Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Group 5
Strategic Alliances & Joint Ventures
Sagar Gupta
Radhika Bhatter
Rakshit Sharma
Soumyajit Sengupta
Varun Gopal
Aneesha Chandra
Cristina Morini
12P041
12P096
12P160
12P171
12P174
12P186
Exchange
Agenda
Scheme of Presentation
Business Case
Partner
Selection
Negotiations
Alliance
Management
Alliance
Assessment
Business Case
Nestle (Switzerland)
Company Snapshot
Competitive Positioning
The company has transformed itself into a nutrition, health and wellness
company
Key brands include Maggi, KitKat, Milo, Nescafe, Purina, Herta, Dreyers
and Gerber
Geographic Breakdown
Financials
Water
8%
Confectionary
11%
Nutrition
11%
2011A
2012A
2013E
2014E
89,190
100,938
106,994
112,344
(4.9)%
13.2%
6.0%
5.0%
13,278
15,232
16,250
17,247
% Margin
14.9%
15.1%
15.2%
15.4%
Net Income
10,438
12,092
12,802
13,564
% Margin
11.7%
12.0%
12.0%
12.1%
Revenue
Beverages
22%
ROW
27%
Americas
45%
Milk Products
20%
Pet Care
12% Prepared
Dishes
16%
% Growth
Europe
28%
EBIT
Nestle
444 Roadmap
Mission Statement
Good Food, Good Life
To provide consumers with the best tasting, most nutritious choices in a wide range of food and beverage categories and
eating occasions from morning to night
Objective
To be the leader in Nutrition, Health and Wellness, trusted by all stakeholders
444 Roadmap
Builds strong alignment within the company of what they want to achieve, strategically and financially, and how to go
about it
Competitive Advantages
Growth Drivers
Operational Pillars
Operational efficiency
Premiumization strategy
Out-of-home consumption
Consumer engagement
Source:
Company
website,
filings
People,
culture,
valuesCompany
and attitude
Nestle
SWOT Analysis
Strengths
Weaknesses
Opportunities
Threats
Yoghurt Industry
Key Trends
CHF 61.9
Yoghurt
In
USA
Package Facts estimated the U.S. market for yogurt sold at retail to be
for a more than 80% share of volume consumption, dominate the global
yogurt market
$7.3 billion in 2012, up 6.6% from 2011. They also estimated that by 2017,
sales will hit almost $9.3 billion. This growth is attributed to one sub
category: Greek yogurt whose sales increased more than 50% in the last
year in food, drug and mass channels
Partner Selection
Partner Selection
Selection criteria
Complementary Capabilities
Financially Stable
Strategic Complementarity
Compatible Management
Partners should look at all business issues with the same and
highest levels of integrity and honesty
Company Sales
Complementary
Capabilities
Bakeries and
Foodservice
12%
Main product categories in the US Retail markets are ready-toeat products, frozen products, mixes, grain, cereals, snacks and
organic products
International
25%
Mutual Dependency
Non-US
25%
US Retail
63%
US
75%
Financially Stable
Financial
Snapshot
USD
2011A
2012A
2013E
2014E
Revenue
14,880
16,658
17,774
18,218
EBIT
2,774
2,562
2,852
3,040
Net
Income
1,804
1,589
1,892
1,938
Market Capitalization
USD
32,282
54
Enterprise Value
USD
39,966
50
Share Price
USD
48.53
EV/Revenue 2013E
2.2x
EV/EBITDA 2013E
11.2x
P/E 2013E
17.3x
Strategic Complementarity
46
42
Compatible Operating
Philosophy
38
34
Jun/2011
Oct/2011
Key Brands
Feb/2012
Jun/2012
Oct/2012
Feb/2013
Jun/2013
Company Overview
Compatible Management
The key growth drivers for the company are innovation, brand-building,
leading customer growth, margin and international expansion
General Mills has the yogurt production capabilities while Nestle has the global marketing & distribution capabilities.
Complementary
Capabilities
Both General Mills and Nestle are big market players and will be dependent on each other for Yoplaits international expansion
Mutual Dependency
Both General Mills and Nestle are market leaders in their fields of business, one nationally and the other, globally
General Mills and Nestle have been at the forefront of announcing high profits over the years and have given increasing dividends every year
Financially Stable
General Mills hopes to increase revenues to touch the $20 billion mark while Nestle wants to increase its product portfolio in emerging nations
Strategic Complementarity
Compatible Operating
Philosophy
Having previously collaborated in a continuing JV globally, GM and Nestle should have lower cultural barriers than most America-European JV partners
CPW has allowed both the managements to get in touch with the different styles of management of the partner and this will help in increasing the success
potential of this new JV due to the personal rapport that the top management of GM and Nestle share between themselves
Compatible Management
Nestle and General Mills have been highly vocal in their use of organic food and have been donating generously to fund product innovations. Both the firms
maintain the highest forms of honesty and integrity in their operations, exhibited by the low number of product recalls or controversies.
Company Sales
2012A
2013E
2014E
Revenue
19,310
20,870
21,590
22,570
EBIT
2,843
2,958
2,730
3,044
Net
Income
1,671
1,672
1,505
1,795
60%
56%
20%
8%
Baby Nutrition
Water
Medical Nutrition
France
BRIC
USA
Others
Financially Stable
Market Capitalization
Euro
34,618
Enterprise Value
Euro
41,048
Share Price
Euro
54.86
EV/Revenue 2013E
Mutual Dependency
22%
Financial
Snapshot
2011A
10%
6%
Euros
Complementary
Capabilities
Strategic Complementarity
Compatible Operating
Philosophy
1.9x
EV/EBITDA 2013E
12.2x
P/E 2013E
21.6x
20/11/08
Key Brands
20/12/08
20/01/09
20/02/09
20/03/09
20/04/09
20/05/09
20/06/09
20/07/09
20/08/09
20/09/09
20/10/09
20/11/09
Company Overview
Compatible Management
Danone has the yogurt production capabilities while Nestle has the global marketing & distribution capabilities.
Complementary
Capabilities
Mutual Dependency
Both Danone and Nestle are market leaders in their fields of business, one in the dairy business globally , the other in the F&B industry globally
Danone and Nestle have been announcing high profits every year with Nestle sales around $90b and Danone at $20b
Financially Stable
Strategic Complementarity
Compatible Operating
Philosophy
Both the companies are headquartered in Europe leading to the possibility of low cultural barriers
Compatible Management
Danone and Nestle both are highly regarded for their ethical standards of operations and have been voted as two of the most trusted companies globally
Recent Events
above 2000 with the 1st Chobani yogurt hit store shelves in 2007
Recent Controversies
Complementary
Capabilities
Mutual Dependency
Financially Stable
Key
Executives
Name
Hamdi Ulukaya
David Denholm
Andreas Sokollek
Peter McGuiness
James McConeghy
Chobani had to recall its Greek yogurt product line from all
across the USA due to product concerns after numerous
customers were taken ill, post consumption
Purists have slammed Chobani for using technology to bypass
the authenticity of milk required to produce Greek yogurt
Key Products
Designation
Founder & CEO
President & COO
Senior VP, Supply Chain & Distribution
CMO & Chief Branding Officer
CFO
Company Overview
Strategic Complementarity
Compatible Operating
Philosophy
Compatible Management
Chobani has the yogurt production capabilities in Greek yogurt while Nestle has the global marketing & distribution capabilities.
Complementary
Capabilities
Mutual Dependency
Choabani is a small player in the overall sector, but one of the biggest yogurt producers in the world while Nestle is the global FMCG powerhouse
Chobani is on track to becoming a $1b company by 2015 while Nestles profits have ranged around $13b in recent year
Financially Stable
Strategic Complementarity
Chobani employees get benefits that have been modelled on Nestles employee benefits program leading to greater coherence among their employee
efforts and morale
Compatible Operating
Philosophy
Compatible Management
Chobani has been involved in a number of controversies, most recent being the one in which 89 people were taken ill after consuming Chobani yogurt while
Nestle is one of the most respected and relatively blemish-free track record in regards to ethical operations
Recent Events
Key Products
Financially Stable
Strategic Complementarity
Compatible Operating
Philosophy
Mutual Dependency
Complementary
Capabilities
Compatible Management
FAGE has the yogurt production capabilities in Greek and other low-fat yogurt while Nestle has the global marketing & distribution capabilities.
Complementary
Capabilities
Mutual Dependency
FAGE is a small player in the overall sector, but one of the few European companies with a pan-USA presence and in 35 other countries
FAGE is is looking at $3b revenues company by 2015 with international expansion being done through internal accruals creating high unutilized debt
capacity for the company
Financially Stable
FAGE has been trying to enter the emerging markets to drive its revenues but has almost no distribution set up in the high growth regions with most of its
revenues coming from developed markets while Nestle wants product access to yogurt
Strategic Complementarity
Compatible Operating
Philosophy
Compatible Management
FAGE has not been involved in any major controversy related to its production or operations giving it an image of a well run and honest company, which fits
Nestles own story of integrity and success
Mars,
Incorporated
Starbucks
General Mills
PepsiCo
Heinz
Current
Competitors
Group
Danone
Kraft
Foods
Near-Term
Competitors
Nestle
Unilever
Conagra
Kellogg's
Mondelez
International
Coca Cola
Associated
British Foods
Hershey
Distant
Competitors
Company
General Mills
Dannone
Chobani
Fage
N/A
N/A
N/A
Origin Country
Primary Sales Regions
Complementary Capabilities
Optimal Mutual
Dependency
Similar Company Size
N/A
Financial Stability
Strategic Complementarity
Compatible Operating
Policy
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Yoplait Yogurt
General Mills
Nestle wanted to
acquire Yoplait too
due to the market
leading brand it had
and to augment its
product portfolio
General Mills
0.9
1.3
1.4
1.55
1.65
Nestle
0.6
1.1
1.35
1.5
1.6
Bright Foods
0.7
1.2
Lactalis
0.6
However, after acquisition, the market share of Yoplait has decreased in the Americas from 32% to 26% and is currently no.2 in the yogurt space after Danone and
No.3 in the Greek Yogurt space after Chobani and Danone. The expansion of Yoplait in the emerging markets has also taken a hit due to decreasing sales figures in
the US market. Thus, expansion has taken a backseat and consolidation of the US market is more important to General Mills as of now. Hence, Nestle with its global
distribution network seems like the best candidate to help GM in expanding the brand in emerging markets without much recourse on its finances and resources.
Internal Benefits
Strategic Benefits
Competitive Benefits
Internal Benefits
Strategic Benefits
Competitive Benefits
General Mills derives 75% of its revenue from USA. Given the
mature market in USA, General Mills and its competitors have
been trying to increase their presence in emerging economies
Theory
General Mills
It has a strong history of innovation
It has got strong yoghurt brand (Yoplait was named as the Yoghurt Brand
of the Year 2013 in USA)
It wants to increase its presence outside USA
The companies have complementary resources and capabilities and both
can gain by co-operating
Theory
Theory
Organization Knowledge
and Learning Theory
Synergies
Modular
Sequential
Reciprocal
Assets
Hard
Soft
Degree of
Uncertainty
Low
Medium
High
Forces of
Competition
Low
Medium
High
Criteria
Type
Synergies
Sequential (initially)and
Reciprocal (over time)
Assets
Equity Alliance/Acquisition
Degree of Uncertainty
Medium
Equity Alliance
Forces of Competition
High
Acquisition
Resource Requirement
Low
High
Political Factors
Low
High
Given low political
factors and high
resource requirement, a
Strategic Alliance/Joint
Venture makes sense
this case
Primary Risk
Property
Knowledge
Primary Resource
Relational Risk
Performance Risk
Control
Security
Flexibility
Productivity
Criteria
Business
Future
Proactive Alliance
Defensive Alliance
Reason
Expand Business
Survival in Existing
Business
Competition
Competitive
Advantage
Competitive
Pressures
Market
Phase
Growing Market
Declining Market
Other Firms
Resources
Strategic
Option
Leverage
Create Options
Critical
Dependency
No Option
Proactive Alliance
Nestle
+
General Mills
Defensive Alliance
Key Drivers
From The Perspective of Co-opetition
Setting Standards
The yoghurt market is highly fragmented. The coming together of two giants like Nestle and General Mills will set clear standards for the
industry
Sharing Risks
With any new product, there is a performance risk attached
At the same time, it also involves costs like setting up production facilities and distribution systems, marketing and advertisement
expenditure. This alliance will allow the two companies to share these risks and costs
Entering Emerging Markets
Both companies would be able to increase their presence in the emerging economies
Expanding Product Lines
Nestle will be able to enter into the Greek yoghurt market and hence add to its nutrition portfolio
Reducing Costs
By setting up combined production facilities, both the companies would be able to achieve economies of scale
Gaining Market Share
With the help of General Mills product line and Nestles strong distribution system, the companies will be able to increase their
market share across geographies
Creating New Businesses
Key Risks
From The Perspective of Co-opetition
Technology Leakage
General Mills and Nestle had a face-off in the acquisition of Yoplait in which General Mills emerged victorious
However, General Mills has till now been unable to effectively market and distribute its yoghurts products
While this alliance will allow it to leverage the marketing expertise of Nestle, but at the same time there is a risk that Nestle
might be able to glean into the technology/processes involved in the production of yoghurt
Telegraphing Strategic Intention
The two companies may come to know which geographies and products the other company is planning to target based on
the nuances of management decisions
Customer Defection
Based on how the products of the joint venture are promoted and marketed (use of brand names/company names),
customers of one company may come in contact with the other company, hence increasing the risk of defection
Slow Decision Making
This is a major drawback of strategic alliances and joint ventures. As the alliances/ joint ventures decision affects both the
companies, and as the companies may have differing goals and objectives, there is slow decision making so as to satisfy
both the parties
Extent of Organizational
Interaction
Low
Strategic Objective
Alliance Type
High
Flexibility
Core
Protection
Learning
Value
Adding
Low
Procompetitive
Alliance
Noncompetitive
Alliance
Competitive
Non-Competitive
Pro-Competitive
High
Conflict Potential
Pre-Competitive
PreCompetitive
Alliance
Competitive
Alliance
In this alliance, given the lower extent of geographic and product overlap, the
conflict potential is low-medium. Further, the success of their earlier joint venture
also points towards a low conflict potential
The extent of organizational interaction will be high as of shared control on most
decisions
Thus in this alliance, the key strategic objective would be learning followed by value
adding, flexibility and core protection
Structure
Joint Venture
Financial Control
50:50
The parties are equally strong and have a history of a successful 50:50 IJV called CPW
Management Control
Nestles Perspective and General
Mills Perspective
Our Recommendation
CEO should be externally appointed so that the JVs objectives are not subordinated to
Split Control: Nestle responsible for marketing communication, distribution, operation and
Nestles Perspective
Our Recommendation
USA should not be a part of the joint
venture because that would encourage
direct competition between General
Our Recommendation
Our Recommendation
Initial lock-in period of 5 years with no change in equity structure
If the firm suffers increasing net losses for three consecutive years, the JV should be re-evaluated
If there is change in ownership in any of the partner firms, the JV will be dissolved with first right of refusal to the other partner
If one partner is looking to sell, the other partner has first right of refusal
In case of any breach of covenants of the JV by any partner, the aggrieved party can buy out the stake of this partner in the JV or
liquidate the JV
Autonomy Granted
to IJV
Management
Corporate Cultural
Differences
Key
Determinants
Corporate and National Differences exist,
but as the company has been able to work
successfully in the past, future co-operation
is expected to be fruitful
National Cultural
Differences
InterOrganizational
Trust
Focus on
Internal
Harmony
Contribution
Monitoring
Joint Venture
Management
Periodic
Strategic
Assessment
Efficient
Information
Flow
Alliance Management
Inter-organizational trust
InterOrganizational
Trust
Joint Venture
Management
Alliance Management
Partner Contribution Monitoring
Contribution
Monitoring
Joint Venture
Management
Alliance Management
Efficient Information Flow Management
Joint Venture
Management
Efficient
Information
Flow
Alliance Management
Periodic Strategic Assessment
Joint Venture
Management
Periodic
Strategic
Assessment
Alliance Management
Focus on Internal Harmony
Focus on
Internal
Harmony
Joint Venture
Management
Assessment of Alliance
Key Factors
Shared Risk
Both partners share common value
systems and complement each
others corporate culture. Such
shared value systems is the
foundation of this relationship
providing the means, motivation
and commitment to resolve
partnership related problems and
mutually grow the relationship
Shared Values
Shared Vision
Shared
Resources
Shared Rewards
Performance Metrics
Assessment of the Key Factors
A precise set of meaningful parameters is the best way to drive performance and produce desired benefits from the partnership. These metrics
should include shared measurements that are similar to both partners.
Metrics
Operational
Timeliness
Productivity
Innovation
Quality
Measurements
Process
improvement
Partnership
Technology
Integration
New business
gained
Profitability
gained across
portfolio
Thank You