Business Portfolio and Dynamic Capability Development Report: Insights and Recommendations for Millennium Health Sciences

In this ppt slide we will discuss about business portfolio & dynamic capability development and below are the summaries point:- Millennium Health Sciences (MHS) is a diverse business portfolio with separate brands and varying potentiality. Analysis of MHS using BCG Matrix, GE-McKinsey Matrix, and Synergy Matrix to categorize and assess each business unit. Recommendations for aggressive promotion and market development strategies, investment in new areas, and harvesting non-profitable units.

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

Introduction
• MHS was established in 1968 by two scientists.
• They are having diverse businesses ranging from energy drinks to
cosmetic products.
• Each of the brands are separate business units and reports to MHS
CEO.
• However, some of the brands are having more potentiality while
some are not (Ram et al. 2013).

BCG Matrix
?
Relative Market Share
Market Growth Rate

GE-McKinsey Matrix
Growth
Competitive strength of
business unit
High Med Low
Industry
attractivenessHigh
Med
Low
Growth
Harvest
Selective Harvest
HarvestSelective
SelectiveGrowth

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

Business categorisation
BCG
Matrix
GE-McKinsey
Matrix
Synergy
Matrix
LOOKS Question mark Harvest Misfits
Neutrino Cash cow Harvest Fits
Dermatech Star Growth Fits
Energino Dog Harvest Misfits

LOOKS
• Analysis
• Looks are comparatively new with low market share and high
growth rate
• Looks are also misfit based on synergy matrix
• Recommendations
• It should initiate more aggressive promotional strategy
• Should cover more customer segments

Neutrino
• Analysis
• It is having higher market share with lower growth
• However, it is fit for further investments
• Recommendations
• Neutrino should be invest in new areas to increase their growth
level
• They should come up with new and diverse product offerings

Dermatech
• Analysis
• Dermatech is having good market share and growth
• They are fit for further investments
• Recommendations
• They should further increase their investments for tapping the
growth opportunities
• Should initiate market development strategy

Energino
• Analysis
• It is not fit for further investments and should be harvested
• Recommendations
• They should sell it off to third party vendors

Conclusion
• Each of the business units of MHS are having different sets of
opportunities
• Some of them are having higher market opportunities
• Some of them should be harvested
• Different tools are used to identify the opportunities for all these
brands.

Introduction
• Dynamic capability of MHS is favourable with having higher access
to financial resources
• Research and development is also extensive (Kindstrom,
Kowalkowski and Sandberg 2013)
• However, the entire process is not consolidated
• Chance of duplication is high

Identify and assess
opportunities
• Demand for organic medicines and nutrients is increasing in the
market.
• Patent will further help in maintaining the competitive advantages
• Centralized leadership can also help in having greater organizing
power.

Identify and assess
opportunities
• It is recommended that research and development process should
be focused on organic development
• Patent should be filed for innovations (Gibson, Rosen and Stucker
2015)
• Research and development process should be centralized

Mobilise resources
• MHS is having funding for research and development but
ineffective approaches is causing underutilization of resources
• Investments are being wasted for same processes by different
units (John 2017)

Mobilise resources
• It is recommended that funding should be made for different
research projects with different objectives
• They should also review each of the steps in the research process

Transform and reconfigure
• Board of directors initiated to change the separate process of
research and development
• Research processes will be done based on centralized manner
• All the members in the research process will now be hold
responsible (DeRue, Nahrgang and Ashford 2015)

Transform and reconfigure
• Research and development process should be supervised by the
CEO centrally
• Competition between the units should reduced and single entity
should be promoted
• Outcome of research projects should have common utility for the
units

Conclusion
• It can be concluded that MHS is having favourable capability,
which is underutilized
• Research projects are facing issues in meeting the different needs
of the units
• A few recommended steps are being discussed, which will help in
mitigating these issues

References
• DeRue, D.S., Nahrgang, J.D. and Ashford, S.J., 2015. Interpersonal
perceptions and the emergence of leadership structures in groups:
A network perspective. Organization Science, 26(4), pp.1192-1209.
• Ram, M., Jones, T., Edwards, P., Kiselinchev, A., Muchenje, L. and
Woldesenbet, K., 2013. Engaging with super-diversity: New migrant
businesses and the research–policy nexus. International Small Business
Journal, 31(4), pp.337-356.
• Sohel, S.M., Rahman, A.M.A. and Uddin, M.A., 2014. Competitive profile
matrix (CPM) as a competitors’ analysis tool: A theoretical
perspective. International Journal of Human Potential Development, 3(1),
pp.40-47.

References
• Tsakalerou, M., 2015. GE/McKinsey matrices revisited: a mixed mode
tool for multi-criteria decision analysis. European Journal of
Contemporary Economics and Management, 2(1), pp.92-98.
• Momin, B., Neri, A., McCausland, K., Duke, J., Hansen, H., Kahende, J.,
Zhang, L. and Stewart, S.L., 2014. Traditional and innovative
promotional strategies of tobacco cessation services: a review of the
literature. Journal of community health, 39(4), pp.800-809.
• Kindström, D., Kowalkowski, C. and Sandberg, E., 2013. Enabling
service innovation: A dynamic capabilities approach. Journal of
business research, 66(8), pp.1063-1073.

References
• Gibson, I., Rosen, D. and Stucker, B., 2015. Business Opportunities and
Future Directions. In Additive Manufacturing Technologies (pp. 475-
486). Springer, New York, NY.
• John, D.M., 2017. Pro-life and pro-choice mobilization: Infrastructure
deficits and new technologies. In Social movements in an
organizational society (pp. 48-66). Routledge.