Analyzing ARM Holdings: KPIs, Competitive Position, and Business Model

This report provides a comprehensive analysis of ARM Holdings, focusing on its Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) in comparison to its major competitors, Intel and Imagination Technologies. It examines various financial metrics such as revenue, gross profit, R&D expenses, net income, ROCE, ROA, ROE, operating margin, and current ratio, interpreting the trends and performance of each company. The report also assesses ARM Holdings' competitive positioning using the 4Cs framework (Company, Competition, Resources, and Customers) and outlines its business model using the Business Model Canvas, highlighting key partners, activities, resources, value propositions, customer relationships, channels, customer segments, cost structure, and revenue streams. The analysis identifies strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats, providing a holistic view of ARM Holdings' strategic landscape. Desklib offers a wealth of similar solved assignments and past papers to aid students in their studies.

red colour writing notes are the feedback to make the amendments.
Part -1
you did not use the Harvard method in terms of referencing – write down within the text where you got the information from –
see the both examples google and Samsung------write with the each KPI and throughout the assignment I need the referencing-
I cannot pass without it. Also I am surpsired that you did not put any numbers and labeled any graphs and tables- check your
reference again. Number all the graphs and lebell them with name and number. – see google example to do referencing of all
images/graphs and tables and within the text also.
1) Key Performance indicators of ARM Holdings and two of its largest competitors, Intel and Imagination Technologies
KPI ARM HOLDINGS Intel I
m
a
g
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
T
e
c
h
n
o
1

red colour writing notes are the feedback to make the amendments.
l
o
g
i
e
s
Write the $ or pound sign and m for
million sign
201
1
(+/-
%)
(+/-%) 2013 (+/-
%)
201
4
(+/-
%)
201
5
2011 (+/-
%)
2012 2011 (+/-
%)
201
2
(+/-
%)
2013
Revenue (GPB Mil) 492 17
%
24% 715 11% 795 22
%
968 5399
9
-
1%
5334
1
98 30
%
127 19
%
151
Cost of revenue (GPB Mil) 28 14
%
22% 39 -3% 38 3% 39 2024
2
0% 2019
0
21 0% 21 0% 21
Gross profit (GPB Mil) 464 17
%
24% 675 12% 757 23
%
929 3375
7
-
2%
3315
1
77 38
%
106 24
%
131
Gross profit margin % 94.4 0% 0% 94.5 1% 95.2 1% 95.9 62.5 -
1%
62.1 78.8 6% 83.5 3% 86.3
Research and development
(GPB Mil)
165 1% 22% 203 10% 224 24
%
278 8350 22
%
1014
8
45 33
%
60 40
%
84
Total operating expenses
(GPB Mil)
315 7% 55% 522 -
14%
448 17
%
523 1628
0
14
%
1851
3
60 37
%
82 45
%
119
Net income (GPB Mil) 113 42
%
-35% 105 143
%
255 33
%
340 1294
2
-
15
%
1100
5
19 5% 20 -
70
%
6
Basic 0.25 40
%
-37% 0.22 150
%
0.55 31
%
0.72 2.46 -
11
%
2.2 0.08 0% 0.08 -
75
%
0.02
EBITDA 170 41
%
-20% 191 84% 352 30
%
457 2388
6
-
6%
2248
5
20 70
%
34 -
38
%
21
ROCE % 11.5 23 -41% 8.3 116 17.9 13 20.3 24.6 - 18.6 17.62 - 12.2 - 2.74
2

red colour writing notes are the feedback to make the amendments.
2 % % 4 % 3 2 24
%
6 30
%
9 78
%
ROA % 9.45 23
%
-42% 6.75 118
%
14.7 17
%
17.1
7
19.2
7
-
27
%
14.1
6
15.08 -
30
%
10.5
7
-
78
%
2.28
ROE % 11.5
2
23
%
-41% 8.33 116
%
17.9
9
14
%
20.4
3
27.1
5
-
17
%
22.6
6
18.2 -
30
%
12.7
7
-
73
%
3.4
Current Ratio (%) 2.26 26
%
-2% 2.78 21% 3.35 8% 3.61 2.15 13
%
2.43 4.7 -
11
%
4.2 -
63
%
1.55
Total Asset (GPB Mil) 130
0
13
%
12% 1638 12% 183
7
15
%
212
0
7111
9
19
%
8435
1
175 22
%
213 59
%
339
Operating Margin (GPB Mil) 30.3 19
%
-40% 21.5
%
81% 38.9 8% 41.9 32.4 -
15
%
27.4 16.58 34
%
22.2
5
-
67
%
7.45
Start the years from 2015 to 2011 .
Add more KPI’s especially 1 Global market share and 2- profitability and general – See the attached Google pdf example.
Graphs & Interpretation:
 Constant increase in revenue for ARM Holdings from 2011 to 2015 indicates that company’s products
and services possess great demand in the target market. However, it shows the positive hike of 5% from 17%
to 22% in past five years. While on the other hand, Intel revenue has decreased significantly in 2011, 2012
and 2013 with the respect of -1%. Similar to this, KPI indicates poor condition of Imagination technologies as
its sales volume has declined considerably in past 3 years from 30% to 19%.
 In addition to this, cost R&D department for ARM Holdings and Imagination Technologies are showing
increasing figures whereas, for Intel it is showing decreasing results. This indicates Intel due to decreasing
revenue is unable to invest in the same [3]. While the other two companies have are constantly investing huge
3

red colour writing notes are the feedback to make the amendments.
in R&D department as their financial status are relatively stable.
 Negative net income for all three companies in past years indicates that they are not able to satisfy the
needs and wants of customers due to which they are unable to attract large number of audience for buying
services [48].
 ARM Holdings shown unstable return on equity till 2013 as thereafter firm is able to provide better
return on the equity capital for its stakeholders. On the other hand, Intel and Imagination Technologies has
been showing declining results which indeed created negative image within the minds of investors for the
future investments [31].
 Despite of decreasing ROCE, ARM Holdings plc has been able to maintain positive results whereas both
its competitors are unable to generate positive outcomes which clearly indicates that they are unable to
generate return on the employed capital [2].
 Liquidity position of ARM Holdings plc is showing significant outcomes which signify that firm has
adequate amount of currents assets to overcome its short term financial obligations. Contradicting to this,
current ratio of its art rival is showing negative outcomes in past year indicates their incapability in meeting
short term financial needs or commitments [41].
 Rationale behind decreasing net income in all three firms is because of incapability in generating profit
from the operations. It is because of the fact, operating margin ratio of the all three firms showcase declining
results [38].
 Significant decrease in earnings per share for all three firms indicates the incapability of providing
expected dividends to the shareholders.
Interpretations
As per the above graph showing return on equity of all the companies it depicts the true position of the three
companies in terms of the rate of return on equity. The growth of Intel shows declining position from 2011 to
2013 from high to low. The graph of imagination technology is inclining downward from moderate to
negative. This graph also depicts the growth rate of ARM from moderate to high position among all
companies.
Under the graphs – now add the individual interpretation of each kpi used above – see Samsung Microsoft word
example attached
4

red colour writing notes are the feedback to make the amendments.
2 Positioning of ARM Holdings: 4C’s as component of ARM’s Eco-system
Company
Strength
 Strong brand name enhances the ability to charge high for its products and services.
 Asset leverage assist the course of ARM Holdings to make the best possible use of operational
assets for expanding business and improving market share.
 High customer loyalty [3].
 Superior technology leads to satisfy diverse expectations of customers.
 Uniqueness of products distinguish ARM from its competitors and allow company to charge
higher prices [47].
Weakness
 Weak R&D slow down the growth of ARM Holdings.
 Weak online presence restrict firm to lose the opportunity of generating high revenues [5].
 High debt burden enhances the risks of business as one bad decision may lead to situation of
bankruptcy [50].
Threats
 Availability of substitute product is one of the major threat for the firm.
 Recession or bad economy may affect adversely on the number of customers [6].
 Increasing international competition can negatively affect the course of ARM Holdings [52].
Resources
 Acquisition of Sansa Security, provider of hardware security IP in 2015.
 Acquisition of Wicentric and Sunrise Micro Devices for Bluetooth smart stack and radio
intellectual property (IP) in the same year [56].
 ARM renewed its $5 million research partnership with University of Michigan in 2011 to focus
on ultra-low energy and sustainable computing.
 More than 50 billion chips have been produced by ARM Holdings plc in 2014 [7].
Competition  Intel invest $1.5 million in loTchuip R&D in Ireland. [14]
 Imagination made a loss of £63.2 million pre-tax in 2016, which is down from 2.2 million profit
of the previous year. Further, company’s revenue has dropped by 23% to £120 million. [13]
 Acquisition of companies like Vuzix, Lantiq, Altera, Recon, Saffron technology in 2015 has
enhanced the level of business for Intel. [17] Recently, Intel has acquire German and Italian firms
i.e. Ascending Technologies and Yogitech to enhance its UAVs and loT security. [15] [16]
5

red colour writing notes are the feedback to make the amendments.
Customers  B2C: ARM processors are used in all modern mobile phones, CPUs which are easily used by
consumers around the globe.
 B2B: ARM processors are used as the main CPU for smartphones which includes the
manufactures like Apple, HTC, Nokia, Sony Ericsson and Samsung.
Collaborators
Alliances ARM and Samsung are extending their strategic alliance through long term licensing agreements.
Acquisitions  Sansa Security [35]
 Wicentric
 Sunrise Micro devices
 Carbon design system [60]
 PolarSSl
Partners  Microsoft: In 2011, Microsoft revealed that Windows 8 operating system will run on ARM
architecture platform [17].
 University of Michigan: $5 million researcher partnership which emphasize on ultra-low energy
and sustainable computing.
Licenses
 ARM Core licensees: There are several companies that possess 64-bit ARMv8-A core licensees
i.e. Samsung, Broadcom, HiSiliconetc [57].
 ARM Architectural licensees: It is 64-bit ARMv8-A architectural license [33].
 Mali licensees: This indicates the licensees of the Mali GPU designs hold by Rockchip and
Allwinner.
Suppliers Deals as an IP firm, ARM Holding does not hold widespread supply chain of raw materials but makes
purchase of varied goods and services from 900 suppliers around the globe.
Here you would need to do big changes- heading should be Positions of Arms compared to intel and imagination see
example of Samsung Microsoft word . Write the components which can give you the comparison of arms with its
rivals.
After writing about positioning you have to write the next Heading which will be 5c’s of ARMS – see google example
6

red colour writing notes are the feedback to make the amendments.
So basically you will keep the no.2 part writing as it and change the name as 5 cs of Arms but will have to write
positioning of Arms against rivals in a separate section.
3. ARM Holding Business model Canvas
Key partners
 Microsoft: In 2011, ARM Holding signed the partnership deal with Microsoft for providing architecture platform to the Windows 8
operating system [58].
 University of Michigan: Is one of the major partner of ARM Holdings wherein, both the firms aim at developing ultra-low energy and
sustainable computing. However, the deal of research partnership was signed at $5 million [32].
Key Activities
 Manufacturing: Primary business is to design ARM processors (CPUs) which are used by leading companies like Apple, Samsung
etc. Further, it manufactures Mali line of graphics processing units (GPU) which are used in laptops in over 50% of android tablets.
ARM’s core designs are used in chips that support many common network related technologies in smartphones i.e. Bluetooth, WiFi, and
broadband [36].
 Research and Development: High investment is made in R&D department of the company to bring constant innovation and updation
within the processors manufactured by the firm. This also aids in satisfying the needs and wants of B2B clients [18]. Normalised
expenses on research and development has increased to £217 million in 2015 to extend the product portfolio. Along with this, another 74
million was invested in acquisitions to accelerate product development and create new revenue streams [34].
 Acquisitions: Acquisition of Sansa Security, provider of hardware security IP in 2015. Further, acquisition of Wicentric and Sunrise
Micro Devices for Bluetooth smart stack and radio intellectual property (IP) in the same year.
Key Resources
 Human resource: ARM Holdings consist of 3300 employees which aims to carry out given tasks and operations in effective and
efficient manner [34].
 Intellectual property: In year 2013, ARM Holdings became the part of consortium of the firms that has acquired the right to patent
portfolio of MIPS technologies. This indeed minimizes the potential risks of future litigation with the patents. In the following year, cited
firm filled 171 patents application across the globe which increased the number of patents owned by ARM to 2500 [51].
 Development tool: The major portfolio of ARM is to manufacture microprocessor designs and graphics processing unit (GPU) designs
which are mainly used in smart phones, tablets, laptops etc. of leading companies like Apple, Samsung, Nokia, HTC and Sony Ericsson
etc [19].
 Brand value: In 2014, brand value of ARM Holdings was recorded at £567 million which clearly indicates the better goodwill of the
company in the market [37].
7

red colour writing notes are the feedback to make the amendments.
 Physical resources: ARM operates in different parts of the world that comprises of Europe, United States and Asia Pacific with 35
well established offices in the countries of these continents [54].
Value proposition  ARM create value for partners by employing engineers to develop advanced processors, IP, tools and software that company license to
its B2B segment for the development of consumer electronics. Licensing helps the course of partners to acquire technology at cost
effective [51].
 By recovering costs from licensing technology helps in generating high revenues and profits which indeed leads to create value of
shareholder by providing them better returns at the end of year [20].
 In context to long term value preposition, company reinvest in R&D as well as hire more skilled and capable engineers to develop new
technology and bring constant innovation within the firm [40].
 ARM creates value by shipping chips to different parts of the world. Along with this, licence and royalty income in which till date
1348 cumulative licences are signed [55].
Customer segment  B2C: ARM processors are used in all modern mobile phones, CPUs which are easily used by consumers around the globe.
 B2B: ARM processors are used as the main CPU for smartphones which includes the manufactures like Apple, HTC, Nokia, Sony
Ericsson and Samsung [21].
Customer Relationship  In this, management aims at developing innovative processors for the companies that have license to create value for money as well as
maintain long term relationship with them [53].
 Herein, managerial level people are encouraged to emphasize on after sale services for several service centers has been established in
different parts of the target market [22].
Distribution Channel  Directly with the clients
 Through factories or licenses
Cost structure
 There are different costs that are associated with the functioning of ARM Holdings plc:
 Manufacturing: Producer of different microprocessor chips and IP is the major costs that cited firm has to incur to satisfy needs and
expectations of clients [39].
 R&D: High investment of £217 million in research and development department to extent the product portfolio of the ARM Holdings
[23].
 Distribution: There are two method through which ARM distributes its quality of products and services i.e. directly to the clients and
through licensing [69].
 Marketing and advertisement: Huge investment is made in the marketing prospects of the business as to overcome the level of
competition as well as create awareness among the target markets of international boundaries [76].
Revenue Streams  Total revenue of £968.3 million has been generated in year 2015 from different portfolios.
8

red colour writing notes are the feedback to make the amendments.
 However, revenue grew by 15% in 2015 as existing customers adopted and deployed ARM latest technology in their current and
future products [73].
 Along with this, 39 new companies signed the license with ARM technology [70].
 In 2015, 15 billion units of chips containing ARM cores has been sold within the target markets.
Add some more detail in BM canvas image.
4. Acquisition of ARM Holdings Plc
Company Standard Industrial classification Value added to ARM Holding
Sansa Security (2015) Hardware security and software
industry
This added value by enhancing ARM’s IP security and software for advanced system on chip
components [9].
Wicentric (2015) Value for partners by adding Bluetooth smart smack [64].
Sunrise Micro Devices (2015) Intellectual property company The acquisition resulted in development of ARM® Cordio® portfolio in which IP of both companies
were integrated [13].
Carbon design system System validation solution industry This acquisition added value for ARM by improving its operating system as well as software system
verification and interconnect performance analysis has been improved significantly [46].
PolarSSI (2014) FlowLink Driver Software Software library implementing the SSL and TLS protocols [63].
Falanx (2006) Security and intelligence provider This added value by incorporating portfolio of 3D graphics accelerators. Along with this, acquisition
assist in hiring specialists who are proficient in developing silicon on insulator physical [49].
5. TWOS Analysis of ARM Holdings
External opportunities (O) External Threats (T)
 Constantly increasing demand of smartphone
leads to generate better revenue for the
microprocessor portfolio of the company [62].
 Improving outlook for semiconductor market
[24].
 Demand of low electric power consumption in
 High degree of competition especially in
microprocessor portfolio has affected the course of
ARM Holding [65].
 Constantly advancement in technology is major
threat as it could hinder the overall processes of
ARM Holdings [66].
9

red colour writing notes are the feedback to make the amendments.
portable devices is increasing at significant pace
[67].
Internal strength (S) S-O S-T
 Strong brand name enhances the ability to
charge high for its products and services.
 Asset leverage assist the course of ARM
Holdings to make the best possible use of
operational assets for expanding business and
improving market share.
 High customer loyalty
 Superior technology leads to satisfy diverse
expectations of customers.
 Uniqueness of products distinguish ARM from
its competitors and allow company to charge
higher prices.
 Use customer loyalty to increase the sales of
microprocessor portfolio so as to generate higher
profits [25].
 Make optimum utilisation of superior
technology for enhancing the outlook for
semiconductor market [68].
 Develop USP in low electric power
consumption for the portable devises to charge high
than competitors and enhance sales volume [71].
 Make optimum use of brand image to maintain
the sales performance of different portfolio of the
ARM.
 Use of asset leverage in acquiring advanced
technology will help in enhancing the overall
functioning of ARM [72].
Internal Weakness (W) W-O W-T
 Weak R&D slow down the growth of ARM
Holdings.
 Weak online presence restrict firm to lose the
opportunity of generating high revenues.
 High debt burden enhances the risks of
business as one bad decision may lead to situation
of bankruptcy.
 Invest in R&D to acquire advanced
technology for enhancing future contingency [75].

 Create USP of sustainable computing through
making use of online marketing or promotional;
campaign [74].
 Develop revenue streams through meeting the
demand of microprocessor portfolio in varied target
markets [80].
 Set proper budget for enhancing the R&D
department of ARM Holdings [78].
 Legal and compliance to ensure that disputes
regarding patents are addressed before progressing
to lawsuit stage [81].
 Focus on licensees in B2B and B2C segments
[26].
 Increasing debt may create obstacle in
acquiring advanced technology [79].
6: Eco system
Knowledge Testing Standards
Innovations, working with partners and self-selectors. Assist in creating road map for developing, trail and Growth of IP that is by means of exchanging of services,
10

red colour writing notes are the feedback to make the amendments.
Research and development investments.
Advantage from partners IP and sharing of patents by
the means of licensing [27].
Use of new and unique technologies
Increasing efficiency of its employees
Enhancing business operations
market new products [42].
Offers ideal environment for testing and trail of the
innovative technologies.
Creative talent of employees judged by giving
challenges
Secure long lasting relations
products and interaction in the eco-system [45].
Pre-determine standards help company to improve its
services.
Growth of IP
Self-recruitment process
The eco system is very weak – add more key information in this section.
7. ARM Holding’s Leadership- Synthesis of McKinsey 7S Framework, Balance scorecard and Senge’s 5th Discipline
System Considering the increasing opportunities as well as obstacles in foreign market, ARM Holdings abiding the collaborative system in which
management emphasize on developing and maintaining quality of long term relationship with stakeholders and partners [82].
Strategy The purpose of ARM existence is to prepare chip for smart phones, tablets, laptops etc. however, increasing demand of smartphones has
helped the course of ARM to generate higher business volume. Further, company employ strategy of license to develop customers for the
microprocessor [28]. Furthermore, acquisition strategy is paying great returns as ARM is constantly enhancing its operating system and IP
for meeting the expectations of clients or customers.
Skills, learning and growth Management of ARM constantly focus on training and development so as to enhance learning and skills of engineers. Innovation and
creativity is the base for growth of ARM in existing market [84].
Style and staff
 Staff: At present, ARM Holdings plc possess 3300 skilful and capable workers who are highly educated engineers. Herein, better
working environment encourages employees to put their best in delivering the best to clients [83].
 Style: Managerial level people abide democratic leadership style to guide and direct workers. It leads to enhance employee
engagement within the organisation. This leads to maintain coordination between the employees and helps them to execute operations
in correct manner [29].
Structure At present, ARM Holdings possess vertical structure which consists of board of directors, top, middle and lower level of management.
Shared values ARM create value for partners by employing engineers to develop advanced processors, IP, tools and software that company license to its
B2B segment for the development of consumer electronics. Licensing helps the course of partners to acquire technology at cost effective
[30].
11

red colour writing notes are the feedback to make the amendments.
Change the heading into Mckinsey’s 7s framework & 5th Discipline.
See google- pdf file and make the exactly the same.
After this section make a new heading as 8: Arms’s Leadership and its styles.
In that section you have to mention the keys events or incidents happened in the last 10 years, how arm cope with the
incidents. How leaders were affected with these incidents and how they will involved in such events. Mention the events that
cause any changes in the organisation and leadership. What are the styles of leadership current and past-both. How KPI s and
Mckinsey’s 7s were affected by those incidents and then changes and then leadership styles also?
8. SWOT Analysis
9.Success factors of ARM holding
Innovative design and products ARM holding is known for developing innovative products. In past years it bring many changes in its product lines. It also
develop new products. This is the reason due to which it is one of the top company in its sector. Forbes put ARM holding in the
list of most innovative company [86]. Mentioned company always remain ahead of its competitors in terms of revenue earning
and product development. Hence, technology development play an important role in growth of an organization.
Management practice Management of ARM holding is sound and innovative in nature. Managers of the firm always try to identify the new ways that
they can adopt for speeding up growth rate of an organization. They time to time evaluate business environment and identify the
changes that can be bring in their products to meet business requirements [90]. This is the reason due tom which firm is ahead of
its competitors.
Capital power Firm is earning sufficient amount of revenue in its business. Thus, it have huge quantity of capital in its business. The available
capital is used to make heavy expenditure on research and development projects [91].This is the reason due to which firm is
known for innovation in its product.
Capability to create new market Firm is capable to create new market for itself. This is because it is known for doing innovation in its product line. Its product is
acceptable around the world by top companies [89]. Hence, when it introduce any new innovative product in the market firms
adopt same. As a result, firm is capable to create new market for itself.
12

red colour writing notes are the feedback to make the amendments.
Ethic in organization ARM holding have good culture and it is adopted and strictly implement by the firm managers and employees. It is ensured by
the top managers of the firm that discrimination is not done among the employees on the basis of sex, caste and religion etc [90].
Openness to change ARM holding is very open to change because its managers always try to identify the needs of the people. They try to identify the
changes that are coming in the market and accordingly firm innovate its existing product line [93]. This is the reason due to
which firm is market leader in its industry.
Heavy investment in research and development
project
ARM holding every year makes heavy investment in research and development program. Under this it carry out research
activities that will bring change in its products [88]. This is one of the main core competency of an organization.
10. Balance Scorecard
Perspectives Objectives Measurements Targets Initiatives
FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015
Internal business The main objective of
ARM holding is to
recruit talented people
as employees in an
organization and to
retain them for long
term [89].
Firm is bringing changes in
technology infrastructure.
NA NA NA Managers time to time
evaluate business
environment and decide
that in which direction
they needs to work for
benefit of an
organization [99].
Customer To create new and
retain old customers
[96].
Increase in number of customers
and number of times old client
place order for purchase of items
NA NA NA Firm consistently take a
feedback from its
customer's in order to
get idea about changes
that they needs to make
in their products [95].
Financial perspective To raise fund for
financing of research
Percentage change in the finance
cost of funds.
NA NA NA To raise funds from
different sources of
13

red colour writing notes are the feedback to make the amendments.
and development
projects at cheaper rate
[100].
To make best use of
funds in business
activities to maximize
ROI.
finance that have low
cost in balanced manner
[94].
Learning and growth
perspective
To admit new
engineers to the
research and
development team of
an organization.
Performance of newly selected
employees in research and
development projects [98].
NA NA NA Placing newly selected
employees under
leadership of
experienced engineers
[97].
why na in fy 2011-fy2013?
14

red colour writing notes are the feedback to make the amendments.
REFERENCES1. Taylor, H., Artman, E. and Woelfer,
J.P., 2012. Information technology project risk
management: bridging the gap between research and
practice.Journal of Information Technology. 27(1).
pp.17-34.
2. Moro Visconti, R., 2012. Inflation risk
management in project finance
investments. International Journal of and
Accounting. 1(6).
3. Lin, C.L, and et.al., 2010. Evaluation of
perceived discomfort in repetitive arm reaching and
holding tasks. International Journal of Industrial
Ergonomics, 40(1), pp.90-96.
4. Amin, S.H., Razmi, J. and Zhang, G.,
2011. Supplier selection and order allocation based
on fuzzy SWOT analysis and fuzzy linear
programming.Expert Systems with
Applications. 38(1). pp.334-342.
5. Sevkli, M. and et.al., 2012.
Development of a fuzzy ANP based SWOT analysis
for the airline industry in Turkey. Expert Systems
with Applications. 39(1). pp.14-24.
6. Nikolaou, I.E. and Evangelinos, K.I.,
2010. A SWOT analysis of environmental
management practices in Greek Mining and Mineral
Industry.Resources Policy. 35(3). pp.226-234.
7. Peter Clarke, 2015."ARM extends
Michigan research deal." 31 August 2011. Sage
publication
8. Jump up ^ Chris Edwards, Electronics
Weekly. "ARM extends Michigan low-power work."
31 August 2011. Retrieved 20 September 2011.
9. "ARM Expands IoT Security
Capability with Acquisition of Sansa Security -
34. Günzel, F. and Holm, A.B., 2013.
One size does not fit all—understanding the front-
end and back-end of business model
innovation. International Journal of Innovation
Management. 17(01). p.1340002.
35. Wallin, J., Chirumalla, K. and
Thompson, A., 2013. Developing PSS concepts
from traditional product sales situation: the use of
business model canvas. In Product-Service
Integration for Sustainable Solutions. Springer
Berlin Heidelberg. pp. 263-274.
36. Rytkönen, E. and Nenonen, S.,
2014. The Business Model Canvas in university
campus management. Intelligent Buildings
International. 6(3). pp.138-154.
37. Dudin, M.N. and et.al., 2015. The
Innovative Business Model Canvas in the System
of Effective Budgeting. Asian Social
Science. 11(7). p.290.
38. Naggar, R., 2015. The Creativity
Canvas: A Business Model for Knowledge and
Idea Management. Technology Innovation
Management Review. 5(7).
39. Fritscher, B. and Pigneur, Y., 2014,
July. Visualizing Business Model Evolution with
the Business Model Canvas: Concept and Tool.
In Business Informatics (CBI), 2014 IEEE 16th
Conference on . IEEE. 1, pp. 151-158.
40. Shahand, S., Duffelen, J. and
Olabarriaga, S.D., 2015. Reflections on science
gateways sustainability through the business model
canvas: case study of a neuroscience
gateway. Concurrency and Computation: Practice
and Experience. 27(16). pp.4269-4281.
41. Karadakis, K., Kaplanidou, K. and
Karlis, G., 2010. Event leveraging of mega sport
66. Jogulu, U.D., 2010. Culturally-linked
leadership styles. Leadership & Organization
Development Journal. 31(8). pp.705-719.
67. Brauckmann, S. and Pashiardis, P.,
2011. A validation study of the leadership styles of a
holistic leadership theoretical framework.
International Journal of Educational Management.
25(1). pp.11-32.
68. Yukongdi, V., 2010. A study of Thai
employees' preferred leadership style. Asia pacific
business review. 16(1-2). pp.161-181.
69. Efferin, S. and Hartono, M.S., 2015.
Management control and leadership styles in family
business: An Indonesian case study. Journal of
Accounting & Organizational Change. 11(1).
pp.130-159.
70. Overstreet, R.E. and et.al., 2013.
Leadership style and organizational innovativeness
drive motor carriers toward sustained performance.
The International Journal of Logistics Management.
24(2). pp.247-270.
71. Cemaloglu, N., 2011. Primary
principals' leadership styles, school organizational
health and workplace bullying. Journal of
Educational Administration. 49(5). pp.495-512.
72. Xue, Y., Bradley, J. and Liang, H.,
2011. Team climate, empowering leadership, and
knowledge sharing. Journal of knowledge
management. 15(2). pp.299-312.
73. Paglis, L.L., 2010. Leadership self-
efficacy: Research findings and practical
applications. Journal of Management Development.
29(9). pp.771-782.
74. Manik, S., 2010. The Migration of
Indian Teachers from KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa
to the United Kingdom: Escaping Adverse
15

red colour writing notes are the feedback to make the amendments.
ARM". ARM.
10. ^ Jump up to: a b "ARM Announces
Acquisition of Wicentric and Sunrise Micro - ARM".
ARM.
11. Shimpi, A, L., 2015. "ARM Partners
Ship 50 Billion Chips Since 1991 - Where Did They
Go?".Rouledge
12. Manners, D., 2016. Record loss for
imagination. [Online]. Available through:
<http://www.electronicsweekly.com/news/business/re
cord-loss-for-imagination-2016-07/>. [Accessed on
6th July 2016].
13. Manners, D., 2016. Semiconductor
sector. [Online]. Available through:
<http://www.electronicsweekly.com//>. [Accessed on
6th July 2016].
14. "Intel buys Yogitech, aims to bolster
IoT safety efforts". ZDNet. 2016-04-05. Retrieved
2016-04-05.
15. "Intel Acquires Ascending
Technologies". January 4, 2016. Retrieved March 9,
2016
16. Intel buys $25 million stake in Google
Glass rival Vuzix". The Verge. Vox Media.
17. Krane, H.P., Olsson, N.O. and
Rolstadås, A., 2012. How project manager–project
owner interaction can work within and influence
project risk management. Project Management
Journal. 43(2). pp.54-67.
18. Kazdin, A.E., 2011. Single-case research
designs: Methods for clinical and applied settings .
events: a SWOT analysis approach. International
Journal of Event and Festival Management. 1(3).
pp.170-185.
42. Sariisik, M., Turkay, O. and Akova,
O., 2011. How to manage yacht tourism in Turkey:
A swot analysis and related strategies. Procedia-
Social and Behavioral Sciences. 24. pp.1014-1025.
43. Amin, S.H., Razmi, J. and Zhang,
G., 2011. Supplier selection and order allocation
based on fuzzy SWOT analysis and fuzzy linear
programming.Expert Systems with
Applications. 38(1). pp.334-342.
44. Helms, M.M. and Nixon, J., 2010.
Exploring SWOT analysis-where are we now? A
review of academic research from the last
decade. Journal of strategy and
management. 3(3).pp.215-251.
45. Milosevic, I.N., 2010. Practical
application of SWOT analysis in the management
of a construction project. Leadership and
Management in Engineering. 10(2). pp.78-86.
46. Karadakis, K., Kaplanidou, K. and
Karlis, G., 2010. Event leveraging of mega sport
events: a SWOT analysis approach. International
Journal of Event and Festival Management. 1(3).
pp.170-185.
47. Ming, Z. and et.al., 2014. CCS
technology development in China: Status,
problems and countermeasures—Based on SWOT
analysis. Renewable and Sustainable Energy
Reviews. 39. pp.604-616.
48. Panigrahi, J.K. and Mohanty, P.K.,
2012. Effectiveness of the Indian coastal regulation
zones provisions for coastal zone management and
its evaluation using SWOT analysis. Ocean &
coastal management. 65. pp.34-50.
49. Knierim, A. and Nowicki, P., 2010.
Leadership and Management'. The Anthropologist. 4.
pp.109-120.
75. Ertureten, A., Cemalcilar, Z. and
Aycan, Z., 2013. The relationship of downward
mobbing with leadership style and organizational
attitudes. Journal of business ethics. 116(1). pp.205-
216.
76. Rothfelder, K., Ottenbacher, M.C.
and Harrington, R.J., 2013. The impact of
transformational, transactional and non-leadership
styles on employee job satisfaction in the German
hospitality industry. Tourism and Hospitality
Research, p.1467358413493636.
77. Cooper, D., 2015. Effective Safety
Leadership: Understanding Types & Styles That
Improve Safety Performance. Professional Safety.
60(2). p.49.
78. Isaksen, S.G. and Akkermans, H.J.,
2011. Creative climate: A leadership lever for
innovation. Journal of Creative Behavior. 45(3).
pp.161-187.
79. Rajbhandari, M.M.S., 2012. Growing
with Driving Leadership Style in School: A Case
Study on Leadership of Finnish Elementary Schools
in Tampere. Online Submission.
80. AkhavanTabassi, A. and Hassan Abu
Bakar, A., 2010. Towards assessing the leadership
style and quality of transformational leadership: the
case of construction firms of Iran. Journal of
Technology Management in China. 5(3).pp.245-258.
81. Dadkhah, V., Hui, H. and Jenatabadi,
H.S., 2014. An Application of Moderation Analysis:
the Situation of School Size in the Relationship
among Principal's Leadership Style, Decision
Making Style, and Teacher Job Satisfaction.
International Journal of Research in Business and
Technology. 5(3). pp.724-729.
82. Vermeeren, B., Kuipers, B. and
16

red colour writing notes are the feedback to make the amendments.
Oxford University Press.
19. Nikolaou, I.E. and Evangelinos, K.I.,
2010. A SWOT analysis of environmental
management practices in Greek Mining and Mineral
Industry.Resources Policy. 35(3). pp.226-234.
20. Osterwalder, A. and et.al., 2014. Value
proposition design: how to create products and
services customers want. John Wiley & Sons.
21. Gilmour, P. and et.al., 2013. Customer service:
differentiating by market segment. International
Journal of Physical Distribution & Materials
Management.
22. Ernst, H. and et.al., 2011. Customer
relationship management and company performance
—the mediating role of new product performance.
Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science. 39(2).
pp.290-306.
23. Westoby, M.J. and et.al., 2012. ‘Structure-from-
Motion’photogrammetry: A low-cost, effective tool
for geoscience applications. Geomorphology. 179.
pp.300-314.
24. Helms, M.M. and Nixon, J., 2010.
Exploring SWOT analysis-where are we now? A
review of academic research from the last
decade. Journal of strategy and
management. 3(3).pp.215-251.
25. Milosevic, I.N., 2010. Practical
application of SWOT analysis in the management of
a construction project. Leadership and Management
in Engineering. 10(2). pp.78-86.
26. Karadakis, K., Kaplanidou, K. and
Karlis, G., 2010. Event leveraging of mega sport
events: a SWOT analysis approach. International
Journal of Event and Festival Management. 1(3).
pp.170-185.
27. Kosoy, N and Corbera, E., 2010. Payments for
ecosystem services as commodity fetishism.
Ecological economics. 69(6). pp.1228-1236.
SWOT analysis: appraisal of a new tool in
European rural development policies. Outlook on
agriculture. 39(1). pp.65-72.
50. Kurland, H., Peretz, H. and Hertz-
Lazarowitz, R., 2010. Leadership style and
organizational learning: The mediate effect of
school vision. Journal of Educational
Administration. 48(1). pp.7-30.
51. Bernhard, F. and O'Driscoll, M.P.,
2011. Psychological ownership in small family-
owned businesses: Leadership style and
nonfamily-employees’ work attitudes and
behaviors. Group & Organization
Management. 36(3). pp.345-384.
52. Wang, F.J., Chich-Jen, S. and Mei-
Ling, T., 2010. Effect of leadership style on
organizational performance as viewed from human
resource management strategy. African Journal of
Business Management. 4(18). p.3924.
53. Lo, M.C., Ramayah, T. and De Run,
E.C., 2010. Does transformational leadership style
foster commitment to change? The case of higher
education in Malaysia. Procedia-Social and
Behavioral Sciences. 2(2). pp.5384-5388.
54. Wang, F.J., Chich-Jen, S. and Mei-
Ling, T., 2010. Effect of leadership style on
organizational performance as viewed from human
resource management strategy. African Journal of
Business Management. 4(18). p.3924.
55. Müller, R. and Turner, R., 2010.
Leadership competency profiles of successful
project managers. International Journal of Project
Management. 28(5). pp.437-448.
56. Voon, M.L. and et.al., 2011. The
influence of leadership styles on employees’ job
satisfaction in public sector organizations in
Malaysia. International Journal of Business,
Management and Social Sciences. 2(1). pp.24-32.
Steijn, B., 2014. Does leadership style make a
difference? Linking HRM, job satisfaction, and
organizational performance. Review of Public
Personnel Administration. 34(2). pp.174-195.
83. Hui-Chin, C. and Tsui-Yang, K.,
2012. Exploring faculty psychological contract
through leadership style and institutional climate in a
higher education setting. International Journal of
Business and Social Science. 3(4).
84. Park, J.H., 2012. The effects of
principal’s leadership style on support for
innovation: evidence from Korean vocational high
school change. Asia Pacific Education Review.
13(1). pp.89-102.
85. Chen, C.C., 2013. How does
paternalistic style leadership relate to team
cohesiveness in soccer coaching?.Social Behavior
and Personality: an international journal. 41(1).
pp.83-94.
86. Herrmann, D. and Felfe, J., 2013.
Moderators of the relationship between leadership
style and employee creativity: The role of task
novelty and personal initiative. Creativity Research
Journal. 25(2). pp.172-181.
87. Kiyani, K. and et.al., 2013.
Emotional intelligence (EI) and employee outcomes:
The mediating effect of authentic leadership style.
Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research
in Business. 5(1). pp.394-405.
88. Ng'ethe, J.M., Namusonge, G.S. and
Iravo, M.A., 2012. Influence of leadership style on
academic staff retention in public universities in
Kenya. International journal of business and social
science. 3(21).
89. Lowe, M.E., 2011. Breaking the
stained glass ceiling: Women's collaborative
leadership style as a model for theological
education. Journal of Research on Christian
17

red colour writing notes are the feedback to make the amendments.
28. Hanafizadeh, P. and Ravasan, A.Z., 2011. A
McKinsey 7S model-based framework for ERP
readiness assessment. International Journal of
Enterprise Information Systems (IJEIS). 7(4). pp.23-
63.
29. Singh, A., 2013. A study of role of McKinsey's
7S framework in achieving organizational excellence.
Organization Development Journal. 31(3). p.39.
30. Alshaher, A.A.F., 2013. The mckinsey 7S model
framework for e-learning system readiness
assessment. International Journal of Advances in
Engineering & Technology. 6(5). p.1948.
31. Meertens, L.O. and et.al., 2012,
March. Mapping the business model canvas to
ArchiMate. In Proceedings of the 27th Annual ACM
Symposium on Applied Computing . ACM. pp. 1694-
1701.
32. Muhtaroglu, F., Demir, S., Obali, M.
and Girgin, C., 2013, October. Business model
canvas perspective on big data applications. In Big
Data, 2013 IEEE International Conference on
IEEE. pp. 32-37.
33. Hong, Y.C. and Fauvel, C., 2013.
Criticisms, variations and experiences with business
model canvas.
57. Castle, N.G. and Decker, F.H., 2011.
Top management leadership style and quality of
care in nursing homes. The Gerontologist. 51(5).
pp.630-642.
58. Bucic, T., Robinson, L. and
Ramburuth, P., 2010. Effects of leadership style on
team learning. Journal of Workplace learning.
22(4). pp.228-248.
59. Shin, J.H., Heath, R.L. and Lee, J.,
2011. A contingency explanation of public
relations practitioner leadership styles: Situation
and culture. Journal of Public Relations Research.
23(2). pp.167-190.
60. Hoozée, S. and Bruggeman, W.,
2010. Identifying operational improvements during
the design process of a time-driven ABC system:
The role of collective worker participation and
leadership style. Management Accounting
Research. 21(3). pp.185-198.
61. Vinkenburg, C.J. and et.al., 2011. An
exploration of stereotypical beliefs about
leadership styles: Is transformational leadership a
route to women's promotion?.The Leadership
Quarterly. 22(1). pp.10-21.
62. Zopiatis, A. and Constanti, P., 2010.
Leadership styles and burnout: is there an
association?.International Journal of
Contemporary Hospitality Management. 22(3).
pp.300-320.
63. Kythreotis, A., Pashiardis, P. and
Kyriakides, L., 2010. The influence of school
leadership styles and culture on students'
achievement in Cyprus primary schools. Journal of
Educational Administration. 48(2). pp.218-240.
64. Herrmann, D. and Felfe, J., 2014.
Effects of leadership style, creativity technique and
personal initiative on employee creativity. British
Journal of Management. 25(2). pp.209-227.
Education. 20(3). pp.309-329.
90. Rad, P., GolshiriEsfahani, Z. and
ZmaniMiandashti, N., 2010. Investigation of
Leadership Style Correlates Affecting Jihad-e-
Keshavarzi Staffs Job Satisfaction in Yazd. Journal
of Agricultural Science and Technology. 10. pp.421-
429.
91. Suharti, L. and Suliyanto, D., 2012.
The effects of organizational culture and leadership
style toward employee engagement and their
impacts toward employee loyalty. World Review of
Business Research, 2(5), pp.128-139.
92. Delmatoff, J., 2014. The most
effective leadership style for the new landscape of
healthcare. Journal of Healthcare Management.
59(4). p.245.
93. Zhu, W. and et.al., 2011. The effect
of leadership on follower moral identity: Does
transformational/transactional style make a
difference?.Journal of Leadership & Organizational
Studies. 18(2). pp.150-163.
94. Omar, W.W., 2013. Transformational
leadership style and job satisfaction relationship: a
study of structural equation modeling (SEM).
International journal of academic research in
business and social sciences, 3(2), p.346.
95. Milosevic, I.N., 2010. Practical
application of SWOT analysis in the management of
a construction project. Leadership and Management
in Engineering. 10(2). pp.78-86.
96. Skias, S., Pliakas, F. and Kallioras,
A., 2013. Application of SWOT analysis for the
management of transboundary River Evros
(Bulgaria, Greece, Turkey). International Journal of
Water. 7(1-2). pp.104-121.
97. Carroll, R., 2016. Identifying risks in
the realm of enterprise risk management. Journal of
Healthcare Risk Management. 35(3). pp.24-30.
18

red colour writing notes are the feedback to make the amendments.
65. Sauer, S.J., 2011. Taking the reins:
the effects of new leader status and leadership style
on team performance. Journal of Applied
Psychology. 96(3). p.574.
98. Odom, L., 2013, June. A swot
analysis of the potential impact of moocs. In world
conference on educational multimedia, hypermedia
and telecommunications. Vol. 1. pp. 611-621.
99. Ayub, A. and et.al., 2013. A
conceptual framework on evaluating SWOT analysis
as the mediator in strategic marketing planning
through marketing intelligence. European Journal of
Business and Social Sciences. 2(1). pp.91-98.
19

Part 2
1. Why KPI is important?
Operating in such a competitive market it is important for the senior authority of ARM Holdings plc to assess KPIs
to evaluate the overall performance of firm. The main purpose behind evaluating KPI is to identify those areas which required
improvement for future contingency. There are several KPIs used in the present report to assess the overall performance of
ARM Holding Plc. Every organisation operating in the market has its own corporate goals and objectives. Similarly, ARM
Holdings also defined certain target that management through vital efforts try to achieve those. In this regard, KPIs assist in
measuring whether company’s progress is in right direction to achieve the desired gaols and objectives. Further, KPI
considered as the backbone of business which is used by managers, leaders, executives to help them understand whether
activities are on right track or not. Herein, through the KPI analysis it has been identified that ARM plc is performing relatively
good in order to maintain its position within the market and attain long term sustainability. Key performance indicator is
important because it reflects the areas where firm perform better and domain where it give a worst performance. By
formulating strategies firm can convert its weakness in to strength.
Elaborate further.
2. What business model and what part of Eco system play along their business model?
Herein, directors of ARM Holdings plc has adopted business canvas model to assist the strategic management. The
main purpose of developing this model is that it assist the course of managers to showcase different essential elements of
business enterprise i.e. products, value proposition, infrastructure, customers and costs and revenue streams. On the basis of
this model one can easily assess outer structure of business and its procedures. Furthermore, this model assist in aligning the
functioning of ARM Holdings through highlighting potential trade-offs. Through the means of this model, management can
assess the key partners that business possess as well as the resources available so that allocation decisions can be made smartly
to generate effective results. This is the model which provide an information about the factors on which firm needs to pay due
attention. The factors of the canvas model are infrastructure, offering, customer, channels, customer relationship , finance and
revenue stream. By evaluating firm on these factors top managers can identify the direction in which they needs to work to
propel organisation towards growth path. Elaborate further.
3. Who are the key partners and what value they add?
There are mainly two partnership deed that ARM Holdings carried out in the year 2014-15 which indeed assisted the
course of enhancing different prospects of business enterprise. Following are the partners:
 Microsoft: In 2011, ARM Holding signed the partnership deal with Microsoft for providing architecture
platform to the Windows 8 operating system.
 University of Michigan: Is one of the major partner of ARM Holdings wherein, both the firms aim at
developing ultra-low energy and sustainable computing. However, the deal of research partnership was signed
at $5 million.
The main purpose of collaborating with these firms is to enhance the overall functioning of ARM Holdings as well as
assist in satisfying changing needs and wants of customers and clients.
4. What is ARM Holdings strategy to retain customers?
Operating in such a competitive market it is important for ARM Holding’s management to make sure that they
employ effective strategies and tactics to satisfy the needs and wants of customers. Herein, senior authority of ARM Holdings
mainly focuses on customer relationship strategies by offering wide range of superior quality of services as well as emphasis
on providing after sale services so that customers or clients can be retained for longer period of time. Further, ARM provide
20

value for money to its customers by delivering products and services on timely basis and as per the expectations.
5. Who are the customers?
There are two types of customer segment that, ARM Holdings possess and make valiant efforts to satisfy needs and
wants of each customer. Following are the types of customers segments that ARM deals with:
 B2C: ARM processors are used in all modern mobile phones, CPUs which are easily used by consumers around the
globe.
 B2B: ARM processors are used as the main CPU for smartphones which includes the manufactures like Apple, HTC,
Nokia, Sony Ericsson and Samsung.
On the basis of both these segments, ARM aims to generate revenue by selling different portfolios. Mainly the
microprocessors that are used in smartphones and are sold to large level companies. Herein, targeting two segments help the
course of company to satisfy its financial needs and commitments.
6. SIC Codes
In general, SIC codes can be defined as the Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) which is a system of classifying
industries on the basis of four digit code. The main purpose of using this code is that it helps distinguishing companies or
industries on the basis of areas.
7. Who are the buyers and where are they geographically located and how much they buy?
As studied above there are two major customer segment for ARM Holdings on the basis of which company fulfill its
financial expectations and commitments. However, company is renowned for supplying quality of semiconductor systems to
different companies that uses them in manufacturing their products or commodities. On the basis of geographical areas, there
are several clients of ARM Holdings that belongs to Asia Pacific, Europe and United States. In these continents, companies
like Apple Inc, Samsung, Nokia, HTC, Sony Ericsson etc. buy microprocessor of the ARM which are prominently used in
smartphones of all these companies.
8. ARMs Distribution Channels
Distribution channels of ARM Holdings consist of two modes i.e.
 Directly with the clients
 Through factories or licenses
On the basis of both these methods cited company aims at delivering its goods and commodities within the target
market and satisfy needs and wants of different customers. Along with this, distribution channel of ARM consist of design
centers, integrated systems of logistics, social networking, B2B selling etc.
9. Strategic Alliance:
In general, strategic alliance can be defined as the agreement between two or more parties that pursue a set of agreed
objectives while still remaining independent at the time of carrying out operations. In this mainly companies either merge or
acquire one another. On the basis of ARM Holdings, it possess strategic alliance with Samsung on the base of long term
licensing.
10. Collaborations
There are several collaborations that ARM Holdings made during the tenure of 2013-14 and 2014-15 which consist
of acquisition of Sansa security, Wicentric, Sunrise Micro device, Carbon design system, PolarSS1, Microsoft, License and
suppliers are some of the major one.
11. ARMs business model
Top level management of ARM Holdings has employed canvas model for outlining the overall functioning of
business. It clearly indicates the value proposition of the firm that its offers to its clients and shareholders. There are several
revenue streams for ARM which consist of royalties, factories, license etc. Firm is closely focusing on all these streams of
21

income and is earning huge profit in its business. It develop its business model in such a way that it can operate its concern in
systematic way. Elaborate further.
12. ARMs Holdings Position
ARM plc has position itself on the basis of its strengths and opportunities available to it. In this regard, main focus of
top level management is on Strong brand name which indeed assist in enhancing the ability of firm to charge high for its
products and services. In addition to it, uniqueness of products distinguish ARM from its competitors and allow company to
charge higher prices.
13. Key partners
To establish business in different target market, top level management of ARM has always focused on collaboration
or partnership in this following are some of the major partners of citied firm in the present era:
 Microsoft: In 2011, ARM Holding signed the partnership deal with Microsoft for providing architecture platform to
the Windows 8 operating system.
 University of Michigan: Is one of the major partner of ARM Holdings wherein, both the firms aim at developing
ultra-low energy and sustainable computing. However, the deal of research partnership was signed at $5 million.
14. ARMs Key Activities
Manufacturing, research and development and investment in start-ups are the key activities of ARM.
15. Resources:
Its resources comprises development tools like microprocessor, virtual prototype, simulation models. Moreover,
workers are engaging in completing their tasks regarding management, marketing, sales and other operations. Marketing
intelligence system looks at MKIS and ARMS roots in the market. Further, it includes intellectual property by acquiring patent
rights of MIPS technology.
16. Value preposition:
It derive value by investing in new technology, superior design and nurturing the ecosystem as well. All this make an
significant contribution to satisfy customer need with greatest technology which results in increase value.
17. Core competencies
Best quality products at affordable prices, large customer base, skilled and talented workforce, advanced
technological products with having great feature are the factors that helps ARM to compete effectively in the market.
18. Cost structure:
ARMS incurred manufacturing cost, research and development cost, distribution cost, marketing and advertisement cost.
Write in full detail
1; Leadership and its style:
Warren East who was the CEO of the firm left his post in 2013 after handling company for 12
years. At his place Simon Segar comes and he overtook his position. Any big change is not
observed after Segar took over leadership position and this was indicated by him in his press
conference. The big change that comes in organisation is that know firm is viewing Apple as its
major competitor then before. Sgear is following democratic leadership style and his ability to
22

forsee future is the major element of his leadership. After Segar took over his position firm
business strategy get changed and now it is focusing on developing new technology for preparing
high quality of processors. Hence, its KPI also get changed.
2; Mckinsey’s 7S
When news comes that Warren East is leaving his position there was fear among the shareholders
that something went wrong. However, in press conference Warren East state that this is just
shifting of leadership. Change of leadership bring change in business strategy it improve firm
KPI. Mckiney help a lot to the firm when it wants to bring any change in its business strategy
because its is tool which reflects the area in which firm can bring changes. Some of these areas
are structure, system, values, skills and styles etc. The main purpose behind bringing change in
business strategy was to improve competitiveness of the firm relative to Intel. Hard changes that
comes in an organisation was the resign of Warren East from his post. Resources that were used
in bringing change were top managers, research and development team and finance. These
changes were bring at fast pace. In order to bring changes meeting was carried out between
managers and research as well as development team. In this meeting discussion was carried out
about the direction in which in future research activities must be carried out. In second phase of
meeting different stages of project were determined and planning regarding same was prepared.
Moduleristion means bringing changes in complex systems. ARM is focusing on process
engineering and under this it is reviewing its manufacturing process. Unproductive steps are
removed from production stages to reduce complexity of operations.
-Scale: what resources were used in the change effort and what
amount of resources required in change? What was the involvement
of such resources?
23

-Scope: breadth of change – the range of change from isolated
diversion to entire organisation?
-Speed: pace at which change introduced, ability of company to
adapt the change and what was the substitutional condition of
company?
-sequence: what steps were taken in implementing the change?
-style: leadership approach used in order to implement the change?
Top down (management authority)?
Bottom up (participation of employee)?
-three generic strategies ; programmatic change , discontinuous
change, emergent change. Explain how arms used these generic
strategies in their company when there was a need of any change.
3; what is modularisation? What is modularisation of ARMS how it
works in the company?
4: the detail explanation of business model
5: what are the platform technologies?
6:write about modularisation and business model with covering
topic ecosystem and KPIS, what are their affect on them?\
Note: above questions written in red needs full detailed answers.
For your help two example- google pdf, Samsung- Microsoft word
example has been attached. I am also sending you notes on generic
strategies and modularisation and business model and also about
24

referencing. Take an extra care, because it my last change to pass
this exam now.
25