Competitive Strength Assessment

This report evaluates the competitive strength of BP Australia against its rivals Caltex and Shell in the oil and gas industry in Australia. It identifies key success factors such as product features, reputation and goodwill, financial strength, technological services and distribution network. The report recommends defensive strategies for BP Australia to maintain its competitive position.

Running head: COMPETITIVE STRENGTH ANALYSIS
Competitive Strength Assessment
Name of the University:
Name of the Student:
Authors Note:

1COMPETITIVE STRENGTH ANALYSIS
Table of Contents
Part A...................................................................................................................................2
Overview of BP Australia and Industry...........................................................................2
Competitive Strength Analysis of BP Australia and its Rival companies - Caltex and
Shell.............................................................................................................................................3
Key Success Factors for the Industry..............................................................................4
Competitiveness of BP Australia against its Rivals........................................................5
Strategy Selection Based on Competitive Position in the Market...................................7
Part B...................................................................................................................................8
Peer Evaluation Form......................................................................................................8
References..........................................................................................................................11

2COMPETITIVE STRENGTH ANALYSIS
Part A
Overview of BP Australia and Industry
BP Australia operates its business within Oil and Gas Services Industry and is involved in
manufacturing and distributing petroleum services and products. The firm was established n
1919 and is situated in Melbourne Australia that operates as a subsidiary of BP Plc. The
company is involved in upstream exploration, crude oil and natural gas refining, downstream
marketing supply of necessary fuel, lubricant and bitumen products (Al-Dajani et al. 2014). The
company offers services and products to its consumers all over Australia. The company is
involved in exploration and manufacturing of oil, natural gas, liquefied natural gas along with
transportation, refining and marketing of lubricant or petroleum products. BP Australia
transports refined as well as unrefined products to and from terminals and refineries along with
the consumers employing gas carriers, ships, pipelines, trains and trucks. The company offers its
goods to retail and commercial consumers from several industries including aviation, racing and
retail service stations in (Australia bp.com. 2018).
Oil and gas services industry in Australia is robust that has resulted in substantial growth
over the past twenty years. In the industry the local organizations great considered to develop its
deep and remote resources in order to attain expertise in exploration and drilling technologies,
engineering and design along with operations and maintenance. The oil and gas industry of
Australia has a global reputation in order to deal with challenges associated with remote location
of its resources along with social and environmental challenges. Education and training ability of
Australia is also vita to global competitiveness of its oil and gas industry (Browne et al. 2016).
Since the 1965 drilling of first offshore well and with the modern coal seam gas boom, the

3COMPETITIVE STRENGTH ANALYSIS
industry has generated and sustained internationally respected, innovative services and
technology. This is built around the huge number of oil and gas projects.
Competitive Strength Analysis of BP Australia and its Rival companies - Caltex and Shell
Competitive strength of BP Australia along with its rival companies such as Caltex and
Shell is evaluated. BP Australia has competitive strength is in its exceptionally developed
business model. To maintain its competitive and sustainable position, the company has
maintained diversified portfolio all across business, geographies as well as resource types (Busch
and McCormick 2014). Developing the upstream and downstream businesses and properly
established trading capabilities can support in mitigating the impact of lower commodity pricing
cycles. The company has competitive advantage of maintaining balanced portfolio with
advantaged oil and gas along with dynamic investment strategy offers with resilience.
On the other hand, competitive strengths attained by Caltex include an efficient supply
and marketing infrastructure that had facilitated the company in attaining a competitive edge.
Moreover, a fast successful growth in the marketing business has also resulted in its profitability
increase. Board service and product portfolio including diesel, biofuel blends, precision spray
oils and marine fuels facilities in decreasing risks associated with one field and attain revenue
from a number of diverse sources (Caltex 2018). The company also has competitive strengths in
having efficient refining output results supported by stronger refinery margins, plant reliability
advantages along with having decreased depreciation charge. This has also resulted in the
company’s financial success.
Competitive strengths of Shell Company include strong market position, strong exploring
capability, vertical integration along with strong research and development. The company has

4COMPETITIVE STRENGTH ANALYSIS
always attempted to improve its technologies for carbon footprint decrease along with
developing methods to explore more fuels in decreased effort. It is also gathered that the
company is associated with exploration and production (Chan, Cameron and Yoon 2017).
Moreover, in downstream market it is associated with marketing the refined products. The
vertical integration offers high competitive advantages in aspects of cost benefits and quality
control.
Key Success Factors for the Industry
Key success factors that are present in the oil and gas industry in Australia include
product features, reputation and goodwill, financial strength, technological services and
distribution network. The product features of diversification are deemed to be important in
decreasing business risks encompassing anticipation of oil price fluctuation. Spread out location
of the oil and gas reserve might facilitate in decreasing business interruption risk (Chang, Hsieh
and Chen 2016).
Another key success factor that is important in the oil and gas industry is the financial
strength. This evaluation encompasses an analysis of management policy, strategy and
philosophy towards the financial risk. This also encompasses analysis of financial targets of the
management, hedging and certain other policies in an effort to decrease overall risks of a
petroleum company. Management of the liabilities of the petroleum companies are also reviewed
in a better manner (Chuang and Yang 2014).
Reputation and goodwill is another key success factor as the petroleum industry for long
time has been an industry where discretionary decisions such as concessions or license awards

5COMPETITIVE STRENGTH ANALYSIS
have been vital. Reputation is also deemed as a vital factor in measuring success of the
petroleum industry.
Technological services acts as one of the key success indicator in the petroleum industry
as for attaining competitive advantages within the industry. The industry measures success of the
companies operating within it through analyzing how well they are maintaining technologically
advanced supply industry.
Distribution network serves as another key success indicator in the petroleum industry.
This is for the reason that competitive advantages can be attained from several activates
performed by the petroleum companies operating within the industry through generating and
delivering value (Fryer, Antony and Douglas 2015). Value chain maintenance is one of the major
key success indicator this makes the way in which the petroleum companies maintain
relationship between the shop and the consumers.
Competitiveness of BP Australia against its Rivals
The effectiveness of the key success factors for BP Australia Company along with its
ratings are provided on a rating scale of 1 to 10. The rating that is provided with be summed up
for each company in order to realize the ways in which all the key success factors are attained by
these companies in attaining a competitive advantage (Guo, Liu and Liu 2016).
Key Success Factors BP Australia Company Caltex Company Shell Company
Product features 10 9 7
Reputation and goodwill 7 5 10
Financial strength 10 8 5
Technological services 7 5 8
Distribution network 6 8 9

6COMPETITIVE STRENGTH ANALYSIS
Total 40 35 39
From the evaluation of the key success factors of these companies it has been gathered
that BP Australia has efficient product features that serves as its major success factor within
Australian oil and gas industry. The products features of this company is deemed to attain
competitive advantage over Shell and Caltex Company for there are efficient forms of gas to
liquids fuel along with other products. Shell Company has better success factor in goodwill and
reputation. BP Australia is in the second position compared to its competitors as its competitors
have adopted better environment reforms as an aspect of their reputation management strategies.
Financial strength of BP Australia is better than its competitors that serve as one of its major
success factors. This is for the reason that the company has maintained better liquidity along with
effective capital resources. Technological services offered by BP Australia are situated in the
second position in comparison to its competitors. This is for the reason that the company offers a
wide range of technical services and expertise that focuses on enhancing health, safety along
with company’s performance in the industry. Distribution network of BP Australia is not much
better than its business rivals. This is for the reason that it operates within downstream fuels it
has diverse fuel sources, domestic refineries along with its fuel distributors.
Strategy Selection Based on Competitive Position in the Market
In order to attain competitive advantage over Shell and Caltex Company, BP Australia is
recommended to implement certain defensive strategy based on the effectiveness of its key
success factors. In following this strategy, the company will try to develop a balanced portfolio
with having competitive downstream along with low carbon future maintenance (Irjayanti and
Azis 2015).

7COMPETITIVE STRENGTH ANALYSIS
Another effective defensive strategy that can be implemented by the company is hybrid
strategy that indicates the company must operate its business in a low cost based environment.
The company must also focus on reinvesting in low price along with differentiation in business
operation. In order to sustain its competitive position as one of the most established petroleum
organization, it must employ hybrid strategy (Kayikci, Bartolacci and LeBlanc 2018). It must
also consider following this strategy in the long term for the reason that it can facilitate the
company in attaining differentiation along with a price which is lower in comparison to the
competitors of BP Australia. Over the years, the company must also consider undergoing major
rebuilds of CDU in order to process heavy crude along with its efficient manufacture.
Technological success factor can be improved by the company through maintaining effective
new world scale sculpture removal along with gas oil hydro treating units. The focus of this
strategy is relied on profit growth along with application of alternative energy. This defensive
strategy if implemented by BP Australia can facilitate in developing leading technologies along
with effective consumer relationships (Lee, Kim and Hong 2017). Resources and capabilities of
the company must also change gradually that can result in increased investments and profits with
increased oil prices.
Part B
Peer Evaluation Form
Name of each group member is motioned within the peer evaluation form. For each
group member the extent to which they agree with the statement mentioned within the peer
evaluation form is measured using scale of 1-4 (1=strongly disagree; 2=disagree; 3=agree;
4=strongly agree). Total of these numbers are also calculated in each column.

8COMPETITIVE STRENGTH ANALYSIS
Evaluation Criteria Group member: Group member: Group member: Group member:
Attended every group
meetings regularly and
arrives within time.
4 3 2 4
Contributes
meaningfully within the
group discussions.
3 4 4 4
Attaining group
assignments within
time.
3 2 4 4
Accomplishing work
within a quality manner.
4 4 3 3
Indicates a cooperative
and supportive attitude.
2 4 3 3
Contributes
considerably to the
project success.
3 3 4 3
Totals 19 20 20 21
Feedback on team dynamics:

9COMPETITIVE STRENGTH ANALYSIS
1. How effectively did the group work?
The group was deemed to be efficient in attaining the objectives of the report. This group
work facilitated them to get involved in developing the process of evaluation. This might
encompass maintaining their establishment on attaining advanced and deep understanding of
the subject contents, processes and skills. This can also encompass evaluating individual
assessment criteria by methods of consultation with teaching staff (Park, Chang and Kang
2015). The major aim of the report was attained by the group that increased their advanced
and deep learning of key success factors within the petroleum industry. The group work
encourages increased group involvement as well as responsibility. The group attained great
success in attaining the report objectives through goal setting.
2. Where the behaviors of the group members valuable or detrimental for the team?
The behaviors of the group members were valuable and detrimental to the performance of the
team in attaining project objectives. The team attained good points in the fair work sharing.
There was a sense of equity and fairness within a good team member. There was also a sense of
equity that has greatly vital for collective motivation of the team members. The team members
efficiently identified key success factors that are present in the oil and gas industry in Australia
includes product features, reputation and goodwill, financial strength, technological services and
distribution network (Soetanto et al. 2015).
3. What learning is gathered regarding working within a group from this report that will be
carried by the group members in the next group experience?

10COMPETITIVE STRENGTH ANALYSIS
From accomplishing this report, the group members learned regarding the key success
factors that are present in the oil and gas industry in Australia. This includes product features,
reputation and goodwill, financial strength, technological services and distribution network. The
team has also considered enhancing future analysis of the petroleum industry performance based
on few more key success factors.

11COMPETITIVE STRENGTH ANALYSIS
References
Al-Dajani, H., Dedoussis, E., Watson, E. and Tzokas, N., 2014. Graduate entrepreneurship
incubation environments: A framework of key success factors. Industry and Higher bp.com.,
2018Education, 28(3), pp.201-213.
bp.com., 2018. [online] Available at: https://www.bp.com/en_au/australia.html [Accessed 3 Apr.
2018].
Browne, W., Dreitlein, S., Manzoni, J. and Mere, A., 2016. Two key success factors for global
project team leadership: Communications and human resource management. Journal of
Information Technology and Economic Development, 7(2), p.40.
Busch, H. and McCormick, K., 2014. Local power: exploring the motivations of mayors and key
success factors for local municipalities to go 100% renewable energy. Energy, Sustainability and
Society, 4(1), p.5.
Caltex., 2018. Caltex Australia | Fuels, Convenience Retail & Lubricants. [online] Available at:
https://www.caltex.com.au/ [Accessed 3 Apr. 2018].
Chan, D., Cameron, M. and Yoon, Y., 2017. Key success factors for global application of micro
energy grid model. Sustainable cities and society, 28, pp.209-224.
Chan, D., Cameron, M. and Yoon, Y., 2017. Key success factors for global application of micro
energy grid model. Sustainable cities and society, 28, pp.209-224.

12COMPETITIVE STRENGTH ANALYSIS
Chang, S.F., Hsieh, P.J. and Chen, H.F., 2016. Key success factors for clinical knowledge
management systems: Comparing physician and hospital manager viewpoints. Technology and
Health Care, 24(s1), pp.S297-S306.
Chuang, S.P. and Yang, C.L., 2014. Key success factors when implementing a green-
manufacturing system. Production Planning & Control, 25(11), pp.923-937.
Fryer, K.J., Antony, J. and Douglas, A., 2015. Critical Success Factors of Continuous
Improvement in the Public Sector: A review of literature and some key findings.
Guo, J., Liu, Z. and Liu, Y., 2016. Key success factors for the launch of government social media
platform: Identifying the formation mechanism of continuance intention. Computers in Human
Behavior, 55, pp.750-763.
Irjayanti, M. and Azis, A.M., 2015. Key Success Factors (KSF) of Small Medium.
Kayikci, Y., Bartolacci, M.R. and LeBlanc, L.J., 2018. Identifying the Key Success Factors in
Strategic Alignment of Transport Collaboration Using a Hybrid Delphi-AHP. In Contemporary
Approaches and Strategies for Applied Logistics (pp. 1-36). IGI Global.
Lee, S.M., Kim, N.R. and Hong, S.G., 2017. Erratum to: Key success factors for mobile app
platform activation. Service Business, 11(2), pp.451-451.
Park, C., Chang, B. and Kang, P., 2015. Analysis on Key Success Factors for Partner
Relationship Management. Korean Management Science Review, 32(4), pp.45-56.
Soetanto, R., Childs, M., Poh, P.S., Austin, S., Glass, J., Adamu, Z.A., Isiadinso, C., Tolley, H.
and Mackenzie, H., 2015. Key success factors and guidance for international collaborative
design projects. International Journal of Architectural Research: ArchNet-IJAR, 9(3), pp.6-25.

13COMPETITIVE STRENGTH ANALYSIS