Assignment Cover Sheet

Submitted by:

Assignment Title: Functional Analysis of Panther Ltd.

Module Title & Code: IB9FB0 – Business In Practice

Word Count: 3888/4000

Number of Pages: 25 "I declare that I have read the guidance on plagiarism/cheating provided in the Handbook, understand the University regulations and am aware of the potential consequences of committing plagiarism/cheating. This work is entirely my own in accordance with the University's Regulation 11 and the WBS guidelines on plagiarism and collusion. All external references and sources are clearly acknowledged and identified within the contents. No substantial part(s) of the work submitted here has also been submitted by me in other assessments for accredited courses of study, and I acknowledge that if this has been done it may result in me being reported for self-plagiarism and an appropriate reduction in marks may be made when marking this piece of work. I understand that should this piece of work raise concerns requiring investigation in relation to the points above, it is possible that other work I have submitted for assessment will be checked, even if the marking process has been completed. I am aware that the University expects all proofreaders to comply with its policy in this area and I confirm that if I have used a proofreader, the proofreader was made aware of and has compiled with University’s proofreading policy. If this is a revision of a piece of previously submitted work, my Programme Team and tutor are aware of this.”

2

Table of Contents

1. Introduction 4

1.1. STRATEGY 5 1.1.1. STRATEGY CANVAS 5

2. Innovation 6

2.1. INNOVATION DRIVERS AND PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS 7 2.1.1. INNOVATION FOCUS FRAMEWORK 7 2.1.2. SUSTAINABILITY OUTLOOK 8 2.2. INTERDEPENDENCIES 9 2.2.1. CHRONOLOGICAL LAUNCH AND FEATURES OF ELECTRIC CARS IN THE FLEET 9 2.2.2. MARKETING & INNOVATION 9 2.2.3. OPERATIONS AND INNOVATION 9

3. Operations 10

3.1. OPERATION DRIVERS AND PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS 10 3.1.1. 4V MODEL 10 3.1.2. PRODUCTION CAPACITY 11 3.1.3. CAPACITY UTILIZATION 12 3.2. INTERDEPENDENCIES 12 3.2.1. MICRO EXPANSIONS 12 3.2.2. FUNCTIONAL TRANSFORMATION 13 3.2.3. OPERATIONS AND MARKETING 14

4. Marketing 15

4.1. OPERATION DRIVERS AND PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS 15 4.1.1. PREFERENCE MAPPING 15 4.1.2. FEATURES 16 4.1. INTERDEPENDENCIES 17 4.1.1. PRODUCT LIFE CYCLE 17 4.1.2. SEGMENTATION 18 Appendix 19-22 References 23-25

3

List of Figures

Serial Number

Topic Page Number

1. Excerpt from Strategic Blueprint (Risi, 2020) 4

2. Innovation Focus Framework (Montoya, 2020) 7

3.

Composite 4V model with an inclination metric 11

4. 4P Analysis for Panther Ltd. 15

List of Graphs

Serial Number

Topic Page Number

1. Panther Strategy Canvas (Kim and Mauborgne, 2005) 4

2. CO2 Emissions in g/miles for Panther Ltd (2019-2025) 8

3.

Capacity utilization of the factory 12

4. Key Expenses and Income (Q12-Q28) 13

5. Change in overall car prices 14

6. Panther Features Mix 16

7. Cumulative Marketing Spend/Sales (2019-2025) 17

List of Table

Serial Number

Topic Page Number

1. Features in Electric Cars Launched 9

4

1. Introduction

The current paper attempts to critically analyze the performance of an automobile

manufacturer, Panther Ltd. and understand the rationale behind key decisions that shaped

the company over the past 7 years. The paper blends in several academic concepts, internal

director meeting notes, data points from the Industry Masters (2020) portal, references from

both academic writings and real-world case scenarios for an in-depth breakdown of the firm

and its choices. The paper has also given recommendations and possibilities that the firm

holds in the coming years.

Panther Ltd. is a high performing business with revenues upwards of $7.5 Billion and the

highest market share in the automobile industries of America, Europe and Asia, predominantly

China, with these countries accounting for over 90% of all global electric vehicle (further, EV)

sales (IEA, 2020). The company currently runs 12 production lines divided equally between

the 3 factories across the geographies and produces all types of vehicles with a strong focus

on research and development and customer value for money.

The growth and limited shortcomings of Panther can be accredited to Innovation,

Operations and Marketing. These functions have been crucial in setting the overall tone of

business, day-to-day running and charting out the path for future. A strong combination and

impending trade-offs created room for clear analysis and underlying dependencies between

these functions. I worked as the Innovations Director of the firm, with an overarching focus on

strategic considerations of the company. This study is an impartial view of the firm’s

performance and my understanding of the inter-functional decisions.

The paper begins with the overlying strategy that is employed at the firm and is relevant

for a corporate and competitive level knowledge of the firm. This strategy is further used in the

functional analysis that is divided into 3 parts, with the first subpart analysing the functional

drivers and the second subpart correlating interdependencies with other functions. This is

followed by a conclusion that uses these drivers and interdependencies to create a coherent

business model used by the company and offering valuable suggestions for a future uptick.

5

1.1. Strategy

Figure 1: Excerpt from Strategic Blueprint (Risi, 2020)

1.1.1. Strategy Canvas

The company and its directors formulated a plan to create a different market based on re-

inventing consumer needs and demands. Kim and Mauborgne (2005) in their paper: “Blue

Ocean Strategy: Theory to Practice”, state that customers scarcely know what they genuinely

want, the idea is that they want ‘more’ of what is already offered at the right prices. The shift

in consumer preferences can be linked in any industry towards radical over incremental

changes, hence the product strategy focused on creating a new market of vehicles that

exceeded all industrial boundaries. This strategy forms the ethos of the company and is further

explained through the graph below.

• Objective

Create a technology driven electric mobility brand that offers value for money and maximizes efficiency, hence, maximising shareholder value.

• Scope

The company aims to be available across various segments, offering a range of, e-mobility equipped innovative mid-range vehiles across America, Asia and Europe while carefully increasing capacity.

• Advantage

Panther Ltd. is creating a new market for consumers with a propensity to experience cutting edge electric technology while offering vehicles significantly ahead of it's time.

Overall Strategy

6

Graph 1: Panther Strategy Canvas (Kim and Mauborgne, 2005)

The graph has been meticulously created based on competitor information and internal

company documents (Industry Masters, 2020). The blue line significantly outperforms the

metrics of its competitors as the Value Added by Panther has been considerably higher than

its competitors and has disrupted the global market (Appendix). The vehicles have been

equipped with the most advanced technology and offered longer-range travel which addresses

the “range anxiety” problem (Noel et al., 2019; Hidrue et. al.,2011; Egbue and Long, 2012).

The second concern is related to the charging infrastructure, in which case the company

strategized maximum in-house development and investment in charging infrastructure

continuously (Neubauer and Wood, 2014). Leapfrogging ensued in the year 2023 and the

company has since held the pole position in all geographic regions in terms of market share.

2. Innovation

The company has undertaken the ‘strategic innovation’ route that allows for a managed

innovation process while using industry foresight to create and satisfy the needs of customers

in the automobile sector. This approach offers a medium to high revenue potential (Palmer

and Kaplan, n.d.). The company set out with high leverage in research and development, such

that electric car deployment is advanced and vehicle charging infrastructure could be

deployed. Prof. Barnes (2020) suggests creating opportunities is contingent on creating a ‘new

fit’. Panther’s innovation strategy is based on creating a new product to serve the existing

market (Ansoff, 1957). In the Ansoff matrix, the company suffers from high risks in the products

level, but the use of blue ocean shifts the market, creating a diversification approach.

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Segmentation Electrification Autonomous Tech

Range Promotion Value for Money

Low

to H

igh

Categories

Strategy Canvas for Panther Ltd.

Competitors Panther

7

2.1. Innovation Drivers and Performance Analysis

2.1.1. Innovation Focus Framework

Scale

Incremental Radical

Target

Internal Process Consumer Product

Timeframe

Quick Wins Long Term/Strategic

Trigger

Opportunity Driven Goal-Driven

Figure 2: Innovation Focus Framework (Montoya, 2020)

The following framework as suggested by Montoya (2020) who serves as the marketing

director for Experian Motors, adapted from Gartner is a ‘guiding’ framework which indulges in

the innovation focus that the company undertook. The investments made in technology were

radical from the onset with the first electric car starting development in Quarter 9. As part of

the short-term goal as discussed between the directors, the company focused on continuous

investment to launch electric vehicles first to market. The company did well in this regard by

reaching the target innovations by end of year 4.

The company followed an internal process-based innovation on the assumption that

consumers will accept decisive changes in vehicles. Brook and Pagnanelli (2014) highlight the

need for using a project portfolio managed innovation system which is a business model and

organizationally oriented. A careful analysis of the product features and launch timings shows

that the company may have fallen behind on short-term requirements of the customer.

However, the short-term hits can be sustained due to the propensity to high-risk with a focus

on the long-term strategy that the company had envisaged. The electric car industry has

several social barriers including range, infrastructure and charging time which took several

years to fruition. The company has made these investments and is expecting higher

acceptance in the following years.

8

The company is less susceptible to making changes based on market updates. As Risi (2020),

puts across a fundamental aspect of a business, "strategy is choosing what not to do". The

corporate element shows that Panther Ltd. has a strong focus which has led the company to

fall behind on several dynamic changes, in terms of customer turnover as well as market

momentum. However, the company has maintained a laser focus on the long-term goals of

market technical dominance similar to industry-wide approaches of Tesla Motors, Rivian and

Wyd (Wayland, 2020).

2.1.2. Sustainability Outlook

Graph 2: CO2 Emissions in g/miles for Panther Ltd (2019-2025)

The formative years of the company consisted of higher CO2 emissions due to a predominant

gasoline and diesel fleet. However, a range of factors including, but not limited to government

regulations and change in consumer preferences led the company to change its portfolio

outlook and create a clean energy fleet.

In the short term, the fleet incurred, falling but high CO2 emissions due to the addition of two

Hybrid Cars, a coupe and a compact. The company was able to discontinue older, higher

emission models and limit the sales of existing high emission models to reduce its carbon

footprint, which was a direct result of the innovation strategy. The method seems to have

considerably helped the company and the introduction of “Project Green Car” added impetus,

with gains from emissions reaching $3 billion.

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

Year 0 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6

g/m

ile

CO2 Emissions Control

Marks the

turning point in

CO2 emissions

and addition of

‘Project Green

Car’

Student ID: 195444

9

2.2. Interdependencies

2.2.1. Chronological Launch and Features of Electric Cars in the Fleet

Model Type Range Autonomous Connectivity

E Micro Extra Long I II

E Executive Extra Long II II

E Compact Medium III III

E Luxury Medium III III

E SUV Medium III III

E Convertible Short IV IV

E Micro Short II II

Table 1: Features in Electric Cars Launched

Features of Car = f(Competitor Features + Consumer Preferences + Employee Expertise + Margin Required + Innovation Strategy)

2.2.2. Marketing & Innovation

In the initial years, as per a comprehensive study on innovation in the automotive industry,

consumers demanded long-range vehicles to prevent charging inertia due to limited

infrastructure (Tiwari, 2017; Noel et al., 2019; Hidrue et. al.,2011; Egbue and Long, 2012).

When put to practice this served against the company and demand for the extra-long vehicle

range remained low due to the highly competitive prices. It also severely affected the

contribution margins due to the lower price for competitiveness and higher promotional

expenses. The competitors were offering a lower range of cars with limited technology that

remained more favourable with the customers. The company adapted market changes in the

years 2024 and 2025 which saw higher margins on short-ranged cars and higher acceptance

of older models.

The targeting aspect was in the space of creating an uncontested market space for high tech

electric vehicles with a value for money proposition to achieve scalability with the forthcoming

launches as was outlined by Musk (2006) in a blog post “The Secret Tesla Motors Master Plan

(just between you and me)”. The market landscape was unfavourable and the much-

anticipated shift in customer preferences did not realise creating a cascading effect.

2.2.3. Operations and Innovation

10

Years 1&2: The legacy vehicles were streamlined, and hybrid cars were introduced to make

use of existing factory space and to balance cash flows from loss on higher emissions with

more energy-efficient cars.

Year 3&4: The company launched a high number of electric vehicles, while also re-launching

an older model. Due to the specialized nature of vehicles, scalability was not achieved, and

the timing of the launch was not synchronized with lines running empty and on certain

occasions halting of production due to storage cut-off levels.

Year 5&6: The company achieved better inter-functional control and the launch of customer-

friendly models that could be scaled, allowing the company to post strong results in terms of

revenue increase and return on investments (Appendix).

3. Operations

The operations processes have significantly altered as Johnson (2020), a guest speaker for

WBS Operations Team puts in terms of Just-in-Time (JIT). Panther applied a similar approach

to its resilience method followed to limit tariff shocks and constant changes to customer

preference. The strategic decision to invest $300 million in “Modular Design & Production”

with a short implementation time of 2 months, significantly limiting production disruption. The

academic models introduced by Johnson, 2020 help in analyzing the volume-variety interplay

which served as a key indicator of the operational performance of Panther Ltd.

3.1. Operation Drivers and Performance Analysis

3.1.1. 4V Model

The importance-performance matrix as introduced by Slack et al., 2010 has been interpreted

to understand the operational performance achieved by the firm concerning the importance

criteria set up in the strategic implementation practices.

11

Figure 3: Composite 4V model with an inclination metric[ :Type 1 :Type 2]

The 4V model as introduced by Slack et. al., 2010 provides into the volume-variety argument.

The Type 1 Models exhibit qualities of low volume, high variety, variation in demand and

visibility, while the Type 2 models are the antecedents of Type 1 models. The semi-radial

meter at the bottom is inclined towards Type 1 because 9 out of 14 models showed

characteristics remnant of Type 1 models. This description is necessary to carefully

understand the performance and decisions under the operations function.

3.1.2. Production Capacity

The production capacity formed of 12 production lines, equally divided between America,

China and Europe. The production lines expansion has been a severe cause of concern due

to its limited scalability. This problem can be isolated to the overdependence on Type 1

products which could not be scaled since the market did not receive the products well. The

limited sale of products prevented any expansion, like the Tesla introductory models, roadster

and model S with total sales of 2,450 and 158,000 respectively (Tesla, 2019).

The company invested too much on vehicle development and employed a very narrow

approach towards production expansion. The interplay between the risk of under-production

and empty lines can be viewed as a master strategy approach that will allow the company to

expand as demand arises and operate efficiently with product investments fulfilled.

Type 1

Volume High Low

Visibility (Customer Contact) Low High

Variety Low High

Variation in Demand Low High

Type 2

12

3.1.3. Capacity Utilization

Graph 3: Capacity utilization of the factory (Industry Masters, 2020)

The overall capacity utilization remained at an aggregate 77.5%. The company transitioned

from a carbon high to electric manufacturing which created decisive changes on the human

resources front, with increased training requirements and constant employment. On several

instances, a supply-demand gap seems to have contracted utilization to 57% and 69% in

successive years. Imperfect scaling up of Type 1 cars that dominated the product mix led to

the inventory levels exceeding maximum capacity on several instances bringing the

production systems to a halt. On the positive side, the acceptance of Panther vehicles has

grown significantly in years 5&6 and consumer preferences have aligned as forecasted. This

has solidified the company stance and placed it at a place to reap maximum economies of

scale and increase production lines.

3.2. Interdependencies

3.2.1. Micro Expansions

The expansion needs to be carefully aligned with Marketing and Innovation functions to make

way for production. Over the first 4 years a micro-outlook was taken, to minimize idle lines and

maximize efficiency. A line was added on the direction of the marketing team as a new car

was produced. The company did not leverage scale specifically in China due to a narrow

outlook of per car expansion policy.

68

88

57

69

92 93

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6

Overall Capacity Utilization in %

13

3.2.2. Functional Transformation

The decisions related to where a car is produced and in what quantities are a function of the

overall strategy, availability of production capacity and customer preferences. Based on the

firm analysis, it can be found that the allocation seems arbitrary with limited concern for

resilience in terms of tariffs and a primary motive of availability to scale production in the first

4 years with a lack of structure. Specific decisions based on customer preference and tariff

analysis after conferring with the marketing and innovation directors led to several changes in

place of production, which saw a significant spike in staff, G&A expenses and materials cost

and consecutively a drop in net income to an all-time low of $93 million in Quarter 20 as seen

in Graph 4.

Graph 4: Key Expenses and Income (Q12-Q28)(Industry Masters, 2020)

These changes are however mitigated due to the benefits received in terms of reductions in

the cost of operations, geographic pricing and increase in sales due to competitiveness in the

market as analyzed below.

In metanalysis, Al-Alawi and Bradley (2013) argue that manufacturers are limited by, “budget,

technology availability, brand preference, and preexisting product plans”, that limit the creation

of models tuned to the market needs. The rate of adoption is largely unknown which has driven

the stimulus for the current model transition by Panther Ltd.

$0

$500,000,000

$1,000,000,000

$1,500,000,000

$2,000,000,000

$2,500,000,000

$3,000,000,000

Q13 Q14 Q15 Q16 Q17 Q18 Q19 Q20 Q21 Q22 Q23 Q24 Q25 Q26 Q27 Q28

Movem

ent

Quarterwise (Q12-Q28)

Key Expenses and Income (Extract)

G&A Expenses Material Cost Net Income Staff Expenses

14

Graph 5: Change in overall car prices (Metadata in Appendix)

The net effect was an 8.5% drop in cumulative prices of the aforementioned cars across all

geographies. E Micro and E Lux have remained unchanged, as they were being produced in

the right geographies offering maximum returns to scale. The operations efficiency rose in

terms of, higher production while maintaining lower inventories. The material costs, staff

expenses and G&A expenses were brought under control.

3.2.3. Operations and Marketing

This move allowed the demand to improve succinctly, with products being produced where

they preferred more, compared to other countries. The price effect through tariff accounting

as visible in graph 5, allowed the company to increase margins by limiting direct price cuts

and achieving price levels close to the competition while still selling cars with better features

and securing higher margins at an average of 16%(Year 5&6) compared to 11% (years 3&4).

15

4. Marketing

Figure 4: 4P Analysis for Panther Ltd.

The 4P analysis gives a bird’s eye view of the marketing structure. This is, however, a

simplistic outlook limited by the dynamic nature of the business and the inclusion of various

caveats from competitors and internal departments. The analysis will draw key references as

the firm evolved its marketing strategy over the past 6 years.

4.1. Operation Drivers and Performance Analysis

4.1.1. Preference Mapping

The blue ocean strategy (Kim and Mauborgne, 2005) shows that the company was trying to

create a different market for its e-cars and aim to disrupt by radically changing customer

preferences by offering disruptive technology. In year 3, with the first EV launch, the first-

mover advantage purported by Kerin et al. (1992) fell back on the cost front but scored high

on differentiation. It is clear from the performance in terms of the limited sales and low return

on sales in the years 3&4 that the strategy failed on the time dimension with the firm unable

to manage short term dealings, hence, the first-mover advantage was nullified.

The considerable risks involved in creating paradigm shifts with an expectation to alter

customer preferences were realized. The customers soon caught up with the curve in years

5&6 and the company produced vehicles that could be competitively priced and obtained

mass-market appeal, with the return on sales reaching 19% by the end of Q28. The

Product

• High Variety

• Max technical capabilities

• Build customer preference around product

Price

• Penetration Pricing

• Constant Adjustments to maximise sales

• At par with competitors, offering better features

Place

• America, Europe and Asia focus

• Low Cost in China

• Mid Range in Europe

• High range with maximum deatures in America

Promotion

• Maximise Promotions

• Consistent increase in marketing spend

• Increase TV/Promotions on new launch

• Increase Training & Print in the quarters post launch

16

preferences are expected to shift with the company already having an autonomous vehicle in

the mix and consumers in the European and Asian starting an early trend shift towards these

vehicles (IEA, 2020).

4.1.2. Features

The features, when plotted against competitors, were significantly ahead of the market curve,

which should have led to higher sales. In a survey by IBM (2011), it was found that half the

customers would not pay more for similar featured gasoline, hybrid or diesel variant. The

company produced cars with better features and priced them at par with the competitors. In

retrospect, the cost of production pushed higher which led to very slim margins for continuity

of operations. This pushed the firm to spend higher on promotions and it further reduced net

profits. The high yield expected from investments in new models, which did not realize, can

be traced straight back to the features mix and low acceptance by customers given in the

graph below.

Graph 6: Panther Features Mix (Industry Masters, 2020)

A side by side comparison of the features shows that within each model Panther vehicles were

placed better than the competitors owing to the creation of a premium features company that

offers value for money. The penetration policy limited the scale of price to lean on the lower

end of the spectrum for all cars. The higher input cost made the majority of the vehicles

uncompetitive in the broad spectrum of the market. The learnings from mistakes and corporate

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

Ra

ng

e

Auto

nom

y

Co

nn

ect

Ra

ng

e

Auto

nom

y

Co

nn

ect

Ra

ng

e

Auto

nom

y

Co

nn

ect

Ra

ng

e

Auto

nom

y

Connect

Range

Auto

nom

y

Co

nn

ect

Ra

ng

e

Auto

nom

y

Co

nn

ect

E Micro E Compact E Executive E Convertible E SUV E Luxury

Level of F

eatu

res

Car Segment

Competitors vs Panther Features Mix (End of Year 4)

A B C Panther

17

maturity allowed for the launch of an E-micro (Hotwheels) that addressed all these concerns

and transitioned from Star to Cash Cow in the BCG Matrix faster than industry rates

(Henderson, 1970).

4.1. Interdependencies

4.1.1. Product Life Cycle

The product life cycle acted as the single most important metric for timeline decisions of launch

and liquidation of vehicles. It was also highly relevant in making progressive and/or regressive

changes to price and promotional spending.

The primary focus remained at clearing out inventory and increasing sales at the expense of

lower selling prices, hence, lower margins and high promotional activity. Consecutively,

leasing options were extended to allow ease of adoption, where, Haddadian (2015) states that

“EVs offer lower TCO compared to their ICE counterparts over the life of the vehicle”. The

company employed a range of external factors to boost demand. This seemed to have been

the overarching focus irrespective of the position within the product life cycle that a vehicle

was placed at any given point of time. This can be quantified by the marketing spend/sales

that significantly rose from Year 1 to Year 6.

Graph 7: Cumulative Marketing Spend/Sales (2019-2025)

The fear of low sales volume had a significant impact on the overall margins. Ideally, the

spend/sales ratio should improve as the product moves from Introduction to Decline. The

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6

Valu

es

Cumulative Marketing Spend/Sales

18

average age of the fleet varied throughout the simulation. Case in point is Year 3 when the

average age of the fleet was around 14-16 months, the Spend/Sales ratio increased by almost

200 points, which should have ideally dropped or stayed the same. The company did not

recognize undersupplied segments and, in the race, to compete in oversaturated markets

spent notably high on promotions while also reducing prices. The last 2 years which has high

sales, shows the graph plateau, which allowed for recovery and a higher return on investment

in the future.

4.1.2. Segmentation

A new product launch seemed like an exciting idea and involved effective communication

between Operations and Innovation Departments, along with the Finance Department issuing

the necessary financial resources. Since the product mix included variants that fit segments

in different markets the choices were based on the preference list. As Rudd (2020) stated

while arguing segmentation in a lecture slide that, ‘few products can satisfy all customers’.

The company was able to define global boundaries and maximize sales based on production

and tariff norms. The goal focus remained at securing the highest market share in each

segment of the vehicle, which would give a higher market share in each country.

The company had a not-so-swift transition from a marketing myopia point in the beginning and

middle years, to a customer-focused organization. This is a case of ‘customer informed’ to

‘customer-focused’ marketing, which is against the arguments dispensed by Rudd (2020).

Conclusion

The essay has broadly analysed the performance of individual functions of the organization

using KPIs and competitor analysis. The paper has highlighted the interdependencies that

exist between them using important decisions that created a mature company. These factors

have created the necessary elements to judge how well the company has performed. More

importantly, how each function works in collaboration to formulate a bigger picture.

As isolated functions, the company would find itself in complete disarray and succinct

communication with a strategy agreed between all the directors allowed the company to

succeed. The dynamic response system within Panther Ltd. is weak since all KPIs had fallen

significantly in years 3 and 4. This could have been prevented with a proactive reaction system

in the early quarters of decision making.

The idea of creating a novel product and distinguish a separate market is filled with risks and

that is exactly how the startup ecosystem works. Panther as a startup made significant

19

investments in innovation and launched products, but it failed in the short term. In context,

Skype was a video conferencing service that existed long before Zoom, but the COVID crisis

propelled Zoom and diminished Skype (Stokel-Walker, 2020). Panther is the Skype that will

succeed due to the underlying ethos of creating a technology-focused company with a value

for money proposition.

At the end of Year 6, the company has developed the resources and capabilities necessary

to storm the market. The company needs to increase factory lines to incorporate for the rise

in sales that are being forecasted. The ‘Coupe Autonomous’ offers the first-mover advantage

on both cost and differentiation grounds, thus, mitigating earlier errors and entering the market

at the right time with appropriate configurations.

This study is limited to the three functions and an overall outlook relating to the other functions

of the organization along with external market-related factors must be analyzed to supply a

broader picture. The limitation of text has blocked out the analysis of the key ratios and

financial figures. Overall the analysis will allow any external or internal user to understand the

company and make informed decisions for the future.

Appendix

Data on customer concerns for EV

Biggest concern about EVs Number of responses (%)

Battery range 158 33

Cost 129 27

Charging infrastructure 83 17

Other 58 12

Reliability 47 10

Safety 6 1

Source: (Egbue and Long, 2012)

Strategy Blueprint

20

Revenue

EBIT Margin

21

Return on Net Assets

Return on Sales

Value Added

22

Metadata on Change Calculation (Graph 5, page 14)

Car Type America Europe Asia

Old New Old New Old New Chan

ge

E Suv $72,6

78

$66,5

91

$66,5

91

$71,9

18

$77,5

83

$73,2

50

$5,09

3

2.35

%

E Compact (RV7) $29,0

36

$28,6

08

$26,0

07

$28,6

08

$31,1

81

$26,0

07

$3,00

1

3.48

%

E Compact (City

007))

$41,6

44

$38,9

75

$40,7

81

$36,0

88

$36,0

88

$41,5

01

$1,94

9

1.64

%

E Executive $56,2

17

$51,3

42

$51,3

42

$55,4

49

$60,0

61

$56,4

76

$4,35

3

2.60

%

E Convertible $48,2

00

$52,0

56

$52,0

56

$48,2

00

$53,0

20

$55,4

30

-

$2,41

0

-

1.57

%

23

References

Al-Alawi, B. and Bradley, T., 2013. Review of hybrid, plug-in hybrid, and electric vehicle market modeling Studies. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, [online] 21, pp.190-203. Available at: <https://0-www-sciencedirect-com.pugwash.lib.warwick.ac.uk/science/article/pii/S136403211300004X?via%3Dihub#s0105> [Accessed 25 August 2020].

Ansoff, H. I. (1957) ‘Strategies for Diversification’, Harvard Business Review, 35(5), pp. 113–124. Available at: http://0-search.ebscohost.com.pugwash.lib.warwick.ac.uk/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bth&AN=6769323&site=eds-live (Accessed: 27 August 2020).

Barnes, D. and Rowbotham, F., 2003. Developing a questionnaire for the four-stage model of operations strategy. Production Planning & Control, [online] 14(7), pp.613-622. Available at: <https://0-www-tandfonline-com.pugwash.lib.warwick.ac.uk/doi/full/10.1080/09537280310001626205?scroll=top&needAccess=true> [Accessed 24 August 2020].

Brook, J. and Pagnanelli, F., 2014. Integrating sustainability into innovation project portfolio management – A strategic perspective. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, [online] 34, pp.46-62. Available at: <http://www.pmir.it/fileCaricati/1/Brook%20and%20Paganelli%20(2014).pdf> [Accessed 22 August 2020].

Capgemini Research Institute, 2019. The Autonomous Car A Consumer Perspective. [online] Capgemini, pp.1-36. Available at: <https://www.capgemini.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/30min-%E2%80%93-Report.pdf> [Accessed 24 August 2020].

Cooper, R., Edgett, S. and Kleinschmidt, E., 2002. Optimizing the Stage-Gate Process: What Best-Practice Companies Do—I. Research-Technology Management, [online] 45(5), pp.21-27. Available at: <https://www.stage-gate.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/wp_14.pdf> [Accessed 21 August 2020].

Egbue, O. and Long, S., 2012. Barriers to widespread adoption of electric vehicles: An analysis of consumer attitudes and perceptions. Energy Policy, [online] 48, pp.717-729. Available at: <https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421512005162> [Accessed 21 August 2020].

Henderson, B., 1970. The Product Portfolio. [online] BCG Global. Available at: <https://www.bcg.com/publications/1970/strategy-the-product-portfolio> [Accessed 27 August 2020].

24

Hidrue, M., Parsons, G., Kempton, W. and Gardner, M., 2011. Willingness to pay for electric vehicles and their attributes. Resource and Energy Economics, [online] 33(3), pp.686-705. Available at: <https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0928765511000200#sec0035> [Accessed 18 August 2020].

IEA, 2020. Global EV Outlook 2020. [online] Paris: IEA. Available at: <https://www.iea.org/reports/global-ev-outlook-2020> [Accessed 21 August 2020].

IndustryMasters, 2020. Business Simulations For Leadership Development And Business Acumen. [online] IndustryMasters. Available at: <https://msp-automan-wbs-aws9.industrymasters.com/#> [Accessed 27 August 2020].

Johnson, M., 2020. Business In Practice: Operations.

Johnson, R., 2020. Business In Practice: Guest Lecture.

Kerin, R., Varadarajan, P. and Peterson, R., 1992. First-Mover Advantage: A Synthesis, Conceptual Framework, and Research Propositions. Journal of Marketing, [online] 56(4), p.33. Available at: <http://0-eds.b.ebscohost.com.pugwash.lib.warwick.ac.uk/eds/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=1&sid=96e93f82-ab79-4ebd-a0dc-252d836a7910%40pdc-v-sessmgr02> [Accessed 24 August 2020].

Kim, W. and Mauborgne, R., 2005. Blue Ocean Strategy: From Theory to Practice. California Management Review, [online] 47(3), pp.105-121. Available at: <https://0-journals-sagepub-com.pugwash.lib.warwick.ac.uk/doi/10.1177/000812560504700301> [Accessed 21 August 2020].

Montoya, G., 2020. Innovation In The Auto Industry.

Mulder, P., 2018. Stage Gate Process: Innovative Project Management Method | Toolshero. [online] toolshero. Available at: <https://www.toolshero.com/innovation/stage-gate-process-robert-cooper/> [Accessed 21 August 2020].

Musk, E., 2006. Tesla Blog. [online] Tesla.com. Available at: <https://www.tesla.com/blog/secret-tesla-motors-master-plan-just-between-you-and-me> [Accessed 24 August 2020].

Neubauer, J. and Wood, E., 2014. The impact of range anxiety and home, workplace, and public charging infrastructure on simulated battery electric vehicle lifetime utility. Journal of Power Sources, [online] 257, pp.12-20. Available at: <https://0-www-sciencedirect-

25

com.pugwash.lib.warwick.ac.uk/science/article/pii/S0378775314000998?via%3Dihub> [Accessed 21 August 2020].

Noel, L., Zarazua de Rubens, G., Sovacool, B. and Kester, J., 2019. Fear and loathing of electric vehicles: The reactionary rhetoric of range anxiety. Energy Research & Social Science, 48, pp.96-107.

Palmer, D. and Kaplan, S., n.d. A Framework For Strategic Innovation. [online] Innovation-point.com. Available at: <https://www.innovation-point.com/Strategic%20Innovation%20White%20Paper.pdf> [Accessed 24 August 2020].

Risi, C., 2020. Industry Masters.

Rudd, J., 2020. Business In Practice: Marketing.

Slack, N., Chambers, S. and Johnston, R., 2010. Operations Management (6A. Ed.). 6th ed. Distrito Federal: Pearson Educacion.

Stokel-Walker, C., 2020. How Skype Lost Its Crown To Zoom. [online] WIRED UK. Available at: <https://www.wired.co.uk/article/skype-coronavirus-pandemic> [Accessed 27 August 2020].

Wayland, M., 2020. Rivian Raises $2.5 Billion In Aggressive Plan To Beat Tesla And Nikola With The First All-Electric Pickup. [online] CNBC. Available at: <https://www.cnbc.com/2020/07/10/rivian-ceo-scaringes-aggressive-plan-to-beat-tesla-and-nikola-with-the-first-all-electric-pickup-and-suv.html> [Accessed 27 August 2020].