Dell's
shareholders refused to vote for Michael Dell's reelection to the board as chairman. That's why
"he wants to show that he's still okay -- even though a quarter of his shareholders don't think so -
- that he can do a lot of good things for shareholders and they're wrong for picking on him,"
notes Hrebiniak.
All Things to All People
According to Day, Dell needs to sharpen its focus. He describes the current strategy as "a day
late and a dollar short.... HP and others have been expanding into services far longer than Dell
has." He suggests that part of Dell's challenge is shaking its obsession with internal efficiencies
to focus outwards. For companies such as Dell, "you have to go out and live with your customers
and channel members, and focus not only on what your competitors are doing in your markets
but also on what they're doing elsewhere."
Other experts raise concerns about Dell's inability to articulate its priorities. Is it smartphones
and the like for consumers? Is it one-stop shop products and services for its corporate customers?
Is it PCs and laptops for everyone? Or a little bit of everything? "I'm not sure if Dell is hedging
its bets or if it is uncertain of where it wants to go, or if it wants to be an all-round big player,
like an HP that straddles both worlds," says Chaudhuri. "At present, it looks like it's not sure
where it can make much impact."
Dell is "trying to be an 'everything' IT business, a diversified company," adds Netessine. "The
problem is that it's extremely hard to do all of those things well. It's hard to see how Dell can ...
compete with all those powerful companies that have been in the business longer and have much
better products in many cases."
It is a problem when companies like Dell "try to take an option on many, many different
segments," says Hsu. "It can be very expensive as well as confusing [to send] mixed signals not
only within its own organization, but also to the outside world as to what is unique about Dell."
What Dell needs to remember, he adds, is that "you don't have to master the whole value chain in
order to be a valuable company."
Product Diversification Strategy
by Ian Linton, Demand Media
inShare


Share
RSS
Email

A product diversification strategy can help your business grow.
Related Articles
How Does a Multinational Company Use the Diversification Strategy in Decision Making?
What Are the Benefits of Concentric Diversification?
Elements of Product Strategy
The Advantages of a Product Differentiation Strategy
Retail Product Strategy
The Purpose of Product Attribute Leadership Strategy
A product diversification strategy is a form of business development. Small businesses that
implement the strategy can diversify their product range by modifying existing products or
adding new products to the range. The strategy provides opportunities to grow the business by
increasing sales to existing customers or entering new markets.
Sponsored Link
The Emerging CFO Program
An exclusive program at Stanford For Finance Executives. Apply Now.
gsb.stanford.edu/ECFOProgram
Objectives
Set your objectives for product diversification. You can take a defensive approach with the
objective to protect your business if, for example, demand drops for your products or you face
strong competition. This might be important for news companies that have built their business on
a single product. Declining market share or revenue could threaten the survival of your business.
Alternatively, you can take an offensive approach where you see a strong market opportunity but
cant take advantage of it with your existing products.
Approach
You can approach product diversification in a number of ways. You can modify your existing
products so that the new version appeals to a different group of customers. If you make tools for
building professionals, for example, consider developing a version that appeals to amateur users.
An alternative strategy is to offer new products to your existing customers. A retailer of fruit and
vegetables could introduce a range of health foods that appeal to the same customer group.
Another approach is to add a new product to your range, aimed at a new group of customers.
Source
Product diversification can be an expensive, time-consuming task. Analyze whether you have the
resources to develop new products or modify existing ones. If you dont want to develop
products internally, consider other options such as distributing products from other suppliers,
taking out licensing agreements to manufacture or supply products developed by other
companies, or setting up alliances or partnerships with other companies to jointly develop or
market products. If your company is in a strong financial position, consider acquisitions to gain
access to products that align with your diversification strategy.
Resources
Assess the resources you need to implement your strategy. Set a budget for the diversification
program to cover development and marketing costs. Consider the supply chain implications of
your new products. You may have to find new suppliers and build effective working
relationships with them. Review your sales and marketing resources. Does your team have the
product and market knowledge to achieve your sales targets? If you plan to manufacture the
product yourself, do you have the production capacity or will you need to invest in new plant or
hire more staff? If your new product sells through retail outlets, can you access a suitable
distribution network?
Risk
Product diversification is a high risk strategy, so its important to assess both the opportunity and
the level of risk. Focus on product diversification that represents an attractive opportunity for
your business, such as an instance where the market is growing and no other company is meeting
the demand. Provided the costs of developing and marketing the new product allow you to earn a
profit, this is an opportunity to pursue. Risk increases if the new product might take sales away
from your existing products or if the cost of market entry is very high. In those scenarios, the
benefit to your company may not offset the risk.
Research
Before committing resources to product diversification, carry out research to ensure that you
understand the needs of the market. Use the Internet to identify potential competitors and find
out more about their products and prices. Carry out a small-scale market test to evaluate the
potential of your strategy. Ask for customers feedback on their experience with the product.
Evaluate the results of your sales and marketing activities in the test. Analyze the cost of taking
the product to market so you can prepare an accurate budget for launching the new product.
Google diversification strategy?
Posted on March 12, 2010 by sebastian
Although the vast majority of Google is search engine market, the reality is that after 10 years
the Mountain View giant has become the largest advertising agency in the world.
Over the past year, Google reported total gross revenues of $ 24 billion USD. If we discount the
6 billion paid to its partners (with whom they share the advertising revenue), net revenues are in
the range of $ 18 billion.
If we look at the chart above, supplied by Business Insider, Is quite obvious that almost all
revenue comes from ads on Googles sites. Only a small portion of revenues comes from
Adsense or other services offered by the new media company (Google Apps, Youtube, Picasa,
etc).
Is Googles diversification strategy working?
Even do Google has been one of the most prolific internet companies when launching new online
and mobile services, still after ten years almost 90% of their revenues are coming from their
most basic and oldest product.
Why the diversification program Google launched many years back by introducing other product
lines like Gmail, Youtube, Picassa, Doubleclick, AdMob, Google Energy and others does not
translate into a significant level of revenues?
It seems that the source of monetization that Google found on the search market, has not yet
found on other business divisions. Again, the key challenge for most internet companies today is
how to monetize the value created by their applications or services.
Moreover if we look how much Google has invested on diversifying their portfolio; for instance
Youtube was acquired in 2006 for 1,650 million USD.
Anyway, Googles strategy could work in the long term. If we look closely on year 2009,
revenue from ads on their sites accounted for 83% of the total. Compared to 2008, this item
represented 90% of Googles total income. Nevertheless, the growth rate of these windfall is,
so far, relatively modest.
Is Google a facing a major risk due to their dependency in only one source of revenues? Could a
loss in their share in the search market against Bing or Yahoo jeopardize Googles future?
The is other angle that we are not able to assess in this graph, such as the impact of mobile
internet exponential growth driven by our paranoia of real-time information and the increasing
power of social networks, which inevitably will end up affecting the search industry and
therefore Googles current revenues. Just as an example, online users spend more time on
Facebook than in Google, Yahoo, MSN, Youtube and wikipedia together!
Google is aware of this and has already begun to position themselves strategically. Its foray into
the mobile world with Android OS, the recent AdMob acquisition, Twitter and Facebook
included their search results and the launch of its latest social media attempt, Google Buzz,
confirm that the battlefield is now for the end users mobile.
Advantages & Disadvantages to Corporate
Strategy Diversification
By Alan Li, eHow Contributor
Diversification
in corporate marketing is selling new products in new markets.
In a corporate marketing context, diversification is the strategy of increasing profits through
selling new products in new markets. As with all strategies, it has advantages and disadvantages,
and management can use these advantages and disadvantages to different ends.
Other People Are Reading
The Advantages and Disadvantages of Ethical Diversification Strategies
Advantages & Disadvantages of Diversifying Into an Unrelated Business?



Print this article
1. Uses of Diversification
o Diversification in corporate marketing can be turned to both offensive and
defensive ends. On the offensive, it can be used to increase the corporation's
profits through starting up enterprises in untapped markets. On the defensive, it
can be used to spread the corporation's assets so as to protect against downturns in
one market.
Profit
o The biggest potential advantage of diversification is the increase in revenue.
Diversification means selling a corporation's products in a new environment that
it has not attempted to tap into on prior occasions; a successful venture there can
result in an entirely new stream of revenue. Better still, such enterprises do not
compete with the corporation's older holdings and tend to offer higher rewards
than those from the preexisting enterprises.
o Sponsored Links
Gap analysis tool
Set up and send out gap analysis assessments in just 3 minutes
www.spidergap.com
Cost
o One major disadvantage to diversification is the cost of starting up new businesses
in new markets. It is more difficult for corporations to secure resources to start
such enterprises because the element of risk is higher. Furthermore, there is no
guarantee that the new enterprise will start producing in the near future, and a
corporation may have to sustain a loss for consecutive periods before it has
attained enough market penetration to start making a profit. Depending on when
and how much profit, new enterprises may not be worth the investment.
Risk
o Another major disadvantage to diversification is that it is the riskiest of all
possible marketing strategies. Since the corporation is selling new products in
new markets, it has neither the expertise to produce and market those products nor
the expertise to sell in those markets. As such, it will need to spend the money to
either acquire the expertise or the information to do both, and there is a chance
that its preexisting management will not be able to do so effectively, which could
turn a potentially profitable project into a resource sink with no payout.


Product Diversification Strategy
By Laura Acevedo, eHow Contributor
Diversification
Product diversification involves modifying existing products in order to expand the market
potential of a product. From changes in brands to changes in a product's target market, product
diversification can obtain new clients for your product by leveraging an existing product's
reputation and development platform to produce and sell a modified product. Successful product
diversification requires accurate targeting and product differentiation to prevent eroding your
current market and increase overall sales and profits.
Other People Are Reading
1. Brainstorm
o Brainstorm potential markets for an existing product with slight alterations.
Consider geographic differences, demographic differences such as gender and
age, and features that appeal to different groups. Obtain a strong list of potential
new products for diversification efforts.
Market Research
o Based on product brainstorming, conduct extensive market research into the
viability of new products. Make sure new products align with different target
markets than the customer base for your existing product to avoid eroding market
share for your current product. Conduct surveys, focus groups and product trials
to ensure product success prior to launching a new product.
Demographic Diversification
o Diversify your product base by implementing changes in your demographic
targets. A good example of demographic diversification by age is "Teen People"
magazine. The standard "People" targets adult readers whereas "Teen People"
targets preteens and teenagers. This diversification added readership and
leveraged an existing brand to diversify and increase revenue. Consider
demographic diversification if there are wide differences in preferences for your
product based on gender, age, location or ethnic differences.
Price Diversification
o Diversification can target new price points. For example, Marriott hotels targets
mid- to upper-price point hotel customers. Marriott expanded into budget hotels
by creating new brands---Fairfield Inn and Courtyard by Marriott hotels. Consider
price diversification if there is a wide range of prices for the products or services
you offer.
Product Extension
o Create a new product that builds off your established brand image. For example,
Reebok is known for athletic footwear. Reebok extended this image and created
Reebok Fitness Water to diversify its product line and build off the success of its
shoe line. Consider a product extension strategy if the existing market for the type
of product you offer is already saturated and there are convenient ties to other
product types. This strategy also helps reduce overall business risk by offering
products in a variety of customer categories.
Product Modifications
o Product modifications such as color or different features can help diversify your
product offers. For example, Heinz expanded its ketchup offerings to include
colored ketchup in purple and green. These products targeted consumers with
children to capture additional market share. Consider a product modification
strategy if you have budgetary constraints, or if slight modifications could lead to
expanded market share or reinvigorate your existing product's image.


a dng ha qu mc: Him ha khn lng
Trn th trng chng khon, chng ta lun c nghe ni n cc ch li ca
vic a dng ha danh mc u t. Khng mt ai trong chng ta mun "b ht trng vo mt r"
hay t a bn thn ra hng chu s ri ro bn cht ca vic ch nm gi mt loi c phiu. Th
nhng, liu bn c ang i qu xa trn con ng t bo v mnh hay khng? C nhng lc a
dng ha qu mc li l mt ri ro ln.
Th no l a dng ha?

Khi chng ta ni n s a dng ha trong mt danh mc u t chng khon, chng
ta ang ni n n lc ca nh u t trong vic gim bt ri ro thng qua vic u t
vo nhiu cng ty thuc nhiu ngnh, thm ch nhiu nc khc nhau. Hu ht cc
chuyn gia u t u ng rng mc d a dng ha l mt tm phiu bo hnh
trc ri ro thua l, nguyn tc sng cn cho vic u t vn lun l hng ti cc mc
tiu ti chnh di hn ca bn. C rt nhiu nghin cu ch ra ti sao a dng ha c
tc dng. Mt cch n gin, bng cch m rng phm vi u t ca bn vo nhiu
cng ty, nhiu lnh vc khng c nhiu s lin kt vi nhau, bn s th kim ch bt
c s bin ng gi c vi danh mc ca mnh do thc t khng bao gi c chuyn
tt c cc ngnh i ln hay i xung vi cng mt tc v trong cng mt thi k. Do
, a dng ha m bo s hot ng n nh hn cho danh mc ca bn.

iu quan trng l lun nh rng cho d danh mc u t ca bn c c a dng
ha n u chng na th khng bao gi nguy c ri ro v n zero. Bn c th gim
thiu c nhng ri ro gn lin vi cc c phiu n l (cc nh hc thut gi l cc
ri ro khng c tnh h thng), th nhng lun c nhng ri ro thuc v bn cht ca th
trng (nhng ri ro h thng). Nhng ri ro ny c th nh hng n hu ht tt c
cc c phiu v s a dng d mc no cng khng th ngn chn c chng.

Liu chng ta c th a dng ha chng li cc ri ro phi h thng?

V vn ny, bi vit mun nu ra mt cu hi: "Bao nhiu c phiu l cho s a
dng ha nhng khng phi a dng ha qu mc?" Vic s hu ba nm c phiu
thay v ch mt loi duy nht lun lun l khn ngoan, nhng n khi no th vic b
sung thm c phiu vo danh mc ca bn s khng cn tc dng trong vic hn ch
ri ro ca th trng?

Trc tin, chng ta cn phi bit ri ro c nh ngha nh th no. Cch thc c
chp nhn rng ri trong vic o lng ri ro l theo di mc bin ng. iu c
ngha l, mt c phiu hay mt danh mc u t bin ng cng mnh trong mt
khong thi gian nht nh th cng c u t cng c ri ro cao. Mt khi nim
trong thng k c gi l " lch chun" c s dng o mc ri ro. Trong
phm vi bi vit ny, bn c th hiu lch chun l "ri ro".

Theo l thuyt hin i v danh mc u t (modern portfolio theory), bn n rt
gn vi im a dng ha ti u sau khi thm vo danh mc ca mnh c phiu th
20. Trong cun sch "L thuyt hin i v danh mc u t v Phn tch u t" ca
mnh, Edwin J. Elton v Martin J. Gruber kt lun rng lch chun (ri ro) trung bnh
cho mt danh mc u t ch c mt c phiu l 49,2% trong khi tng s lng c
phiu trong mt danh mc c cn bng tt s gip gim lch chun xung
mc ti a l 19,2%. Tuy nhin, h cng nhn thy rng vi mt danh mc 20 c phiu,
ri ro c gim xung cn khong 20%. V th nn, cc c phiu thm vo t th 20
cho n th 1000 s ch gim mc ri ro ca danh mc i khong 0,8% trong khi ch
20 c phiu u tin lm gim c n 29,2% (49,2% - 20%).

Nhiu nh u t c quan im sai lm rng ri ro t l nghch vi s lng c phiu
thm vo cho mi danh mc u t, trong khi trn thc t iu ny khng h ng. C
nhng bng chng r rng cho thy bn ch c th gim ri ro n mt im nht nh
m ti vic a dng ho hn na khng em li li ch g.

a dng ha ch thc

Nhng l lun trn y khng c ngha c mua vo 20 c phiu bt k l bn gim
c ri ro n mc thp nht. Lu rng ngay t u chng ti gii thch a dng
ha tc l bn phi mua vo nhng c phiu hon ton khc nhau, c th l v quy m
ca cng ty, ca ngnh, hay ca c mt th trng. Ni theo ngn ng ti chnh, bn
mua cc c phiu khng c s lin h vi nhau - cc c phiu bin ng theo nhng
chiu hng khc nhau trong nhng khong thi gian khc nhau.

ng thi, bn hy lu thm mt im na. Bi vit ny ch cp n vic a dng
ha trong phm vi danh mc u t c phiu ca bn. Bn thn mt danh mc u t
hon chnh ca mt c nhn cng nn c s a dng ha gia cc loi ti sn khc
nhau. iu c ngha l bn phi tnh ton v c s phn b ngun vn theo t l %
nht nh vo tri phiu, c phiu, bt ng sn, dng, v cc loi ti sn khc na.

Cc qu tng h

S hu mt qu tng h u t vo 100 cng ty khc nhau khng c ngha l bn
ang im a dng ho ti u. Rt nhiu qu tng h ch chuyn vo mt lnh vc
nht nh. Vy nn s hu mt qu u t v ngnh vin thng hay chm sc sc khe
ng ngha vi vic bn ang a dng ha trong phm vi ngnh . Tuy nhin, v s
bin ng gi c ca cc c phiu trong cng mt ngnh c s lin h kh mt thit vi
nhau, vic u t vo mt qu tng h nh va ni s khng em li cho bn mc
a dng ha nh bn c th c c khi u t cho nhiu ngnh, nhiu lnh vc khc
nhau. Cc qu u t cn i c kh nng ngn nga ri ro tt hn mt qu tng h
ch chuyn v mt mng nht nh bi h s hu 100 c phiu hoc hn th na ca
cc cng ty trn khp th trng.

Tuy vy, hhiu nh u t ca cc qu tng h cng tng phi i mt vi hu
qu ca vic a dng ha qu mc. Mt s qu, c bit l cc qu ln, c qu nhiu
ti sn (v d qu nhiu tin mt cho vic u t), th nn h phi u t vo hng trm
c phiu. Ni cch khc, chnh bn - nh u t vo qu tng h - ang nm gi
hng trm c phiu . Trong mt vi trng hp, vic s hu qu nhiu c phiu nh
th ny khin vic qu tng h i trc v thu li nhun cao hn mc trung bnh ca
cc hn th biu l iu gn nh khng th. Trong khi , y li chnh l l do then
cht khin bn u t vo mt tng h v chp nhn tr cho gim c qu mt khon
ph qun l.

C th ly Fidelity Magellan, mt qu tng h i vo sch v vi tn tui ca mt
huyn thoi trong lng u t chng khon - Peter Lynch. Trong vng t nm 1990 n
2004, ti sn ca qu ny tng ln con s 60 t . Chng ta chc chn s khng th
tip tc coi Fidelity Magellan ch l mt qu ch s na. Nhng chng ta s cn phi suy
ngh v bn khon rt nhiu vi cu hi ti sao mt qu u t c quy m ln n th
vn c th "vt mt" ch s S&P 500 v tc sinh li.

Li kt

a dng ha ging nh mt cy kem: Hu ht tt c mi ngi u ng rng c a
dng ha v kem l nhng th "tuyt vi". iu khng c ngha l bn c th tiu
ha qu nhiu ci tt. n qu nhiu kem s ch khin bn au bng m thi.

kin c nht tr nhiu nht hin nay: Mt danh mc phn b cn i vi khong 20
c phiu s thc hin c mt cch hiu qu nht chc nng a dng ha, chng li
ri ro. Chng ti xin c dng y vi cu ni ni ting ca Warren Buffett: "a
dng ha quy m ln ch cn thit vi nhng nh u t khng hiu h ang lm ci
g!"

Diversification (marketing strategy)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

This article includes a list of references, but its sources remain unclear because it has
insufficient inline citations. Please help to improve this article by introducing more precise
citations. (December 2010)
Diversification is a form of corporate strategy for a company. It seeks to increase profitability
through greater sales volume obtained from new products and new markets. Diversification can
occur either at the business unit level or at the corporate level. At the business unit level, it is
most likely to expand into a new segment of an industry that the business is already in. At the
corporate level, it is generally very interesting
[clarification needed]
entering a promising business
outside of the scope of the existing business unit.
Diversification is part of the four main growth strategies defined by the Product/Market Ansoff
matrix
[1]
:

Ansoff pointed out that a diversification strategy stands apart from the other three strategies. The
first three strategies are usually pursued with the same technical, financial, and merchandising
resources used for the original product line, whereas diversification usually requires a company
to acquire new skills, new techniques and new facilities.
Note: The notion of diversification depends on the subjective interpretation of new market and
new product, which should reflect the perceptions of customers rather than managers. Indeed,
products tend to create or stimulate new markets; new markets promote product innovation.
Contents
1 The different types of diversification strategies
o 1.1 Concentric diversification
o 1.2 Horizontal diversification
o 1.3 When Horizontal diversification is desirable?
1.3.1 Another interpretation
o 1.4 Conglomerate diversification (or lateral diversification)
2 Goal of diversification
3 Risks
4 See also
5 References
The different types of diversification strategies
The strategies of diversification can include internal development of new products or markets,
acquisition of a firm, alliance with a complementary company, licensing of new technologies,
and distributing or importing a products line manufactured by another firm. Generally, the final
strategy involves a combination of these options. This combination is determined in function of
available opportunities and consistency with the objectives and the resources of the company.
There are three types of diversification: concentric, horizontal, and conglomerate.
Concentric diversification
This means that there is a technological similarity between the industries, which means that the
firm is able to leverage its technical know-how to gain some advantage. For example, a company
that manufactures industrial adhesives might decide to diversify into adhesives to be sold via
retailers. The technology would be the same but the marketing effort would need to change.
It also seems to increase its market share to launch a new product that helps the particular
company to earn profit. For instance, the addition of tomato ketchup and sauce to the existing
"Maggi" brand processed items of Food Specialities Ltd. is an example of technological-related
concentric diversification.
The company could seek new products that have technological or marketing synergies with existi
ng product lines appealing to a new group of customers.This also helps the company to tap that
part of the market which remains untapped, and which presents an opportunity to earn profits.
Horizontal diversification
The company adds new products or services that are often technologically or commercially
unrelated to current products but that may appeal to current customers. In a competitive
environment, this form of diversification is desirable if the present customers are loyal to the
current products and if the new products have a good quality and are well promoted and priced.
Moreover, the new products are marketed to the same economic environment as the existing
products, which may lead to rigidity and instability. In other words, this strategy tends to
increase the firm's dependence on certain market segments. For example, a company that was
making notebooks earlier may also enter the pen market with its new product.
When Horizontal diversification is desirable?
Horizontal diversification is desirable if the present customers are loyal to the current products
and if the new products have a good quality and are well promoted and priced. Moreover, the
new products are marketed to the same economic environment as the existing products, which
may lead to rigidity and instability.
Another interpretation
Horizontal integration occurs when a firm enters a new business (either related or unrelated) at
the same stage of production as its current operations. For example, Avon's move to market
jewelry through its door-to-door sales force involved marketing new products through existing
channels of distribution. An alternative form of that Avon has also undertaken is selling its
products by mail order (e.g., clothing, plastic products) and through retail stores (e.g.,Tiffany's).
In both cases, Avon is still at the retail stage of the production process.
Conglomerate diversification (or lateral diversification)
Main article: Conglomerate (company)
The company markets new products or services that have no technological or commercial
synergies with current products but that may appeal to new groups of customers. The
conglomerate diversification has very little relationship with the firm's current business.
Therefore, the main reasons of adopting such a strategy are first to improve the profitability and
the flexibility of the company, and second to get a better reception in capital markets as the
company gets bigger. Even if this strategy is very risky, it could also, if successful, provide
increased growth and profitability.
Goal of diversification
According to Calori and Harvatopoulos (1988), there are two dimensions of rationale for
diversification. The first one relates to the nature of the strategic objective: Diversification may
be defensive or offensive.
Defensive reasons may be spreading the risk of market contraction, or being forced to diversify
when current product or current market orientation seems to provide no further opportunities for
growth. Offensive reasons may be conquering new positions, taking opportunities that promise
greater profitability than expansion opportunities, or using retained cash that exceeds total
expansion needs.
The second dimension involves the expected outcomes of diversification: Management may
expect great economic value (growth, profitability) or first and foremost great coherence and
complementary to their current activities (exploitation of know-how, more efficient use of
available resources and capacities). In addition, companies may also explore diversification just
to get a valuable comparison between this strategy and expansion.
Risks
Diversification is the riskiest of the four strategies presented in the Ansoff matrix and requires
the most careful investigation. Going into an unknown market with an unfamiliar product
offering means a lack of experience in the new skills and techniques required. Therefore, the
company puts itself in a great uncertainty. Moreover, diversification might necessitate significant
expanding of human and financial resources, which may detract focus, commitment, and
sustained investments in the core industries. Therefore, a firm should choose this option only
when the current product or current market orientation does not offer further opportunities for
growth. In order to measure the chances of success, different tests can be done
[2]
:
The attractiveness test: the industry that has been chosen has to be either attractive or capable
of being made attractive.
The cost-of-entry test: the cost of entry must not capitalize all future profits.
The better-off test: the new unit must either gain competitive advantage from its link with the
corporation or vice versa.
Because of the high risks explained above, many companies attempting to diversify have led to
failure. However, there are a few good examples of successful diversification:
Virgin Group moved from music production to travel and mobile phones
Walt Disney moved from producing animated movies to theme parks and vacation properties
Canon diversified from a camera-making company into producing an entirely new range of office
equipment.