Attachment Handler

Case Study Analysis

1

Presentation Outline • • •

Company History The Strategy Process Issues & Recommendations 1. 2. 3. 4.

•

Why Whitbread Structure Culture Leadership

Conclusion

2

Timeline 1742

1992

1970

1999

1997

2001

1999- 2000

2002

The Foundation: Samuel Whitbread Establishes a Brewery

3

Timeline 1742

1992

1970

1999

1997

2001

1999- 2000

2002

Diversification Starts: The Company Expands into the Leisure Business

4

Timeline 1742

1992

1970

1999

1997

2001

1999- 2000

2002

Beer Order Legislation: Restriction on the Number of Pubs that can be Owned by Vertically Integrated Breweries

5

Timeline 1742

1992

1970

1999

1997

2001

1999- 2000

2002

The David Thomas Era Begins

6

Timeline 1742

1992

1970

1999

1997

2001

1999- 2000

2002

The Allied Domecq Deal: The Company Unsuccessfully Tries to Acquire more Pubs

7

Timeline 1742

1992

1970

1999

1997

2001

1999- 2000

2002

The Transformation • Future Whitbread • Sale of Brewery Business

→ Period of Confusion Starts „ Who Are We?“ 8

Timeline 1742

1992

1970

1999

1997

2001

1999- 2000

2002

Structural Reorganisation Initiation of the Strategic Fitness Program and Development of the 11 Point Plan

9

Strategy Process Model

Strategy Identification Strategy Evaluation Brewery? Leisure?

Strategic Option Development Strategic Option Evaluation Strategy Selection Strategy Communication Implementation Ref: Saloner, G.; et al. (2001). 10

Issue 1: Why Whitbread 1. Why Whitbread • • •

Problems Proposed Solutions Recommendations

2. Structure 3. Culture 4. Leadership 11

Issue 1: Why Whitbread

• Strategy and Intent not Communicated Effectively • Leadership unable to Take Control

12

Issue 1: Why Whitbread Recommendations: • Take Guidelines from “Statement of Intent” (see p.21) • Communicate Effectively

13

Issue 2: Structure • Lack of Control • Silo Structure • Confusion about the Benefits •

Conglomerate discount

14

Issue 2: Structure Proposed Solutions: • • • • •

Point 1: Brand template Point 2+3: Long-Term Considerations Point 4: Clarifying the Role of the Center Point 5: Restructuring Point 6: Empowerment + Accountability

Please refer to p.23 in the case study for the 11 Point Plan 15

Issue 2: Structure Recommendations: •

Nothing to Promote Collaboration Amongst BUs •

•

Create Routines

T-Shaped Managers

Ref: Hansen, M.T. and von Oetinger, B. (2001). 16

Issue 3: Culture

•

“Institutionalized Underperformance” – “OK” to be Second Best – Going for Safe Options

•

Focus on BU Performance

17

Issue 3: Culture Proposed Solutions: • Point 7: High Performers Become Part of Leadership Group • Point 8: Create Winning Culture • Point 9: Master Class • Point 10: Rewarding High Achievers • Point 11: Equity Stakes 18

Issue 3: Culture Recommendations: • Will the Firm be Tougher in the Future? • Might Lead to Less Cooperation • T-Shaped Managers Might Improve this

19

Issue 4:Leadership • Leadership not a Good Example •

CEO never held accountable

• Leadership not Pushing for High Performance • Incompatible Leadership

20

Issue 4:Leadership Recommendations •

Create a Sense of Urgency

•

Leaders Need to Create “Followers” • T-shaped managers might help

Ref: Carnall, C. (2007) 21

Conclusion Diversification External Change Strategic Change Strategy Miscommunication Issues Proposed Solutions Recommendations

22

Questions?

? 23

References • Carnall, C. (2007), „A strategic convergence model for change management, C & R Carnall and Associates, February 2007

• Hansen, M.T. and von Oetinger, B. (2001). Introducing T-Shaped Managers: Knoweldge Management’s Next Generation. Harvard Business Review, 79(3): 107-116.

• Saloner, G.; Shepard, A. and Podolny, J. (2001). Strategic Management. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

24