MBA501: Stakeholder Strategy and Portfolio Analysis for Facebook & D&H

This presentation, prepared for an MBA501 course on Dynamic Strategy and Disruptive Innovation, analyzes Facebook's stakeholder strategy and conducts a portfolio analysis of D&H Foods. The first part focuses on Facebook, identifying key stakeholders such as users, employees, advertisers, and the government, and then recommends suitable generic strategies (Swing, Defensive, Offensive, and Hold) for each stakeholder group. The second part analyzes D&H Foods' business units (Biscuits, Meal Kit, Chocolates, and Fruit Juice) using BCG, GE-McKinsey, and Synergy matrices to evaluate their market positions and competitive strengths. Based on these analyses, the presentation offers strategic recommendations for each business unit, including suggestions for increasing market share, investment, and potential divestment to optimize D&H's overall portfolio performance. The presentation emphasizes the importance of stakeholder engagement and strategic alignment for business success, drawing on academic references to support its findings.

Dynamic Strategy and
Disruptive Innovation
Name of the Student:
Name of the University:

Assignment Part 1
Stakeholder Strategy
Development for Facebook

Introduction
 In order to enhance the work environment and to
gather sustainability and profitability for the
business, stakeholders are essential. They are the
individuals or group of people who affect or
affected by the organizational activity.
 The emerging popularity of Facebook has made
itself a vital part of social life of every individual
in current age.
 This report will focus on the identification and
analysis of associated stakeholders of the
Facebook.

Organizational Overview
 The founder of Facebook, Mark Zuckerberg, invented the particular
social media networking site in the year 2004 and launched it on 4th
February 2004.
 Menlo Park of California has chosen to be the right place to establish it’s
headquarter (Facebook.com 2019).
Mission:
 The organization has its mission of provide a user-friendly, closure
communication network to its users
Vision:
 its vision statement emphasize on supporting as well as enhancing its
network for connecting the people around the globe by developing
products and solving problems in empowering community and harmony

Overview (Contd.)
 The major potential challenges that the Facebook is
currently dealing with the safety priority, legal
regulations, privacy of users and advertisement.
 This platform has topped the priority list of the
retailers and marketers for promoting their products
and gaining competitive advantages (Facebook.com
2019).

Facebook stakeholders
The following can be identified as the vital stakeholders of Facebook
(Jiang et al. 2014);
 Users
 Employees
 Advertisers
 Government

Stakeholder generic strategies
As stakeholders have a vital role in developing the company’s
reputation and profitability, hence It is important for every
organization to analyse and identify appropriate stakeholders
(Manetti and Bellucci 2016). The following are the important
generic strategies for identifying the stakeholders.
 Swing
 Defensive
 Offensive
 Hold

Swing strategy
 This strategy focuses on the mixed
blessing stakeholders.
 The organization undertake several
decisions such as influencing or changing
the rules governing stakeholder
interaction, transaction process and
decision forum (Wu 2013).
 These Mixed Blessing stakeholders are
suitable for the organizations like
Facebook.

Defensive strategy
 This strategy mainly focus on the non-supportive group of
stakeholders (Mampaey and Huisman 2016).
 Effective implementation of this strategy will provide
strong and long term market dominance.
 These strategies mainly indicate holding the strategies
that organization have and utilizing the competitive
advantage to stay ahead of the competition (Tassabehji
and Isherwood 2014).

Offensive strategy
 Stakeholders having cooperative potential along with minimal
threatening potential are categorized as Offensive.
 The organization applies the offensive strategies for improving own
competitive position in the market (Andriof and Waddock 2017).
 Same as the defensive strategies, the offensive strategies also adopts
many forms to encounter the competition

Hold strategy
 These strategies are helpful for the marginal
group of stakeholders.
 Hold strategies involves maintaining position or
programs, it involves monitoring this group of
stakeholder for changes in their position.
 However, this particular strategy is comparatively
less effective than the other three strategies
(Rothaermel 2013).

Stakeholder Map
 The stakeholders mapping for the Facebook can be explained as
follows (Bonsón and Ratkai 2013);

Recommendations
The following strategies can be adopted by the
managers of Facebook for enhancing their stakeholder
management strategies.
 Identification of appropriate stakeholder
 Making sure that all the stakeholders have
acknowledgement about the ongoing project
(Eskerod and Jepsen 2016).
 Keeping clear vision of the project
 Engaging the stakeholders throughout the project
activity

Conclusion
 Therefore, from the above, it can be analysed that, Facebook,
now a days have become the vital platform for a wide range
of people to maintain their social life.
 It is important to identify appropriate stakeholder for the
organization as they affect the functionality of the
organization.
 The above assignment has disused the different type of
stakeholders and generic strategies for stakeholders.
 The report also upholds some recommendation to enhance
the stakeholder analysis and management process. The
stakeholder analysis conducted reflects prospective aspects in
future.

Assessment 2: Portfolio
Analysis on
Delicious and Healthy
Foods (D&H)

Business Portfolio Analysis

Business Findings
The business findings for the Delicious and health Foods (D&H) are
elaborated in the below section:

Market Findings
The business findings for the Delicious and health Foods
(D&H) are elaborated in the below section:

BCG MATRIX
Biscuits Meal Kit
Chocolates Fruit Juice
Biscuits Meal Kit
Chocolates Fruit Juice

GE McKinsey matrix
GE McKinsey matrix for the D&H is elaborated here:
Growth
Meal Kit Growth Selective
Fruit Juice
Growth Harvest
Selective
Fast Food
Medium
Selective Harvest
Low
Harvest
Chocolate
Medium
Low
High
High
Competitive strength of business unit
I n d u s t r y A t t r a c t i v e n e s s
Growth
Meal Kit Growth Selective
Fruit Juice
Growth Harvest
Selective
Fast Food
Medium
Selective Harvest
Low
Harvest
Chocolate
Medium
Low
High
High
Competitive strength of business unit
I n d u s t r y A t t r a c t i v e n e s s

Synergy matrix
Synergy matrix for D&H is elaborated below section

Business Portfolio Recommendations

Pure juice
Analysis
 As per the case scenario, pure juice has a market share of only 3.9%
which I comparatively less. However, according to the current
market analysis, the growth rate of the juice industry is higher.
 The industry attractiveness and competitive straight of the pure juice
medium here, in addition the incoming and outgoing benefits
associated to it also low.
Recommendation
 Increasing the juice quantity can drag more customer attention and
higher market share, which in turn will gather profit for the
organization (Rudnicki and Vagner 2014).

Munchy Biscuits
Analysis
 Munchy biscuits has a market share of 52% but lower growth rate.
However, it turns out to be the cash cow for D&H.
 This industry also face higher competitive force in the market. In addition,
the medium industry attractiveness makes it a growth oriented business.
Recommendations
 Being t the strongest portfolio of D&H, it gathers higher amount of profit
for the organization. However, hiking the ,market share will result in
gathering more profit and revenue for the organization (Oh, Han and Yang
2014).

Home Fresh
Analysis
Having higher industry attractiveness and competitive
strength, makes home fresh a growth oriented business.
The market share of home fresh has registered as 52%.
As the meal kit industry has higher grow facilitates the
growth of this business.
Recommendations
As it gathers higher profit, D&H need to invest more on
it. Despite of stakeholders’ demand for removing it, the
organization should not discard this business (J. Burns
2014).

Burgers R US
Analysis
 According to the case study, it has higher incoming and low outgoing
benefits along with moderate competitive strength and industry
attractiveness. In addition, having a less market share of only 5% makes the
growth of Burger R US debatable.
Recommendation
Fast food industries in current days, have higher growth rate; therefore,
focusing more on this section by increasing the market share will collect more
profit for D&H (Oh, Han and Yang 2014). In addition, expanding the sell
towards both conventional and healthy burgers can also become beneficial.

Funville
Analysis
 Unlike the others, Funville has a very less market share of only 3%. As
the growth rate of the chocolate industry is comparatively low;
therefore the growth rate of Funville is also less.
 It has higher incoming but low outgoing benefits with comparatively
lesser competitive strength.
Recommendation
 As this business is not efficient enough in gathering more profit for
D&H, the organization should exist from this business and sell it and
focus more on the profit gathering businesses (Rudnicki and Vagner
2014).

References
 Andriof, J. and Waddock, S., 2017. Unfolding stakeholder engagement. In Unfolding stakeholder thinking (pp. 19-42). Routledge.
 Bonsón, E. and Ratkai, M., 2013. A set of metrics to assess stakeholder engagement and social legitimacy on a corporate Facebook page. Online Information
Review, 37(5), pp.787-803.
 Bonsón, E., Royo, S. and Ratkai, M., 2015. Citizens' engagement on local governments' Facebook sites. An empirical analysis: The impact of different media and
content types in Western Europe. Government Information Quarterly, 32(1), pp.52-62.
 Eskerod, P. and Jepsen, A.L., 2016. Project stakeholder management. Routledge.
 Facebook.com (2019). Facebook. Facebook.com. Available at: https://www.facebook.com/pg/facebook/about/?ref=page_internal [Accessed 6 Aug. 2019].
 Jiang, S., Chen, H., Nunamaker, J.F. and Zimbra, D., 2014. Analyzing firm-specific social media and market: A stakeholder-based event analysis
framework. Decision Support Systems, 67, pp.30-39.
 Johnson-Cramer, M.E., Berman, S.L. and Post, J.E., 2017. Re-examining the concept of ‘stakeholder management’. In Unfolding Stakeholder Thinking 2 (pp. 145-
161). Routledge.
 Keap.com (2019). Facebook marketing trends for 2019 | Keap. Keap.com. Available at: https://keap.com/business-success-blog/marketing/social-media/facebook-
trends [Accessed 6 Aug. 2019].
 Mampaey, J. and Huisman, J., 2016. Defensive stakeholder management in European universities: an institutional logics perspective. Studies in Higher Education,
41(12), pp.2218-2231.
 Manetti, G. and Bellucci, M., 2016. The use of social media for engaging stakeholders in sustainability reporting. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability
Journal, 29(6), pp.985-1011.
 Ranängen, H., 2015. Stakeholder management in reality: moving from conceptual frameworks to operational strategies and interactions. Sustainable Production and
Consumption, 3, pp.21-33.
 Rothaermel, F.T., 2013. Strategic management: concepts. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Irwin.
 Tassabehji, R. and Isherwood, A., 2014. Management use of strategic tools for innovating during turbulent times. Strategic Change, 23(1‐2), pp.63-80.
 Wu, M., 2013. Towards a stakeholder perspective on competitive advantage. International Journal of Business and Management, 8(4), p.20.

References
⁎ Loyarte, E., Posada, J., Gaines, S., Rajasekharan, S., Olaizola, I.G., Otaegui, O., Linaza, M.T., Oyarzun, D., del
Pozo, A., Marcos, G. and Florez, J., 2015. Technology roadmapping (TRM) and strategic alignment for an
applied research centre: a case study with methodological contributions. R&D Management, 45(5), pp.474-486.
⁎ Madsen, D.O., 2017. Not dead yet: the rise, fall and persistence of the BCG Matrix. Problems and Perspectives in
Management, 15(1), pp.19-34.
⁎ Shen, L., Zhou, J., Skitmore, M. and Xia, B., 2015. Application of a hybrid Entropy–McKinsey Matrix method in
evaluating sustainable urbanization: A China case study. Cities, 42, pp.186-194.
⁎ J. Burns, D., 2014. Succeeding at new businesses: a matrix to measure flexibility. Journal of Business
Strategy, 35(5), pp.23-30.
⁎ Rudnicki, W. and Vagner, I., 2014. Methods of strategic analysis and proposal method of measuring productivity
of a company. Zeszyty Naukowe Małopolskiej Wyższej Szkoły Ekonomicznej w Tarnowie, (2 (25)), pp.175-184.
⁎ Casault, S., Groen, A.J. and Linton, J.D., 2013. Selection of a portfolio of R&D projects. Handbook on the theory
and practice of program evaluation, pp.89-111.
⁎ Oh, J., Han, J. and Yang, J., 2014. A fuzzy-based decision-making method for evaluating product discontinuity at
the product transition point. Computers in Industry, 65(4), pp.746-760.