Alternative Analysis (Alternative Assessment) ✓ Solved

Alternative Analysis ( Alternative Assessment ) Alternative A Qualit

Hello there, this is a team work assignment that requires completing the Alternative Analysis topics. The focus is on two alternatives: Alternative A and Alternative B.

For Alternative A, a qualitative assessment must be conducted, including a detailed explanation of the pros and cons, as well as a quantitative assessment consisting of NPV (Net Present Value), EPS (Earnings Per Share), and ROE (Return on Equity).

For Alternative B, the qualitative analysis is noted to be well done, but it should also include the quantitative assessment with NPV, EPS, and ROE. Additionally, there needs to be a discussion on how each strategy will impact the company, linking to the company's strengths and weaknesses under the existing circumstances.

The analysis should also find connections between the organization's mission and values, situational analysis, and stakeholders.

Paper For Above Instructions

### Alternative Analysis of Business Strategies

The evaluation of business alternatives is crucial in strategic management and decision-making. In this paper, we will analyze two potential alternatives for a hypothetical company, evaluating their qualitative and quantitative aspects. The alternatives will be referred to as Alternative A and Alternative B. The goal is to provide a comprehensive overview of each option, including an assessment of how they align with the company's mission, strengths, and weaknesses, and how they impact stakeholders.

Alternative A: Qualitative and Quantitative Assessment

Qualitative Assessment:

Alternative A focuses on a market expansion strategy aimed at increasing the company's footprint in existing markets. The pros of this approach include the potential for increased revenue, enhanced brand recognition, and greater market share. However, the cons involve the risks of overextension of resources, potential brand dilution, and challenges in meeting new customer demands. These aspects must be weighed against the company’s core competencies and the competitive landscape in which it operates.

A critical linkage in this analysis is the company’s mission: to innovate and provide high-quality products to customers. This mission supports the qualitative assessment by emphasizing the need to maintain product quality as the business expands.

Quantitative Assessment:

To assess Alternative A's financial viability, we will compute the Net Present Value (NPV), Earnings Per Share (EPS), and Return on Equity (ROE). NPV will be calculated using expected cash flows from the market expansion, discounted at the company’s cost of capital. A positive NPV would indicate that the project is expected to generate value exceeding its cost.

EPS is another vital metric; an increase in sales from market expansion can lead to higher earnings, thus positively affecting EPS. Finally, ROE will measure the strategy’s effectiveness in generating profit from shareholders’ equity, allowing us to gauge the strategy’s financial performance.

Alternative B: Qualitative and Quantitative Assessment

Qualitative Assessment:

Alternative B focuses on product development, leveraging innovations to enhance the existing product line. The pros of this strategy include differentiation in the market and potential loyalty from customers seeking innovative solutions. However, risks include high development costs, market uncertainty, and the possibility that the product may not meet customer expectations.

This alternative aligns closely with the company’s mission to innovate and can significantly impact stakeholders, especially customers who seek high-quality solutions. A well-executed product development strategy can lead to enhanced customer satisfaction and increased market share.

Quantitative Assessment:

Similarly to Alternative A, we will perform financial assessments for Alternative B, calculating NPV, EPS, and ROE. The NPV will reflect the expected cash flows generated from new products, highlighting the feasibility of this alternative. A strong NPV would support the argument for proceeding with product development. EPS should also reflect an expected increase as new products generate additional revenue. Lastly, ROE will help assess the return on investment in product development.

Linking Alternatives to the Company’s Mission and Stakeholders

Understanding the company’s mission and values is essential in determining which alternative aligns best with the organizational strategy. Both alternatives must be assessed in light of the company’s strengths, such as technological capabilities, and weaknesses, like limited financial resources. The choice between market expansion and product development will hinge on these factors, alongside their potential impacts on stakeholders.

For instance, market expansion may require significant investment, which could strain financial resources, thereby affecting shareholders. Conversely, while product development could enhance customer satisfaction, it also entails risks associated with development times and market acceptance.

Impact on Company Performance

Each strategy fundamentally influences the company’s performance. A successful market expansion (Alternative A) could lead to an immediate boost in revenue, enhancing the company's market share but also posing risks associated with resource management. On the other hand, successful product development (Alternative B) aligns closely with innovation goals, potentially driving long-term growth and customer loyalty in a competitive landscape.

In summary, both alternatives offer unique advantages and challenges. The qualitative and quantitative assessments provide a framework for understanding their potential impacts on the company. Each alternative's alignment with the company's mission and values, as well as their implications for stakeholders, will ultimately guide the decision-making process.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the decision on which alternative to pursue should not only be based on immediate financial metrics but also on the long-term strategic fit with the company’s core mission and strengths. By thoroughly understanding each alternative and its implications, the company can make an informed decision that supports sustainable growth and stakeholder satisfaction.

References

• Grant, R. M. (2016). Contemporary Strategy Analysis. Wiley.
• Kotler, P., & Keller, K. L. (2016). Marketing Management. Pearson.
• Porter, M. E. (1996). What is Strategy? Harvard Business Review.
• Barney, J. B. (2011). Gaining and Sustaining Competitive Advantage. Pearson.
• Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (2001). The Strategy-Focused Organization. Harvard Business School Press.
• Damodaran, A. (2012). Investment Valuation: Tools and Techniques for Determining the Value of Any Asset. Wiley.
• McKinsey & Company. (2015). How to Design a Business Strategy. McKinsey Insights.
• Wagner, R. K. (2015). Building a Growth Strategy. Harvard Business Review.
• Thompson, A. A., Peteraf, M. A., Gamble, J. E., & Strickland, A. J. (2018). Crafting and Executing Strategy: The Quest for Competitive Advantage. McGraw-Hill Education.
• Ghemawat, P., & Nueno, J. L. (2006). Zara: Fast Fashion. Harvard Business School.