Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
ISSN: 2308-1368
Volume: 2, Issue: 2, Pages: 196-206
2013 Academy of Business & Scientific Research
Research Paper
ANSOFF Matrix, Environment, and Growth- An Interactive Triangle
Sajjad Hussain1*, Jamshed Khattak2 , Arshad Rizwan3, and M. Adnan Latif4
1, 3 & 4. Riphah International University, Islamabad Pakistan.
2.
The basic purpose of the research paper is to investigate the impact of growth strategies
suggested by Ansoff on firms growth and moderating effect of market environment in
fast food sector of Pakistan. Results revealed that all Ansoff growth strategies
significantly contribute in firms growth except diversification. Moreover, market
environment do not moderate relationship between firms growth and any of Ansoff
growth strategies except market penetration. It is recommended that firm should avoid
diversifying its business because it may reduce their growth. It is also recommended that
firm should consider market environment before penetrating in market so that changes in
customers requirements may be fulfilled perfectly. It would definitely help firms to soar
its growth.
Keywords: Fast foods; environment; market penetration; market development; product
development; diversification; market growth; Pakistan;
INTRODUCTION
Fast food sector has grown tremendously (Fanning
et al., 2010) along with the fast moving pace of
business environment on globe today (Ball, 1999).
Owners of these fast food firms are primarily
concerned with providing superior consumer need
based products because customers of fast food
sector are on a run. There are people all around the
city including corners of streets, off the side of
interstates, airports, malls, schools, gas stations,
your local shopping center, and even in hospitals
who symbolize themselves as fast food consumers
(Lee and Ulgado, 1997). Consumers preferences
have changed due to busy life styles (Davies and
Smith, 2004) for example, we do not go for full
lunch or dining but money is spent on French fries!
In this fast paced society eating habits have also
changed to fast food consumption (Kara et al.,
1997). The consumption rate of fast food is on
196
Research Paper
198
Research Paper
200
Insignificant
relationship
between
product
development (R2 = 0.083), and diversification (R2
= 0.059) remained insignificant after moderation of
environment as R2 Change was insignificant (R2
=0.106, 0.092 respectively). Therefore, in
accordance with results our hypothesis 7 and 8
were rejected.
Diversification at last needs to be studied at larger
sample size as regression analysis did not predict
the growth and negative relationship with growth
were not significant.
CONCLUSIONS
Contribution
This study therefore is an addition to overall
research literature in Pakistan and secondly it
provides a solid base to explore hidden truths
about fast food sector of Pakistan.
This study is a base attempt to explore firms
growth and role of Ansoff growth strategies in
predicting growth of Pakistani fast food sector.
Moreover, it will contribute into literature of the
fast food sector of Pakistan.
Lastly, this study extends the generallizeabilty of
Ansoff Matrix growth strategy.
Implications / Future Directions
This study will help practitioners to run their
business in a good manner. This study implies that
practitioners of country should adopt product
development, market development and market
penetrations technique to extend their fast food
business in Pakistan. It will definitely help them to
increase their market growth. But they should
avoid diversifying their business as it may reduce
their market growth.
As this research is a basic milestone in Pakistani
fast food context and it provides a solid base to
explore hidden truths about fast food sector of
Pakistan, future researchers can build their fast
food sector research on findings of current study.
Moreover, there is a need to further explore and
extend the literature of Pakistani food sector
especially with a larger sample size if financial
constraints and geographic constraints allow these
researchers. Future researchers can also replicate
REFERENCES
Aarnio
T.,
Hamalainen
B
A.
A.,
(2008).Challenges in packaging waste
management in the fast food industry.
Resources, Conservation and Recycling (52)
612-621
Ansoff H. I.
(1957). Strategies for
Diversification. Harvard Business Review. 35,
pp.113-24
Ansoff H. I. (1993). Empirical proof of a
paradigmic theory of strategic success
behaviors
of
environment
serving
organizations. International Review of
Strategic Management. 4, 0074 JW. Chap. 9,
173-203.
Bagwell S., Doff S., (2009). Fast food outlets in
tower hamlets and the provision of
healthier foodchoices. The Cities Institute
London Metropolitan University
Ball S., (1999). Whither the small independent
take-away? British Food Journal, 101(9), pp.
715-723.
Block J. P., Scribner R. A., DeSalvo K. B. (2004).
Fast food, race/ethnicity, and income: A
Research Paper
202
Lichtenthaler
E.,
(2005).
Corporate
Diversification: identifying new businesses
systematically in the diversified firm.
Technovation (25) 697-709.
Research Paper
204
Mean
Standard Deviation
Firms
Growth
Firms
Growth
3.7625
.44177
MP
3.5917
.31679
.582**
PD
3.8417
.32475
.266
.094
MD
3.8458
.43318
.658**
.220
.004
Div
3.9333
.49737
.240
-.068
.471**
.425**
ME
3.6597
.20316
.152
-.001
.168
.416**
.512**
MP
PD
MD
Div
ME
MD = Market Development
ME = Market Environment
Research Paper
Variables
Beta
Standard Error
t value
Significance
Constant
MP
PD
MD
Div
-1.767**
.569**
.391**
.636**
-.118
.638
.126
.138
.104
.101
-2.770
4.510
2.832
6.126
-1.167
.008
.000
.007
.000
.249
R2= 0.693
F = 24.246**
N= 48
MP = Market Penetration
PD = Product Development
Div = Diversification
ME = Market Environment
** Significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
* Significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
MD = Market Development
Specification
Market Penetration
Evironment
Market Penetration x Environment
R2
Product Developement
Evironment
Product Development x Environment
R2
Market Development
Evironment
Market Developement x Environment
R2
Diversification
Evironment
Diversification x Environment
R2
Step 1
0.811**
0.332
0.361**
0.240
0.337
0.083
-0.321
0.734**
0.452**
0.085
0.195
0.059
Step 2
5.205
4.324
-1.172
0.019
3.229
3.249
-0.769
0.106
7.852**
8.155**
-2.013**
0.565**
2.298
2.559
-0.650
0.092
206