Bussines Model Innovation

http://sloanreview.mit.edu/article/what-to-do-against-disruptive-business-models/

What to Do Against Disruptive Business Models

(When and How to Play Two Games at Once)

Constantinos C. Markides and Daniel Oyon

Fighting against a disruptive business model by rolling out a second business model is one option for companies to consider. But to make that work, you need to avoid the trap of getting stuck in the middle.

INCREASINGLY, ESTABLISHED companies in industries as diverse as airlines, media and banking are seeing their markets invaded by new and disruptive business models. The success of invaders such as easyJet, Netflix and ING Direct in capturing market share has encouraged established corporations to respond by adopting the new business models alongside their established ones. Yet, despite the best of intentions and the investment of significant resources, most companies are unsuccessful in their efforts to compete with two business models at once.

According to Michael Porter and other strategy theorists, managing two different business models in the same industry at the same time is challenging because the two models (and their underlying value chains) can conflict with each other.1 For example, airlines selling tickets through the Internet to fight back against their low-cost competitors risk alienating existing distributors (the travel agents). Similarly, established newspaper companies that offer “free” newspapers to respond to new entrants risk cannibalizing their existing customer base. By attempting to compete with themselves, Porter argued, companies risk paying a significant straddling cost: damaging their existing brands and diluting their organizations’ cultures for innovation and differentiation.2

His view was that a company could find itself “stuck in the middle” if it tried to compete with both low-cost and differentiation strategies.3

THE LEADING QUESTION

Should companies adopt a second business model in their main market?

FINDINGS

• Responding to a disruption by adopting a second business model in the same market can be an effective strategy.

• Your second business model should be different from your existing one and different from that of the disrupter.

• Keep the two separate enough to avoid conflicts, but leverage potential synergies.

HOW TO INTEGRATE SEPARATE UNITS

Companies operating with two business models use a variety of integrating mechanisms to exploit synergies between the models.

1. Appoint a common general manager overseeing both the established and the new business

2. Allow different cultures to emerge but unite the parent with the separate unit by a strong shared vision

3. Put in place targeted but limited integrating mechanisms

4. Nurture strongly shared values that unite the people in the two businesses

5. Appoint an active and credible integrator

6. Emphasize “soft” levers such as a strong sense of direction, strong values and a feeling of “we are in this together”

7. Develop incentives that encourage cooperation between the two units

8. Integrate the activities that cannot be done well if they become independent

9. Allow the unit to borrow brand name, physical assets, expertise and useful processes

10. Let an independent executive from outside the business unit secure an internal champion to manage the unit and provide oversight

11. Give the unit operational autonomy but exercise strong central strategic control

12. Allow the unit to differentiate itself by adopting a few of its own value chain activities but exploit synergies by ensuring that some value chain activities are shared with the parent

________________________________________

The Case for Separate Units

The primary solution proposed to solve this problem is to keep the two business models (and their underlying value chains) separate in two distinct organizations. That is the “innovator’s solution” that Clayton Christensen proposed and that has been supported by others.4 Even Porter has accepted this organizational solution.5 The rationale for this approach is straightforward: Managers at the established company who feel that the new business model is growing at their expense would want to constrain or even kill it. By keeping the two business models separate, you prevent the company’s existing processes and culture from suffocating the new business model. The new unit can develop its own strategy, culture and processes without interference from the parent company.

Sensible as this argument seems, the separation solution is not without problems and risks. Perhaps the biggest problem is that you can’t exploit the synergies between the established company and the separate unit.6 In recognition of the need to exploit the synergies, some academics have suggested an alternative: the creation of separate business units that are linked by a number of integrating mechanisms. Several studies have now identified a number of integrating mechanisms that successful companies have put in place to exploit synergies (see “How to Integrate Separate Units”).7

Why Separation May Not Be Enough

Although the idea of creating separate business units has received a lot of attention, this approach by itself does not ensure success. In fact, there are many examples of companies that have pursued this strategy and failed (such as British Airways with its Go Fly subsidiary and KLM with its Buzz subsidiary) while other companies, such as Nintendo and Mercedes, have succeeded in playing two games without creating separate units.

We have also found that competing successfully with two different and conflicting business models involves more than creating a separate unit. Several years ago, we studied the experiences of 68 companies that faced the challenge of competing with dual business models.8 Our main finding was that only a handful

...