The matter of the job concerns research questions, which derive from prior observations over Bohemia Travel Organization. It is an interesting topic to follow, because of the arising opportunities for the business. With the long years of experience in the travel and leisure sector, the business has recently created image and during the entire years that positive image increased the success of the business. While becoming a leader on the marketplace, the travel agency increased the probable of its' performance, so that is the primary reason of choosing the certain company and the researched questions. The investigation of finding solution to these research questions are totally related to pursuing an appropriate ideas. These theories bind as well as appropriate research will open the near future paths for increasing the business performance of the business.
As brought up in the problem formulation and the strategy the job will harshly follow the strategy of the travel company and based on the strategic way and selections, we will find a better ways for the company to build up and extend its' business.
The usage of the idea will start with study of the macro-environment. The examination is the first step of the planning process, as it can help to identify issues to be removed in the development and execution of effectiveness available development. On this sense, it is crucial to examine the microenvironment and immediate effect on the business. The mostly used strategy is the so-called PESTEL evaluation divides the complete exterior environment of six segments, thus covering almost anything that can affect the organization. These six areas are: monetary, political, social, technical, environmental and legal.
The thing that needs to be considered when one PESTEL research is conducted is to recognize the environmental factors that influence the organization in the long run, and set up them in order worth focusing on. When the organization develops the strategy, there's a variety of critical indicators they have to consider. We are going to take a look at all the factors that impact the monetary environment and study the relationship between business and the surroundings. This part will clarify the main element macro-economic parameters that affect the business of the organization and can identify the fads in these factors. The PESTEL model will evaluate how changes might influence the company and may measure the strategies that the company might deploy in response. Thus, we are using that model inside our research. The program of action of the travel organization could be always ruined by the exterior economical changes, thus the PESTEL examination can help us to find out the correct solution for the further proper choices.
According to Farnham (1999), the PESTEL and Porter's (1980) five causes model give a useful start for analysis the exterior environment and providing a crucial group of inputs for strategic development and execution. (P. Rudolpf, 2005)
It is important to critic the PESTEL evaluation as model, because it clarifies the exterior factors of the company, but these factors (Lynch 2006) are considered almost uncontrollable. In addition (Sutton 1988) suggests that research of the external environment is carried out to gain competitive gain and improve long and short term planning. McMillan and Tampoe, (2000) state that the PESTEL construction represents a guide to the overall environment but is based only historical data and the past, but it identifies pushes of changes in the surroundings and may be used to forecast the near future. In other words, understanding changes occurring currently can be an important guide to anticipating the future (Fahey, 1986).
(Aguilar 1967; Choo and Auster 1993) suggest that the external environment in relation to an organisation or business is where information that is of critical importance can be analysed. Therefore can help the strategic planning and future development of the organisations future. Organisations and businesses choose to analyse the external environment in order to understand causes out with the business enterprise or organisation that can transform a proposed strategy instantly. Organisations and businesses do this to avoid any surprises and subsequently identify hazards and opportunities.
Such as the SWOT/TOWS analysis, the PESTEL research has been discussed and proposed as an outstanding tool by many authors and experts (Lynch, Sutton, Farnham. In addition (Sutton 1988) suggests that research of the exterior environment is performed to gain competitive edge and improve long and short term planning. Moreover (Lynch 2006) asserts that exterior factors beyond your business or organization are considered almost uncontrollable.
In addition we will say that doing the PESTEL research will be more reliable than another models, since it strongly affects our further strategic choices.
The next step of in understanding the firm's competitiveness is to look at the competitive world in an industry. Porter five makes model is established by Michael Porter in Harvard College or university (1979). The purpose of the model is to investigate the industry to be able to identify the amount of intensity about the competition and appeal of the industry.
A good way of analysing the microenvironment is Porter's five makes model that helps to identify the amount of competition within an industry (Stonehouse, 2001). However, it is vital, by using this model, to consider the characteristics of the industry in regards to technological and cost-effective environmental aspects and the affect of the federal government in regulation competition (Porter, 1980).
According to variety of authors (Porter, Kotler, Lynch, Hollensen etc. ) the exterior environment should be supported with competition examination. That's the reason our next step depends on the author's guidelines. In our circumstance, that is the Porter's five pushes examination. As already described in the strategy part (see the previous chapter above), the Porter's five pushes are going to clarify our picture of your competition in the travel and leisure sector of the chosen travel company.
One of the very most useful frameworks for analyzing the competitive structure has been developed by Porter. Porter (1980) shows that competition within an industry is rooted in its' underlying economic framework and moves beyond the bahaviour of current competition. (Hollensen, 2010)
As we can easily see, one of the authors following Porter's model is Svend Hollensen, who as an Associate Professor can verify the benefits of using the Porter's five forces as a constructive model of analyzing your competition in the industry. Additionally (Hollensen, 2010) asserts that the purpose of competition evaluation is to find a position in industry where in fact the company can best defend itself from the five forces, or can effect them in its' favour.
If we trust Hollensen (2010), you will see two possible outlines for our travel firm - negative and positive. But no matter of the final results, in overall, the examination will ensure and confirm our further proper choices and can influences on our proposal of investment plan.
Michael Porter's five forces model was also harmed of other author's criticism, such as Lynch who says that the model assumes that there are no changes in the industrial environment however in fact the market is very adaptable. That is shown for example on the gigantic expansion of the e-commerce sector. If you are using this tool, you have to repeat this analysis consistently. (Lynch, 2009, p. 101-102) The main reasons why Porter's five forces has endured much criticism are that the world radical financial changes has happened since the time the model has been developed; there is a quite strong impact of internet on the industry. Obviously, the modern times, there are authors, investigating the tactical planning available and one of these Larry Downes explained that Porter's five forces are no more viable. Due to that reason, Downes has developed three new forces, that are: "Digitalization, Globalization, and Deregulation".
Downes insists that Porter's five makes model is obsolete. Downes' arguments are convincing. Actually, digitalization, globalization and deregulation have grown to be powerful forces over the last years, but Porter's models hardly ever take them into consideration. Today's market segments are highly influenced by technological improvement, especially in it. Therefore, it is not advisable - if not saying impossible - to build up a strategy solely on the basis of Porters models. (Recklies, 2008)
Downes critique of Porter means that Porters models focus too much on the financial conditions of their era of origin. Therefore, their viability is bound under improved conditions. We need to add here that Downes new pushes are derived from the economic conditions of their unique era too. Within some years or decades, they will have lost a few of their importance because other innovations have taken within the travelling role. (Downes, 1997)
"Further criticism originates from those who say the model simply offers a snapshot of an industry, rather than more dynamic picture which says something about the future, and can be more easily translated to strategy. Lawton argues, however, that the thought of assessing substitutes does bring dynamism, highlighting where the challenges should come from. Then there are those who criticise the model for having missed out a vital stage along the way of assessing the market. Lampel says: "It doesn't clarify how to define the industry, and sometimes that is a complicated question. Porter picked industries that were easy to recognize, but a whole lot of people obtain the industry wrong, so the evaluation is worthless. Some people argue that defining the industry is the critical input of knowing where you stand. " (SPS, Nov. 2009)
However, some criticism has been made that the five causes are an analytical tool and rather static. Rumelt, (1991) suggested that companies have company-specific choices of tactical development regarding profitability, which has lager affects than the competitive makes of environment. Furthermore, the five pushes largely ignores the recruiting areas of strategy (Farnham, 1999), which will be of increasing importance in the foreseeable future.
But still we can adhere to the proving of PESTEL research coupled with Porter's five causes, because as Thomas Lawton, teacher of tactical management at Cranfield says: In a sense transposing the PESTLE ideas onto the Five Forces is the best way. " (SPS, Nov. 2009)
The very next theoretical model conducted in our project will be SWOT/TOWS evaluation. The SWOT research is a rottenly used proper tool in bigger or smaller organizations. It examines the internal and exterior environment of the company and provides a clearer picture for an organization of its' advantages, weaknesses, opportunities and hazards. SWOT examination is produced by Albert Humphrey, who named the strategic tool alternately SWOT Matrix. The matrix is also explained by (Jobber and Fahey 2006) as the structured approach to assessing the proper position of your business or company by figuring out its strengths weaknesses opportunities and threats. (Lynch 2006) furthers the view of (Jobber and Fahey 2006) by recommending that the SWOT examination is what sort of business or company can further their development from the PEST and Porters Evaluation and make an amalgamation of the research of the inner and external environment by doing the SWOT analysis. Alternatively, the SWOT has endured a great deal of criticism of variety of creators and researchers, working in the field. In relation to the external factors of the SWOT research (Johnson Et al 2009) suggest that the analysis of opportunities and threats is extremely valuable when the organisation or business is seeking to formulate a proposed strategic plan for the future. Other criticism is provided by (Mintzberg 1994) who suggests that SWOT is the key cause of what is considered there an unnecessary formalization of the strategy making process. Many authors (Baramuralikrishna and Dugger 1998; David 1997; Hill and Westbrook 1997; Johnson et al 1989; Thompson and Strickland 1998; Wheelan and Hunger 1998) shows that this usage almost never amounts to a lot more than a inadequately structured, very basic, hastily conducted exercise that produces unverified, obscure and inconsistent inventories of factors considered by the proposing individuals because so many important the different parts of their organization's strategic situation. Most of the SWOT critics are arguing that the matrix is too superficial and basic. It does not provide detailed research of your company and many times it is employed in an incorrect way. Because of much criticism and issues between authors about the SWOT research, we decided to execute the TOWS matrix represented and produced by Heinz Weihrich, Teacher of Management, College or university of San Francisco. He writes an in depth article about TOWS analysis, also called 'The TOWS Matrix --- AN INSTRUMENT for Situational Research'. (Heinz Weihrich, GODINA) has two main purposes - Some may be to review basic considerations in tactical planning and the next to present the TOWS Matrix for complementing the environmental risks and opportunities with the company's weaknesses and especially its advantages. These factors by itself aren't new; what's new is systematically discovering human relationships between these factors and basing strategies to them. There may be little uncertainty that strategic planning will gain better prominence in the future.
In his article Heinz Weihrich is talking about in details the ways of use the matrix and the key advantages of using the matrix. In contrast of the SWOT analysis, the TOWS one is much more reliable and appropriate to conduct in our job, because it is focused in analyzing the business in a lot more details and gives much flawless picture of how to turn the weaknesses into talents and the dangers into opportunities. The TOWS matrix is incorporating the complete four outlines of the matrix and creates the ability of better observation in to the internal and external factors influencing the business. Even sometimes the hazards could wreck the forecasting, the TOWS help the company to forecast easily as soon as understood the strengths and the weaknesses, the company could find better future opportunities to develop. The connection between providing TOWS and the other proper tools - PESTEL evaluation and Porter dive makes is that all the models and theories are bind alongside one another in building the most appropriate path for the company to find the most accurate technique for the better performance of the company.
The very next tactical tool of the project is the style of Igor Ansoff, who created the "product-mission matrix", in other phrase the so-called Ansoff matrix. The matrix allows companies to understand the risk element of various development strategies, including product versus market development, and diversification. The Ansoff matrix reveals the product and market choices available to a business. Herein markets may be thought as customers, and products as items sold to customers (Lynch, 2003). When expanding the Ansoff matrix, the inventor Igor Ansoff directed to gauge the expansion of risk that the business might take whenever choosing different directions of strategy. Based on the matrix, we can say that the more different the place is, the bigger risk is taken. Managers of organizations should be aware of how to manage the risk correctly and take into considerations the right decisions. The Ansoff matrix helps the company to increase its' profit by entering in new business 'oceans'. The strategies considered by a corporation may have huge consequences and that is why the chance should be viewed carefully. However, due to these reasons inside our project we will execute an examination over Ansoff matrix and will observe how the strategies is wonderful for it and then for its' future performance.
As also known, the Ansoff matrix was developed 1957, but a few years later the Igor Ansoff became aware that his work was not unique, just because a similar matrix was developed earlier. Moreover few years after Ansoff matrix was much criticized by Henry Mintzberg, who didn't like the thought of strategy being built from planning, which is backed by analytical techniques.