MHS Business Portfolio and Dynamic Capability Development Report

This report analyzes the business portfolio of Millennium Health Sciences and provides recommendations based on BCG Matrix, GE-McKinsey Matrix, and Synergy Matrix. It also discusses MHS's dynamic capability development using SWOT analysis.

Business Portfolio and Dynamic
Capability Development Report
Millennium Health Sciences
[Student Name] – [Student Number]

Introduction
• MHS Business Portfolio
• MHS was developed in the year of 1968 by two scientists who wanted to
create dermatologically experienced skin care products.
• MHS could be categorized into several units business:
• Neutrino
• Dermatech
• LOOKS
• Energino

BCG Matrix
?
Relative Market Share
Market Growth Rate Neutrino
star
Energino LOOKS

GE-McKinsey Matrix
Growth
Competitive strength of business
unit
High Med Low
Industry
attractiveness High
Med
Low
Growth
Harvest
Selective Harvest
HarvestSelective
SelectiveGrowth
LOOKSNeutrino
Dermatech
Energino

Synergy Matrix
Threshold of acceptance
Misfits
Incoming:
Benefits from belonging
to portfolio
+-
Fits
+
-
Outgoing:
Benefit to portfolio
Altruists
Givers
Parasites
Takers
Dermatech
Neutrino
Energino
LOOKS

Business categorisation
BCG
Matrix
GE-McKinsey
Matrix
Synergy
Matrix
LOOKS Cash cow Medium Harvest Givers
Neutrino Question marks Medium
Selective Takers
Dermatech Star High Growth Fits
Energino Dog Low Harvest Misfits

LOOKS
• Analysis
• Looks has low inward benefits, very high outgoing advantageous and medium
competitive strength in the business outcome.
• The market finding indicates that it has a low growth rate in cosmetic products and also
has medium attractiveness.
• Under GE McKinsey Matrix, it comes into medium selective.
• Recommendations
• It should be a third preference with the perspective of investment.
• Create a cross-function team for developing

Neutrino
• Analysis
• Neutrino has very high inner benefits, less-friendly advantageous and low
rivalry.
• Under the BCG matrix, it is positioned into a question mark.
• Neutrino has medium industry attractiveness and medium growth.
• Recommendations
• It should make a high investment in Star in a higher growth industry.
• It should provide a second preference for investment.

Dermatech
• Analysis
• Dermatech has high feasible strength that helps in acquiring and facilitating benefits in
addressing the business.
• The market finding of advanced skin care products has a higher growth rate as well as
high attractiveness.
• In the BCG matrix, it comes in the Star category.
• Recommendations
• It should highly emphasize export operations.
• It should highly invest in innovative technology, research and development, skilled
employees, creates uniqueness and worth for keeping the competitive advantageous.
• It can make contrast amid its market growth and share steadily.

Energino
• Analysis
• Energino has low outgoing advantageous, low incoming advantageous, and low
competitive
• Special effects have low attractiveness and low growth market.
• Under the BCG matrix, this comes in the category of Dog.
• This company positioned into a low harvest under GE McKinsey Matrix.
• Recommendations
• The company should sell the business as it can damage the performance of the
corporation.
• It should be competent for dealing in the market
• It should emphasize more on other 3 businesses

Conclusion
• MHS Business Portfolio
• MHS Business Portfolio is proficient in vitamins and nutritional supplements,
advanced skin care products, cosmetics and energy drinks.
• This company may come into a mature phase into business cycle according to the
performance of Neutrino, Dermatech, Looks, and Energino

Introduction
• MHS Dynamic Capability
• Dynamic capability is illustrated as the proficiency of an organization to
completely become familiarized its base of resources.
• Explain, describe and recommends how MHS is perceiving, clutching and
transforming its dynamic capability for accomplishing the main objectives
by using SWOT analysis

Identify and assess
opportunities
• Analysis
• MHS has different business units that are highly discussed:
• Neutrino - Vitamins and Nutritional Supplements
• Dermatech – Advance skin care products
• LOOKS – Cosmetics
• Energino – Energy drinks
• It is in growing towards a mature phase in the business process

Identify and assess
opportunities
• Recommendations
• This corporation can distribute, move, and implement understanding and
technology at the workplace.
• This company can identify a new trend and potential market to get
success in the market.
• It should develop a cross-function team in order to combine skills and
gaining the competitive advantageous.

Mobilise resources
• Analysis
• There is an issue in the structure of managerial viewpoint.
• Every company can make a decision in current time like an effective form
of GE workout process.

Mobilise resources
• Recommendations
• Management can identify technology, innovation, approaches and
technology for surviving their business and creates new customers.
• It may execute core capabilities related to advance cosmetics and may
implement energy drinks with special effect results (Renz, 2016).

Transform and reconfigure
• Analysis
• It creates a business environment for reacting towards transformation quickly.
• It may scrutinize the environment, identify key concerns and detects when an issue can
increase (Hanson, et. al., 2016).

Transform and reconfigure
• Recommendations
• capability to learn quickly, new strategies to integrate within an organization and existing
strategies can gain capability for refigured and transform
• team can create a strong base, business culture and can create the competencies for
switching the business into other industry (Renz, 2016).

Conclusion
• MHS Dynamic Capability
• MHS can maintain dynamic competency on a foundation of resources by
transferring the knowledge, advanced technology, and skilled staff within
an organization.
• SWOT assessment indicates the strengths in Dermatech.
• It can increase its opportunity and generates the competencies.
• It can transform business units into a cross-function team as well as
collaborate with other companies.

References
• Ethiraj, S.K., Gambardella, A. and Helfat, C.E., 2016. Replication in strategic management.
Strategic Management Journal, 37(11), pp.2191-2192.
• Ethiraj, S.K., Gambardella, A. and Helfat, C.E., 2017. Reviews of strategic management research.
Strategic Management Journal, 38(1), pp.3-3.
• Ethiraj, S.K., Gambardella, A. and Helfat, C.E., 2018. Theory in strategic management. Strategic
Management Journal, 39(6), pp.1529-1529.
• Frynas, J.G. and Mellahi, K., 2015. Global strategic management. USA: Oxford University Press.
• Ginter, P.M., Duncan, W.J. and Swayne, L.E., 2018. The strategic management of health care
organizations. USA: John Wiley & Sons.
• Hanson, D., Hitt, M.A., Ireland, R.D. and Hoskisson, R.E., 2016. Strategic management:
Competitiveness and globalization. USA: Cengage.
• Lasserre, P., 2017. Global strategic management. USA: Macmillan International Higher
Education.

References
• Michael, S., Storey, D. and Thomas, H., 2017. Discovery and
coordination in strategic management and entrepreneurship. Strategic
Entrepreneurship: Creating a new mindset, pp.45-65.
• Morden, T., 2016. Principles of strategic management. UK: Routledge.
• Morschett, D., Schramm-Klein, H. and Zentes, J., 2015. Strategic
international management (pp. 978-3658078836). USA: Springer.
• Renz, D.O., 2016. The Jossey-Bass handbook of nonprofit leadership and
management. USA: John Wiley & Sons.
• Wheelen, T.L., Hunger, J.D., Hoffman, A.N. and Bamford, C.E., 2017.
Strategic management and business policy. UK: Pearson.