Tagged: strategic management Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts

  • Virtual Chitchatting 12:11 AM on 2011/05/05 Permalink
    Tags: , cost leadership, differentiation, , , marketing mix, memenangkan persaing, menang bersaing, product mix, product strategy, strategic management, strategic thinking   

    Don’t we play the game to win the competition? 

    Winning A Relationship or Just Another Game to Win?

    by Sando Sasako
    Lead Consultant
    Advanced Advocacy Plus

    Jakarta, 4 May 2011

    In every relationship, there must a trade-off situation of loose and tight and in-between. The differences between one party with the other(s) are used to be called as conflict. The interactions between one party to other party(ies) and their characteriestics is defined as social.

    As a concept, social is referred to attitudes, orientations, or behaviours in terms of interests, intentions, or needs of other party(ies). Whike the social role takes place in defining the ideas or principles such as social reality, social justice, social constructivism, and social capital. The implication of marking a status as social is realised as a social process.

    Politically speaking, the word ‘social’ is frequently used by the political opponents of the ruling party as a discourse that the existing government is not committed and not-well functioned properly to serve and provide the social needs, redistribute the state’s resources to improve the welfare of the society as a whole. It can be used to increase the social cohesion. Or vice versa.

    As a course, the social functions and roles depends highly on its structural forming elements such as the norms, customs or conventions, traditions, and intitutions. Farthermore, the discussion over the term ‘social’ will be best and easy to comprehend as we get to know more about the meanings and/or the roles of how the ‘social’ functions.

    In other words, who and what to function socially? The question of who will be best answered if we refer to the individual human, the human society, and the state. The question of what will be best answered if we refer to one aspect of human life or the many aspects at once. They are used to be called as ipoleksosbud-hankam (ideology, politics, economy, social, culture, defense, security).

    A relationship is merely indifferent with a game. You can loose a relationship or you can win one. You can loose a game or you can win one. You can not always win the game. Neither you shall loose in every game you play. It is just like a turning wheel. Once it was up, it is sure to go down the drain. It was down to turn up again. It is dynamic. Be sure of that. The dynamics of life and in life.

    The polars. Try to get used to think between the polars and in-between. It can keep your head straight and clear and the perspectives that you incline and intend to.

    To win THE relationship, or you can read THE GAME, you have got to have the full understandingness of the terms of your relationship, objectively. Where do you want to take your relationships? As is, as it is, or differently? There shall be tugs of war of interests, intentions, or needs. These three things are the social terms.

    The individual social terms can be best described as the individual human needs and wants. Maslow had defined it in the past and been improved perfectly by his students, including me. Maslow differentiate the human needs between the basic needs and the cognitive needs that more advanced, that is expressions, feelings, and aesthetics.

    The five basic human needs comprises of:

    1. The needs in basic physiology to survive in life such as salary, food, clothes, settlement.
    2. The needs in security such as working environment that free from threats of firing, comforting family lives that free from violence verbally or physically for instance.
    3. The needs to be loved and caressed, and vice versa.
    4. The needs to be appreciated and honoured, and vice versa.
    5. The needs to self-actualisation.

    The individual convictions as another form of perception and expectation are the resultante of the developments of one’s socio-culture, situational, and lifetime experiences. The conviction can be realised as prejudices in the beginning and transformed into discrimination practices. Another form of individual conviction is the ethnocentrism such as chauvinism to one certain tribe.

    The alteration of conviction is good if it towards the open mind and willingness to ease the hearts. Human thinks, based on his perceptions. Human feels, based on her sensations. Balancing the two opposite and polarised orientations requires sufficient experiences and wisdoms in life. Eventually, you have to take the side.

    For every relationships, there shall be disagreements. The point to take is agree to disagree. Clashes and conflicts can stem from any minor and/or major viewpoints and perspectives. Each perspectives can be assessed directly, which one is more demanding the rights to be fulfilled or which one is more defensing THE rights that has been fulfilled.

    Likewise the game. Playing the game fairly amongst the players requires some degree of mutual understandingness. It is called by rules of the game. The rule in one place can be very different in another place. Players can be familiar or merely complete strangers or just incognito. They follow and comply to the common grounds which is called by the game theories.

    The leading player used to dictate the basic rules of the game. They used to name the terms in the first place as they have secured the leading position. The new players used to ask the rules of the game in the first place. This is to know how they can conduct maneuvers, mend the rules, bend the rules, or to seek alternative cheat codes.

    Prizes, rewards, or the similar things collected by the winner from any game is measurable. In any relationship, the prize is hardly measurable, but in terms of perceived appreciations, compassions, loves, caresses.

    Bagan:                  Hierarki Kebutuhan Manusia dan Design Concern
    Sumber:                John Lang, Urban Design: The American Experience, Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York, 1994

    Entrepreneurs donot have to be necessarily new player

    Successful enterpreneurs are not necessarily a new player in town or in any game. Instead, they are living and breathing the game, with the game, and in the game. As they are much aware how to defeat the game and win the game, they shall play nicely and neatly. The open competitions reveal that the situation and condition is fierce enough. Unable to survive the game, with the game, and in game, usually has triggered some mechanisms to expel you and kick you out of the game right on the spot.

    How long for Steve Jobs and Dell learnt to beat their competitors to the ground? Almost they spent no time. To the industry they entered, they were new. But, please look closely to what extent they spent their daily activities before they began their successful works, setting new rules of the game. They were there long enough to beat down their competitors.

    Pendidikan Kewirausahaan bukan untuk Semua Orang

    Sifatnya yang strategis membuat pendidikan kewirausahaan bukanlah untuk semua orang. Seorang wirausaha memiliki keahlian intelijensi bagaimana memanfaatkan permintaan yang laten dan potensial. Dia memiliki kemampuan taktis menyiasati pasar input dan output dan mampu bergerak lincah diantara kedua pasar. Pasar yang sangat dinamis dan sangat menuntut bisa membuat sang wirausaha sangat stres dan terdepresi di saat yang bersamaan. If you cannot handle such conditions, be ready to be institutionalised, mentally. Kesian deh loe.

    Studi kewirausahaan bukanlah sesuatu yang mudah dan sederhana serta instan. Anda datang ke kelas, mengikuti pendidikan, pelatihan, praktek, pemagangan, then, voila, setelah selesai semua materi atau modul selesai “disampaikan”di kelas, anda langsung mandapat cap, stempel, sebagai seorang wirausaha. Gini hari, masih ada yang senaif itu?

    Seorang wirausaha bukanlah seorang sarjana. Pendidikan kewirausahaan bukanlah pendidikan akademis ‘saat ini’ yang bisa dengan mudah memberi stempel mahasiswa tamat kuliah terlahir sebagai seorang sarjana. It is not that simple. Semua orang berhak mendefinisikan apa dan bagaimana seorang wirausaha.

    But the truth is not out there. It is inside, embedded as they say, in one’s mind, thoughts, feelings, manners, behaviours. So, where it is to start? The childhood. PAUD, they say, Pendidikan Anak Usia Dini. Bisakah pendidikan kewirausahaan dipelajari dan diterapkan pada usia dewasa? Bisa. Tetapi, kalau tidak digerakkan dari dalam, upaya itu akan menjadi sia-sia dan mubazir. Kenapa?

    Orang dewasa telah memiliki persepsi dan rasa tersendiri terhadap aksi dan reaksi dalam berkomunikasi. Masih banyak orang menilai segala sesuatu dari kulit luarnya saja. Coba lihat dan cerna apa yang dikatakan orang yang duduk, berdiri, bertetangga di sebelah anda? Apakah dasar yang menjadi penilaian mereka? Kebanyakan, sebatas kulit.

    That is to say, according to their senses, and then perceptions. Coba hayati sekali lagi. Anda akan bergumam sendiri terhadap penilaian mereka dan pandangan mereka terhadap dan atas suatu hal, persoalan, permasalahan, realita dalam hidup. Anda kemudian akan bersikap, if that’s the way it is, so be it. We have our separate ways in life and of life. I have to stay away from you. There shall be a distance. Manenggang, kecek urang. We can’t be together. We can’t be closer than we used to be. Au voir.

    Kewirausahaan sebagai Pendidikan Strategi Produk

    Banyak literatur dan modul serta aplikasi yang diajarkan di ruang-ruang kuliah menyamakan pendidikan kewirausahaan sebagai pendidikan menjual produk secara tradisional. Identifikasi peluang usaha kebanyakan dilakukan atas dasar modal sekecil-kecilnya dan ketrampilan sangat dasar seperti memasak, dan segala macam aktivitas kehidupan ekonomi tradisional. Sangat menyedihkan.

    Pemikiran kebanyakan penulis yang sangat terkooptasi dengan hal-hal yang sudah biasa ada di pasar dan sudah dilakukan orang di sekeliling kita. Dangkal, cetek, dan very skin-deep analysis. Terobosan hanya bisa dilakukan oleh orang-orang yang kreatif dan inovatif dalam berpikir dan bertindak, serta berani keluar dari cangkang siput atau kura-kura, atau yang terburuk, cangkang kerang.

    Banyak produk kreatif dan inovatif dibuat serta dipasarkan dengan harga super premium, berkali-kali lipat dari harga produk generik. Panci teflon dijual dengan harga satu juta rupiah? Tahukah anda, berapa harga franco panci teflon tersebut? Kurang dari seratus ribu rupiah! Berapa keuntungan kotor sang pemasar? Hampir sembilan kali lipat biaya produksinya!

    How come? Sang pemasar berhasil melakukan dua hal sekaligus, seperti yang diajarkan Michael Porter di tahun 1985, yakni dua sumber keunggulan kompetitif, yaitu kepemimpinan biaya terkecil (cost leadership) dan diferensiasi. Porter bukanlah seorang ahli pemasaran, melainkan seorang ahli ekonomi industri. Demikian pula halnya Steve Jobs, Dell, dan ribuan orang kreatif dan inovatif lainnya di dunia; mereka bukanlah orang teoritisi dan praktisi pemasaran.

    Teoritisi dan praktisi pemasaran banyak berperan layaknya tukang kecap dan tukang obat di pinggir-pinggir jalan. Mereka berkoar-koar bahwa untuk pergi ke Roma, hanya ada satu jalan, yakni jalan dan cara yang mereka tawarkan. Mereka sangat mengagung-agungkan istilah-istilah yang mereka kembangkan sendiri, yang pada dasarnya adalah sama dan memiliki fungsi generik yang sama, kecuali nama, merek, dan label, seperti top brand, super brand.

    Mereka akan sangat memegang teguh prinsip diferensiasi Shakespeare, what’s in a name? A name is everyting. A brand is everything. Biasalah, tukang kecap. Mereka doyan menciptakan fad, ilusi, sesuatu yang ambigu dan tidak nyata, kecuali dalam pikiran mereka sendiri yang mereka paksakan ke pemilik merek dan penikmat iklan, atau calon korban iklan?

    Pernahkah anda berpikir, siapakah sebenarnya tukang kecap nomor satu di dunia? Unilever. Coba simak tayangan iklan di segala media massa. Unilever sangat diagung-agungkan para raja media. Hampir 90% iklan yang tayang di televisi adalah produk-produk dan merek-merek yang dimiliki Unilever. Hal ini sudah dilakukan Unilever sejak kali pertama berdiri dan wujud di Inggris, pada akhir abad ke-19. Life sucks. Kalau orang LG bilang, Life is Good, for our profiteering companies, but not for our product users!

    Strategi produk yang biasanya dipakai para pemasar adalah berbagai konsep yang dimulai dengan huruf P seperti product, packaging, pricing, positioning, placement, promotion, people, process, physical evidence, dan lainnya. Ada yang keukeuh menggunakan istilah 3-P, 4-P, 6-P, dan lainnya. Ada satu P yang terlupakan, paint my s! Mereka demen menyebutnya dengan istilah marketing mix, product mix, dan berbagai mixer lainnya.

    Keunggulan Bersaing

    Dalam wikipedia, keunggulan kompetitif didefinisikan sebagai keunggulan strategis yang dimiliki satu entitas bisnis dibandingkan entitas pesaingnya dalam satu industri kompetitif. Menurut Dess, Lumpkin, dan Taylor (2005), satu keunggulan kompetitif wujud ketika satu perusahaan memiliki satu produk atau jasa yang dipersepsikan konsumen di pasar tertentu lebih baik dari pesaingnya.

    Menurut Ehmke (2008), satu keunggulan kompetitif merupakan satu keunggulan yang didapat dari persaingan dengan menawarkan pelanggan nilai lebih, melalui harga yang lebih murah atau dengan memberikan manfaat dan layanan tambahan yang membuat harga produk bisa dinaikkan.

    Keuntungan yang lebih tinggi memungkin usaha untuk bisa tetap bertahan hidup, usaha berkelanjutan, serta berhasil dalam jangka panjang. Keunggulan kompetitif bisa memperkuat dan menempatkan satu usaha menjadi lebih superior kinerjanya dibandingkan dengan para pesaingnya.

    Teori keunggulan kompetitif pertama kali diusung Michael Porter di tahun 1985 sebagai respon atas kritikan terhadap teori keunggulan komparatif yang dijelaskan David Ricardo pada tahun 1817. Ricardo mendorong negara-negara untuk berspesialisasi mengekspor barang primer dan bahan baku dan terjebak sebagai negara berupah rendah akibat nilai tukar perdagangan (terms of trade).

    Di sisi lain, Porter berpendapat bahwa negara dan perusahaan seharusnya membuat kebijakan yang menciptakan barang berkualitas tinggi agar bisa dijual dengan harga mahal di pasaran. Di tingkat negara, pertumbuhan produktivitas seharusnya menjadi fokus strategi nasional.

    Tabel – 1. Strategy and Sources of Competitive Advantage
    Strategy / Advantage Cost Leadership Differentiation
    Cost Leadership Yes No
    Differentiation No Yes
    Focus Yes Yes
    Sumber: Euromed Marseille Ecole de Management, Porter and Competitive Advantage

    Koreksi teori keunggulan kompetitif terdapat pada usulan maksimalisasi skala ekonomis pada produksi barang dan jasa yang bisa dijual pada harga premium. Prinsip dasar keunggulan kompetitif terletak pada buruh murah yang tersebar di mana-mana dan sumber daya alam tidaklah diperlukan bagi perekonomian.

    Upaya maksimalisasi dapat dilakukan dengan memberikan atribut kepada produk yang bisa bersaing dan mengungguli pesaingnya pada masa kini dan nanti (pesaing potensil). Produk yang kompetitif dicirikan memiliki beberapa bentuk kepemimpinan di pasar seperti pada biaya dan kemampuan diferensiasi menciptakan produk dengan sifat permintaan tidak elastis (monopolistik).

    Beberapa atribut yang umum mencakup:

    1. akses terhadap sumber daya alam yang berkualitas tinggi tapi relatif murah,
    2. akses terhadap sumber daya manusia yang sangat ahli dan terlatih tapi relatif murah,
    3. akses terhadap sumber daya teknologi produksi yang memberikan peningkatan produktivitas dan efisiensi kerja seperti kemampuan robotik dan teknologi informasi.

    Dengan kata lain, sumber daya perusahaan, strategi usaha, dan/atau kemampuan perusahaan diharapkan mampu menciptakan keunggulan kompetitif. Strategi bisnis merupakan perangkat yang mampu memanipulasi sumber daya alam dan manusia serta menciptakan keunggulan kompetitif yang berkesinambungan. Sumber daya perusahaan dan kemampuan merupakan bahan terciptanya kompetensi distinctives. Kompetensi ini memudahkan inovasi, efisiensi, mutu, dan respon pelanggan.

    Bagan – 1.            Model Keunggulan Kompetitif
    Sumber:                QuickMBA.com, Competitive Advantage.

    Beberapa bentuk sumber daya perusahaan bagi keunggulan kompetitif, menurut QuickMBA.com, terdiri dari:

    1. paten dan merek dagang.
    2. Kecukupan cara (proprietary know-how).
    3. Sudah memiliki basis pelanggan.
    4. Reputasi perusahaan.
    5. Ekuitas merek.

    Salah satu indikator utama satu perusahaan telah mencapai dan memiliki keunggulan kompetitif adalah terjaganya tingkat keuntungan yang lebih tinggi dari pesaingnya dan dari rata-rata industri. Keuntungan superior didapat dari biaya produksi yang (jauh) lebih rendah dibandingkan perusahaan pesaing sejenis atau rata-rata industri.

    Keunggulan bersaing bisa berbentuk terimplementasinya strategi penciptaan nilai secara berkesinambungan. Nilai yang dimaksud bisa berupa manfaat yang dirasakan lebih besar dari produk pesaing dan/atau biaya produksi yang lebih rendah di tingkat perusahaan atau di tingkat saluran distribusinya.

    Keunggulan biaya dan diferensiasi nilai dikenal sebagai keunggulan posisi perusahaan yang menjadi pemimpin pasar di salah satu atau kedua aspek tersebut. Di sisi perusahaan, nilai yang diciptakan adalah berasal dari serangkaian aktivitas perusahaan, yang diidentifikasi Porter sebagai rantai nilai (value chain) dalam aktivitas upstream dan downstream.


    Bagan – 2.            Rantai nilai generik
    Sumber:                Michael E. Porter, Competitive Advantage, hal.37.

    Di tingkat konsumen, atribut produk harus dilihat dan dianggap pelanggannya sebagai produk penting yang harus dibeli dan tidak bisa digantikan produk pesaing. Oleh karena itu, pasar atau segmen produk harus bersifat unik, sempit (niche), dan fokus. Menurut Euromed Marseille Ecole de Management, strategi fokus memungkin perusahaan untuk beroperasi di 2 kepemimpinan pasar, yakni dalam hal biaya dan diferensiasi.

    Bagan – 3.            Rantai nilai untuk produsen penjiplak
    Sumber:                Michael E. Porter, Competitive Advantage, hal.47

    Pemilihan strategi dan keunggulan kompetitif pada aspek biaya membuat perusahaan sangat menekankan pentingnya sistem kontrol, pencapaian skala ekonomis, dan eksploitasi kurva pembelajaran. Melalui teknologi sistem informasi, kontrol dilakukan terhadap aspek penjadwalan, optimisasi, pengukuran, dan koordinasi seluruh prilaku aktivitas.

    Five Forces

    Bagan – 4.            Elemen Struktur Industri
    Sumber:                Michael E. Porter, Competitive Advantage, hal.6.

    Kerangka analisis keunggulan kompetitif Porter berangkat dari pemikirannya pada aspek analisis industri dan strategi bisnis dalam perspektif ilmu ekonomi (organisasi) industri. Porter berpendapat bahwa intensitas persaingan dan daya tarik pasar sangat ditentukan oleh 5 kekuatan, yakni daya tawar pemasok, daya tawar pelanggan, ancaman pemain baru, ancaman produk substitusi, dan intensitas persaingan dalam satu industri.

    Kritik terhadap Teori Porter

    Menurut Dess, Lumpkin, dan Taylor (2005), sudut pandang Porter yang berdasarkan pada teori ekonomi industri, membuatnya rawan terhadap kritikan dari sudut pandang yang lain, yakni kewirausahaan yang mengagung-agungkan kemampuan inovasi bisa menembus pasar yang sudah jenuh. Sejumlah elemen dari stuktur industri diakui Porter bisa mempengaruhi 5 kekuatan tersebut. Faktor-faktor tersebutlah yang mempengaruhi mempengaruhi keunggulan kompetitif.

    Dess, Lumpkin, dan Taylor memang mengakui 5 kekuatan tersebut sebagai ukuran kemampuan suatu usaha untuk bisa sukses di suatu pasar. Mereka menekankan pendapat bahwa kekuatan setiap unsur tidak sama di setiap situasi dan di setiap industri. Beberapa penjelasan:

    1. Di pasar output, kekuatan pembeli mempengaruhi harga yang bisa dibebankan perusahaan, seperti halnya ancaman substitusi.
    2. Di pasar input, kekuatan pembeli dapat mempengaruhi biaya dan investasi, karena pembeli yang berkuasa menuntut layanan yang berbiaya tinggi (costly).
    3. Di pasar input, kekuatan pemasok menentukan biaya bahan baku dan input lainnya.
    4. Intensitas persaingan mempengaruhi harga seperti halnya biaya bersaing di bidang-bidang seperti pabrik, pengembangan produk, pengiklanan, dan tenaga sales.
    5. Ancaman masuk ke pasar menempatkan batasan atas harga dan bentuk investasi yang dipersyaratkan dalam rangka menghalangi pesaing masuk ke pasar.

    Daya inovasi wirausaha bisa terbangkitkan ketika sang wirausahawan mengenali dan memahami kekuatan dasar (underlying forces) dari bentuk dan tekanan persaingan. Kekuatan yang mana yang mendominasi persaingan industri tergantung kondisi tertentu. Bersamaan dengan itu, mereka bisa menilai peluang pasar atau ancaman yang dihadapi usahanya. Disinilah tantangan bagi wirausahawan untuk bisa mengembangkan keunggulan kompetitifnya dengan memanfaatkan dan menempatkan posisinya di pasar.

    Dua mitos yang sering dihadapi wirausahawan dalam rangka menciptakan keunggulan kompetitif, yakni:

    1. Peluang usaha yang paling baik sudah pergi.
    2. Usaha kecil tidak bisa bersaing dengan baik dengan perusahaan besar.

    Dari sudut pandang lain, perusahaan yang sudah ada, baik besar ataupun kecil, pada umumnya tidak menyambut baik pesaing. Perusahaan yang sudah mapan pasti akan memerisai dirinya dari pesaing prospektif dan terhadap pesaing yang sudah ada. Sebagai konsekuensinya, sebagai pesaing baru, wirausahawan harus bisa melihat celah. Celah yang dimaksud adalah keunggulan kompetitif yang strategis guna menerobos masuk ke pasar dan/atau aktivitas perdagangan dengan pola yang sudah mapan.

    Porter sendiri sudah mafhum dengan cacat pemikiran strategis menyangkut situasi persaingan yang dihadapi wirausahawan. Beberapa cacat yang dimaksud:

    1. Memiliki keunggulan kompetitif yang tidak riel. Imitasi pesaing bersifat sukar dan berisiko dan merefleksikan kurangnya keunggulan kompetitif.
    2. Mengejar keunggulan bersaing yang tidak bisa berkesinambungan. Wirausahawan harus yakin bahwa keunggulan kompetitif tidak bisa secepatnya diimitasi.
    3. Salah membaca daya tarik industri. Industri yang paling atraktif bisa jadi bukanlah industri yang bisa cepat tumbuh atau paling mewah.

    Sumber Keunggulan Kompetitif

    Menurut Ehmke (2008), arti pentingnya keunggulan kompetitif menjadi aktual ketika semua produk ‘terlihat’ homogen, sedikit terdiferensiasi, dan sangat dipengaruhi oleh tingkat harga. Pemenang persaingan langsung dapat dilihat pada produsen yang paling efisien dalam biaya dan volume produksi yang tinggi.

    Preferensi konsumen yang beralih pada produk dengan ciri yang lebih spesifik atau layanan khusus menciptakan peluang diferensiasi produk yang signifikan terasa bagi konsumen. Harga produk tersebut tidak melulu tergantung pada biaya dan volume, melainkan pada:

    1. Mutu premium.
    2. Diferensiasi pada proses produksi dan/atau hasil produksi seperti organik, alami, atau buatan manusia.
    3. Komponen poduksi dengan nilai tambah seperti rasa, sudah diproses, sudah diseleksi, atau lainnya.

    Menurut Gupta (2009), beberapa atribut penting dari perusahaan diakui sebagai sumber atau determinan keunggulan kompetitif:

    1. Kelangkaan, nilai, ketidakmampuan ditiru, ketidakmampuan disubstitusi.
    2. Sumber daya potensil yang penting dalam hal finansil, fisik, hukum, manusia, organisasi, informasi, dan rasional.
    3. Kemampuan mengembangkan kompetensi inti yang superior dengan mengkombinasikan keahlian dan sumber daya.
    4. Serangkaian kapabilitas dinamis, kemampuan memiliki dan mengalokasikan serta meningkatkan (upgrade) sumber daya yang berbeda (distinctive).
    5. Hak kekayaan intelektual, rahasia dagang, basis data, budaya organisasi, dan lainnya.
    6. Kapabilitas etika.
    7. Reputasi perusahaann.
    8. Diversitas tempat kerja.
    9. Filantropi perusahaan (CSR).

    Menurut Ehmke (2008), beberapa strategi potensil bagi diferensiasi:

    1. Fitur dan manfaat produk. Beberapa ciri produk yang unik dan diinginkan meliputi gaya, kemasan (handling), rasa, komposisi bermutu, nyaman, metode produksi (alami atau organik, buatan tangan atau pabrik), sertifikasi, dan seterusnya.
    2. Lokasi.
    3. Staf.
    4. Prosedur kerja.
    5. Harga.
    6. Program insentif pelanggan.
    7. Garansi dan jaminan.
    8. Merek.
    9. Niat baik (goodwill).
    10. Nilai tambah produk/jasa.
    11. Perpanjangan atau ekstensi masa kerja.
    12. Lapisan tanah, gedung, lokasi, dan tata letak (landscape).
    13. Air, akses terhadap sumber daya (irigasi), dan tanah basah.
    14. Cuaca.
    15. Tanaman dan hewan.
    16. Organisasi dan aliansi.
    17. Pengalaman pelanggan.
    18. Mutu.

    Dalam perjalanannya, keunggulan kompetitif membutuhkan proses evaluasi yang dijalankan secara konsisten dan terus-menerus. Objek evaluasi mencakup sumber daya, tujuan usaha, cara masuk ke pasar dan diterima pasar, serta pesaing. Tujuan usaha adalah sesuatu yang harus bisa dicapai, spesifik, dan realistis.

    Keuntungan Keunggulan Komparatif

    Menurut Pearce dan Robinson (2007: 233), keberhasilan suatu usaha wujud karena adanya keunggulan relatif bila dibandingkan pesaingnya. Dua sumber utama keunggulan kompetitif adalah struktur biaya usaha dan kemampuannya mendiferensiasi usaha dari pesaingnya.

    Kepemilikan satu atau kedua keunggulan kompetitif biasanya menikmati profitabilitas diatas rata-rata dalam industrinya. Usaha yang tidak memiliki keunggulan kompetitif, salah satu atau keduanya, biasanya maksimal hanya menikmati keuntungan rata-rata industri atau dibawah rata-rata industri.[1]

    Bentuk keuntungan kepemilikan 2 sumber keunggulan komparatif pada satu waktu adalah tingkat profitabilitas yang paling tinggi dibanding pesaingnya dan secara rata-rata industri. Pemilihan strategi prioritas bertumpu pada tingkat keuntungan yang lebih superior dibanding pesaingnya. Di tingkat produk, pemilihan strategi usaha seharusnya berbasis pada aktivitas kompetensi inti dan rantai nilai yang bisa melestarikan kedua keunggulan kompetitif secara simultan.

    Kepemimpinan Biaya sebagai Keunggulan Kompetitif

    Menurut National Correctional Industries Association (2007), keunggulan kompetitif bisa diartikan sebagai satu kondisi dimana perusahaan bisa untung lebih banyak, lebih lama (long term), daripada pesaingnya. Keunggulan yang dimaksud adalah berupa kemampuan memenangkan usaha dan tetap membuat keuntungan. Di sisi lain, penurunan harga bukanlah praktek keunggulan biaya, melainkan mengurangi keuntungan.

    Dua jenis keunggulan kompetitif adalah kepemimpinan biaya dan diferensiasi. Beberapa cara mendapatkan keunggulan biaya:

    1. Memberikan manfaat yang sama dengan pesaing lainnya pada harga yang sama, tetapi pada biaya yang lebih rendah. Di sisi lain, pengurangan biaya bisa berhasil bila persepsi nilai tidak berubah.
    2. Kumulasi biaya (seluruh aktivitas yang menciptakan nilai produk) lebig kecil dari pesaing.
    3. Struktur biaya lebih rendah yang dibuat dari awal (built-in).
    4. Pesaing tidak mudah menduplikasi.
    5. Bisa terkait dengan perlengkapan, bahan baku, jaringan (linkages), pembelajaran, operasi, lokasi, proses, distribusi, dan volume.

    Buruh murah merupakan keunggulan biaya terbesar. Pertumbuhan produktivitas (jumlah output yang lebih banyak per jam) telah membuat biaya buruh menempati porsi yang lebih kecil dari biaya produk. Rasio biaya buruh terhadap harga merupakan salah satu bentuk keunggulan kompetitif. Beberapa bentuk keunggulan kompetitif lainnya mencakup tahan lama, layanan, reputasi, fungsionalitas, dan kemudahan pembelian.

    Menurut Pearce dan Robinson (2007: 234-237), strategi biaya rendah merupakan strategi usaha yang mencari cara membangun keunggulan kompetitif jangka panjang dengan menekankan dan menyempurnakan aktivitas rantai nilai yang bisa dicapai dengan tingkat biaya secara substansil dibawah pesaingnya yang mana bisa disamakan pada basis kesinambungan. Hal ini bisa berdampak pada persaingan harga yang lebih rendah dari pesaingnya dan usahanya bisa tetap berjalan.

    Keberhasilan usaha berdasarkan kepemimpinan biaya mensyaratkan usaha yang mampu menyediakan produk atau jasa pada biaya lebih rendah dari yang dilakukan pesaingnya. Dan keunggulan biaya tersebut harus berkesinambungan. Beberapa keahlian dan sumber daya yang membidani kepemimpinan biaya:

    1. Kesinambungan investasi modal dan akses terhadap modal.
    2. Keahlian rekayasa proses.
    3. Pengawasan ketat pada kegiatan teknis inti atau buruh.
    4. Produk atau jasa yang dirancang demi kemudahan produksi atau penyampaian (delivery).
    5. Sistem distribusi berbiaya rendah.

    Berdasarkan keahlian dan sumber daya tersebut, suatu usaha harus bisa menyelesaikan satu atau lebih banyak aktivitas dalam aktivitas rantai nilainya (mendapatkan bahan baku, mengolahnya menjadi produk, memasarkan produk, dan mendistribusikan produk atau mendukung aktivitas) dengan sikap yang lebih cost-effective dari pada pesaingnya atau usaha tersebut harus bisa mengkonfigurasi-ulang rantai nilainya demi mencapai keunggulan biaya.

    Beberapa persyaratan organisasi guna mendukung dan memelihara aktivitas kepemimpinan biaya:

    1. Kontrol ketat atas biaya.
    2. Laporan kontrol yang rutin dan terinci.
    3. Berorientasi pada perbaikan yang kontinyu dan benchmarking.
    4. Terstrukturnya organisasi dan tanggung jawab.
    5. Insentif berbasis ketepatan pemenuhan target kuantitatif yang ketat.

    Bagan – 5.            Contoh-contoh cara usaha mencapai keunggulan kompetitif melalui kepemimpinan biaya.
    Sumber:                Michael Porter, On Competition, HBS Press, 1998; dalam John A. Pearce II dan Richard B. Robinson, Jr., Strategic Management, hal.236.

    Beberapa aktivitas berbiaya rendah yang bisa dilestarikan dan memberikan satu atau beberapa keunggulan relatif terhadap kekuatan industri kunci seharusnya menjadi basis kunci bagi strategi kompetitif usaha, antara lain:

    1. Keunggulan biaya rendah yang mengurangi kesamaan tekanan penetapan harga dari pembeli.
    2. Keunggulan biaya rendah yang wujud dan berkesinambungan bisa mendorong pesaing ke wilayah lain, mengurangi persaingan harga.
    3. Pendatang baru, yang bersaing dalam hal harga dan tanpa pengalaman untuk mereplikasi setiap keunggulan biaya, harus berhadapan pemimpin biaya yang sudah mapan.
    4. Keunggulan biaya rendah seharusnya mengurangi daya tarik produk pengganti.
    5. Marjin yang lebih tinggi membolehkan produsen berbiaya rendah menahan kenaikan biaya pemasok dan sering mendapatkan kesetiaan pemasok sepanjang waktu.
    6. Banyak aktivitas yang menghemat biaya mudah diduplikasi.
    7. Kepemimpinan biaya eksklusif bisa menjadi perangkap.
    8. Pemotongan biaya yang obsesif bisa mengecilkan keunggulan kompetitif lainnya yang melibatkan atribut kunci daripada produk.
    9. Perbedaan biaya sering menurun sepanjang waktu.

    Diferensiasi sebagai Keunggulan Kompetitif

    Keunggulan diferensiasi wujud ketika manfaat yang diberikan lebih besar dari pesaingnya. Dengan manfaat yang lebih besar, produsen bisa memberikan harga yang lebih tinggi. Dalam prosesnya, diferensiasi merupakan proses menciptakan perbedaan di benak konsumen, antara satu produsen dengan pesaing lainnya.

    Beberapa bentuk diferensiasi yang dirasakan konsumen mencakup rasa yang lebih baik, menciptakan kesan lebih muda, memberikan jaminan yang lebih baik. Kesemua produk tersebut berpotensi menurunkan biaya dalam jangka lebih panjang. Keunggulan diferensiasi bisa bekerja bila konsumen mempercayai adanya diferensiasi atau tahu kenyataannya. Mengklaim adanya diferensiasi tidak membuatnya jadi nyata.

    Semakin tinggi tingkat diferensiasi yang dilakukan, semakin jauh persaingan dalam bentuk harga. Konsumen hanya akan menerima informasi yang mereka sudah tahu atau percaya. Produk atau perusahaan anda sudah menempati ruang dalam pikirran konsumen.

    Menurut Pearce dan Robinson (2007: 237-239), diferensiasi merupakan strategi usaha yang mencari cara membangun keunggulan kompetitif dengan produk atau jasanya dengan menjadikannya ‘berbeda’ dari produk saingannya berdasarkan fitur, kinerja, dan faktor lain yang tidak langsung berhubungan dengan biaya dan harga. Perbedaan hanya satu yang susah untuk diciptakan dan/atau sukar dikopi atau diimitasi.

    Strategi diferensiasi mensyaratkan usaha yang memiliki keunggulan kompetitif yang membisakan usaha menyediakan pembeli sesuatu yang unik bernilai. Strategi diferensiasi yang berhasil membisakan usaha menyediakan produk atau jasa yang dipersepsikan bernilai lebih tinggi bagi pembeli pada ‘biaya yang berbeda’ dibawah ‘premi nilai’bagi pembeli.

    Dengan kata lain, pembeli merasakan tambahan biaya saat membeli produk atau jasa yang dinilai lebih rendah nilainya dari produk atau jasa bila dibandingkan dengan berbagai pilihan alternatif lainnya. Diferensiasi biasanya timbul dari satu atau banyak aktivitas dalam rantai nilai yang menciptakan nilai unik dan penting bagi pembeli.

    Satu usaha dapat melakukan diferensiasi dengan menunjukkan kinerja aktivitas nilai yang ada atau mengkonfigurasi-ulang dengan cara yang unik. Dan kesinambungan diferensiasi tergantung dua hal, yakni kelanjutan persepsi nilai yang tinggi di mata pembeli dan kurangnya imitasi dari pesaingnya.

    Beberapa keahlian dan sumber daya kunci guna membangun strategi berbasis diferensiasi melalui penciptaan basis keunggulan kompetitif yang berkelanjutan dan mendasar, antara lain:

    1. Kemampuan pemasaran yang kuat.
    2. Rekayasa produk.
    3. Bakat dan kemampuan kreatif.
    4. Kemampuan yang kuat dalam riset dasar.
    5. Reputasi perusahaan dalam hal kepemimpinan mutu dan teknis.
    6. Tradisi yang panjang di industri atau kombinasi yang unik pada keahlian dari usaha lain.
    7. Kerjasama yang kuat dari saluran (pemasaran).
    8. Kerjasama yang kuat dari pemasok komponen utama dari produk atau jasa.

    Bagan – 6.            Contoh-contoh cara suatu usaha (terhadap aktivitas rantai nilai) mencapai keunggulan kompetitif melalui diferensiasi.
    Sumber:                Michael Porter, On Competition, HBS Press, 1998; dalam John A. Pearce II dan Richard B. Robinson, Jr., Strategic Management, hal.238.Beberapa persyaratan organisasi guna mendukung dan memelihara aktivitas aktivitas diferensiasi:

    1. Koordinasi yang kuat antara fungsi-fungsi litbang, pengembangan produk, dan pemasaran.
    2. Pengukuran dan insentif subjektif, daripada pengukuran kuantitatif.
    3. Berbagai fasilitas guna menarik buruh berkeahlian tinggi, ilmuwan, dan orang kreatif.
    4. Tradisi kedekatan terhadap pelanggan kunci.
    5. Beberapa personil yang ahli di bidang penjualan dan operasi, teknis dan pemasaran.

    Beberapa aktivitas, yang menyediakan satu atau lebih banyak peluang relatif terhadap kekuatan-kekuatan industri yang pokok, seharusnya menjadi basis aspek diferensiasi dari strategi usaha yang kompetitif:

    1. Rivalry is reduced when a business successfully differentiates itself.
    2. Buyers are less sensitive to prices for effectively differentiated products.
    3. Brand loyalty is hard for new entrants to overcome.

    Managers examining differentiation-based advantages must take potential risks into account as they commit their business to these advantages. Some of the more common ways risks arise are the followings:

    1. Imitation narrows perceived differentiation, rendering differentiation meaningless.
    2. Technological changes that nullify past investments or learning.
    3. The cost difference between low-cost competitors and the differentiated business becomes too great for differentiation to hold brand loyalty.

    Kecepatan sebagai Keunggulan Kompetitif

    Speed-based strategies, or rapid responses to customer requests or market and technological changes, have become a major source of competitive advantage for numerous firms in today’s intensely competitive global economy. Speed is certainly a form of differentiation, but it is more than that. Speed involves:

    1. the availability of a rapid response to a customer by providing current products quicker,
    2. accelerating new-product development or improvement,
    3. quickly adjusting production processes, and
    4. making decisions quickly.

    While low cost and differentiation may provide important competitive advantages, managers in tomorrow’s successful companies will base their strategies on creating speed-based competitive advantages.

    This strategy has been adopted widely by Welch as he transformed a fading GE into one of Wall Street’s best performers over the past 25 years. Below are his words in A CEO Who Can’t Be Cloned, BusinessWeek, 17.09.2001:

    Speed is really the driving force that everyone is after. Faster products, faster product cycles to market. Better response time to customers … Satisfying customers, getting faster communications, moving with more agility, all these things are easier when one is small. And these are all characteristics one needs in a fast-moving global environment.

    Speed-based strategies are business strategies built around functional capabilities and activities that allow the company to meet customer needs directly or indirectly more rapidly than its main competitors.

    Speed-based competitive advantages can be created around several activities:

    1. Customer responsiveness.
    2. Product development cycles.
    3. Product or service improvements.
    4. Speed in delivery or distribution.
    5. Information sharing and technology.

    Some required skills and resources to foster speed:

    1. Process engineering skills.
    2. Excellent inbound and outbound logistics.
    3. Technical people in sales and customer service.
    4. High levels of automation.
    5. Corporate reputation for quality or technical leadership.
    6. Flexible manufacturing capabilities.
    7. Strong downstream partners.
    8. Strong cooperation from suppliers of major components of the product or service.

    Some organisational requirements to support and sustain rapid response activities:

    1. Strong coordination among functions in R&D, product development, and marketing.
    2. Major emphasis on customer satisfaction in incentive programs.
    3. Strong delegation to operating personnel.
    4. Tradition of closeness to key customers.
    5. Some personnel skilled in sales and operations – technical and marketing.
    6. Empowered customer service personnel.

    These rapid response capabilities create competitive advantages in several ways:

    1. They create a way to lessen rivalry because they had availability of something that a rival may not have.
    2. It can allow the business to charge buyers more, engender loyalty, or otherwise enhance the business’s position relative to its buyers.
    3. Particularly where impressive customer response is involved, businesses can generate supplier cooperation and concessions because their business ultimately benefits from increased revenue.
    4. Finally, substitute products and new entrants find themselves trying to keep up with the rapid changes rather than introducing them.

    While the notion of speed-based competitive advantage is exciting, it has risks managers must consider:

    1. First, speeding up activities that haven’t been conducted in a fashion that prioritises rapid responses should only be done after considerable attention to training, reorganisation, and/or reengineering.
    2. Second, some industries –stable, mature ones that have very minimal levels of change– may not offer much advantage to the firm that introduces some forms of rapid response. Customers in such settings may prefer the slower pace or the lower costs currently available, or they may have long time frames in purchasing such that speed is not that important to them.

    Skala Kecil dan Fokus terhadap Pasar sebagai Keunggulan Kompetitif

    Market focus is a generic strategy that applies a differentiation strategy approach, or a low-cost strategy approach, or a combination – and does solely in a narrow (or ‘focused’) market niche rather trying to do so across the broader market. The narrow focus may be geographically defined or defined by product type features, or target customer type, or some combination of these.

    Small companies, at least the better ones, usually thrive because they serve narrow market niches. This is usually called market focus, the extent to which a business concentrates on a narrowly defined market. It usually is differentiating the product and its sales force, achieving low costs in promotion and delivery, and making rapid, immediate response to any owner request its normal practice.

    Some capabilities were created, along with resources, and value chain activities that achieved differentiation, low-costm and rapid response competitive advantages within the niche market that would be hard for other firms, particularly mass market-oriented firms, to replicate.

    Focus lets a business ‘learn’ its target customers –their needs, special considerations they want accommodated– and establish personal relationships in ways that ‘differentiate’ the smaller firm or make it more valuable to the target customer. Low costs can also be achieved, filling niche needs on a buyer’s operations that larger rivals either do not want to bother with or cannot do as cost effectively.

    Cost advantage often centers around the high level of customised service the focused, smaller business can provide. And perhaps the greatest competitive weapon that can arise is rapid response. With enhanced knowledge of its customers and intricacies of their operations, the small, focused company builds up organisational knowledge about timing-sensitive ways to work with a customer. Often the needs of that narrow set of customers represent a large part of the small, focused business’s revenues.

    The risk of focus is that you attract major competitors who have waited for your business to prove the market. Likewise, the publicly traded companies built around focus strategies become takeover targets for large firms seeking to fill out a product portfolio. And perhaps the greatest risk of all is slipping into the illusion that it is focus itself, and not some special form of low cost, differentiation, or rapid response, that is creating the business’s success.

    Managers evaluating opportunities to build competitive advantage should link strategies to resources, capabilitiesm and value chain activities that exploit low cost, differentiation, and rapid response competitive advantages. When advantageous, they should consider ways to use focus to leverage these advantages.

    One way business managers can enhance their likelihood of identifying these opportunities is to consider several different ‘generic’ industry environments from the perspective of the typical value chain activities most often linked to sustained competitive advantages in those unique industry situations.

    Pilihan Strategis Meraih Keunggulan Kompetitif menurut Tahapan Evolusi Industri

    1. Industri yang sedang tumbuh (emerging).
    2. Industri yang sedang berkembang (growing).
    3. Industri yang sudah dewasa (mature).
    4. Industri yang sedang menurun (declining).
    5. Industri yang terfragmen.
    6. Industri yang mendunia.
    7. Pemilihan berdasarkan matriks.
    8. Pemilihan berdasarkan cluster.
    9. Pemilihan antara diversifikasi atau integrasi.

    [1] Hasil dua studi empiris memperlihatkan kecenderungan tersebut, yakni:

    1. R.B. Robinson dan J.A. Pearce, “Planned Patterns of Strategic Behavior and Their Relationship to Business Unit Performance,” Strategic Management Journal, 9, No.1, 1988, hal.43-60.
    2. G.G. Dess dan G.T. Lumpkin, Emerging Issues in Strategy Process Research, dalam Handbook of Strategic Management, M.A. Hitt, R.E. Freeman, dan J.S. Harrison (eds), Blackwell, Oxford, 2001, hal.3-34.
     
  • Virtual Chitchatting 12:04 AM on 2011/04/07 Permalink
    Tags: comparative advantage, , competitive strategy, keunggulan bersaing, keunggulan komparatif, kompetisi, manajemen strategis, persaingan, strategi bersaing, strategi manajemen, strategic management   

    Marketing people, practitioners and professors, donot know how to define competitive advantages 

    My comment:

    Orang marketing, baik praktisi maupun teorisi, sama-sama tukang kecap yang nggak pernah tahu dan mau tahu apa dan bagaimana kecap itu sendiri.

    Dari sekian ratus megabyte file sampah yang berhubungan dengan competitive advantage, tak ada satu pun yang mendefinisikan apa itu competitive advantage (keunggulan bersaing). dan bagaimana hubungannya dengan comparative advantage (keunggulan komparatif), competitive strategy (strategi bersaing), strategic management (manajemen strategis), apa itu kompetitif dan kompetisi (persaingan), apa yang dijadikan persaingan….

    Tukang kecap, tukang obat, sama aja. Mereka itu tak ubahnya tukang jual jigong.

    Ada sih yang sudah buat definisi tentang strategi bersaing, seperti Anne Lukkarila dan Katri Pitko, Strategic Management, tapi koq kayaknya kurang ngegigit gitu.

    dengan kata lain, mereka menganggap semua orang sudah tahu apa itu arti ‘keunggulan bersaing’. Naif bangetkah? terlalu taken for granted. duuhh….., basi banget nih profesor dan profesi tukang kecap.

    btw, siapa sih tukang kecap nomor satu di indonesia sekarang ini? dia suka lempar batu dan suka ngumpetin udang di atas peyek.

    aha, nugraha besoes yang tidak besus. gile, 20 tahun jadi sekjen pssi, sekarang nyembah-nyembah ke agum gumelar, atau ngemis-ngemis?

    bagaimana kabar si udin yang sangat kental dengan super-kasus cengkeh BPPC, Dekopin, mantan napi, setelah dipecat VIVA Cosmetics? Dempul lagi tuh muka supaya bisa tampil lagi di media massa…

    eh, kok ngomongin politik sih…

    Kutipan Istilah Competitive Advantage

    Kevin Lane Keller, Building Strong Brands: Three Models for Developing and Implementing Brand Plans, Tuck School of Business, Dartmouth College, 12.11.2008.

    Three models of branding are presented to help guide managerial efforts:

    1. Brand Positioning: Describes how to guide integrated marketing to maximize competitive advantages.
    2. Brand Resonance: Describes how to create intense, actively loyal relationships with customers.
    3. Brand Value Chain: Describes how to trace the value creation process to better understand the financial impact of marketing expenditures and investments.

    Three Tools to Facilitate Brand Planning

    Holistic marketing requires careful planning and implementation. To help guide these efforts, three models of increasing scope are presented:

    1. brand positioning model describes how to guide integrated marketing to maximize competitive advantages;
    2. brand resonance model describes how to create intense, activity loyalty relationships with customers; and
    3. brand value chain model describes how to trace the value creation process to better understand the financial impact of marketing expenditures and investments.

    The Four Components of a Superior Competitive Positioning

    1. Competitive frames of reference
      1. Nature of competition
      2. Target market
    2. Develop unique brand points-of-difference (POD’s)
      1. Desirable to consumer
      2. Deliverable by the brand
      3. Differentiating from competitors
    3. Establish shared brand points-of-parity(POP’s)
      1. Negate competitor points-of-difference
      2. Demonstrate category credentials
    4. Brand mantras
      1. Short 3-to-5 word phrases that capture key POD’s & the irrefutable essence or spirit of the brand.

    Points-of-difference

    1. Distinctive taste profile
    2. Optimistic view of life
    3. Classic, iconic symbolism & imagery

    Points-of-parity

    1. Contemporary, up-to-date
    2. Refreshing flavor

    Brand slogan: “Side of Life”

    Identifying & Choosing POP’s & POD’s

    1. Desirable? (consumer perspective)
      1. Personally relevant
      2. Believable & credible
    1. Deliverable? (firm perspective)
      1. Feasible
      2. Profitable
      3. Pre-emptive, defensible & difficult to attack
    1. Differentiating? (competitive perspective)
      1. Distinctive & superior
      2. Sustainable

    Janelle Barlow and Paul Stewart, Branded Customer Service: The New Competitive Edge, Berrett-Koehler, San Francisco, Oct.2004.

    Janelle Barlow and Paul Stewart show that delivering on-brand service—service that supports and extends a company’s brand— can provide enormous competitive advantage.

    Brennan Davis, The MarketForensics System, Management Sciences Group, 29.09.2004.

    Brand strategy, brand score-card, brand competitiveness

    Menurut Davis, keunggulan strategis (strategic advantage) merupakan satu kondisi keseimbangan dimana tiga elemen, yakni merek, konsumen, dan pasar, cocok bersama. Penyesuaian (alignment) yang lebih baik membuat keunggulan strategis semakin lebih besar, yakni dengan tercapainya tujuan peningkatan nilai. Nilai hanya akan tercipta dalam jangka panjang ketika pertumbuhan bersifat berkesinambungan.

    Keunggulan strategis bisa dinyatakan dalam ukuran kekuatan merek (brand power) atau kekuatan sinyal (signal strength), kecocokan merek-konsumen, dan kecocokan merek-pasar. Ukuran kekuatan merek bisa dilihat pada kecocokan merek-konsumen, kecocokan merek-pasar, dan kecocokan konsumen-pasar. Sementara kekuatan sinyal merupakan kombinasi hasil (return) empat upaya branding dalam bentuk pengalaman, mutu, imagery, dan identitas.

    Di sisi lain, pada akhir 1980-an, sumber keunggulan bersaing (competitive advantage) dan pendapatan masa depan (future earnings) terletak pada upaya pembangunan merek (brand-building) sebagai aset (brand assets) dan modal (brand equity). Pada pertengahan tahun 1990-an, berkembang pemikiran bahwa lebih murah mempertahankan pelanggan yang sudah ada, ketimbang bersaing untuk mendapatkan pelanggan baru (customer equity).[1]


    [1] M.J. Xavier, The fall of traditional brand management: Making way for CRM and business equity; Dean, Academy for Management Excellence, Chennai, India.

    Christian Blümelhuber, Advanced Marketing, Université Libre de Bruxelles, 07.11.2005.

    Bagi perusahaan, beberapa manfaat branding:

    1. Source of sustainable competitive advantage

    ” Differentiation

    ” Price premiums

    ” Channel power

    ” Increased effectiveness of marketing programs

    ” Increased efficiency of marketing programs

    1. Scale and scope economies in customer acquisition and retention

    ” Encourages trial of new products, cross sales

    1. Asset with market value
    2. Employee attraction/retention

    Points of Parity vs Points of Difference

    PoP:  No reason why not

    may be shared with other brands (Schema, Expectation, Must-be dimension) to be a credible and legitimate offering

    Competitive PoP´s

    PoD: Competitive advantage

    Reason-why

    Brandon Westling, Building Brand Equity in the Wine Industry, Wine Sales and Marketing Consultants, Healdsburg, CA, Nov.2001.

    Beberapa keunggulan kompetitif dari high brand equity:

    • A company will enjoy reduced marketing costs because of consumer brand awareness and loyalty.

    • A company will have more trade leverage in bargaining with distributors and retailers because consumers expect them to carry the brand.

    • A company can charge a higher price than its competitors because the brand is perceived as of higher quality.

    • A company can more easily launch extensions because the brand name carries high credibility.

    • The brand offers the company some defense against price competition.

    Katherine N. Lemon, Roland T. Rust, and Valarie A. Zeithaml, What Drives Customer Equity,  Marketing Management, American Marketing Association, Vol.10, No.1, 2001, pp.20-25.

    customer equity is key to long-term success. Understanding how to grow and manage customer equity is more complex. How to grow it is of utmost importance, and doing it well can create a significant competitive advantage. There are three drivers of customer equity—value equity, brand equity, and relationship equity (also known as retention equity).

    Ljiljana Stanković dan Suzana Djukić, Strategic Brand Management in Global Environment, Economics and Organization Vol.3, No.2, 2006, pp.125-133.

    Bagan: Building brand equity

    Sumber: L.K. Keller, Strategic Brand Management, Building, Measuring, and Managing Brand Equity, ed.2, Prentice Hall, 2003.

    Herbjørn Nysveen, Per E. Pedersen, dan Helge Thorbjørnsen, Using mobile services to strengthen brand relationships: The effects of SMS and MMS channel additions on brand knowledge, satisfaction, loyalty, and main channel use, Samfunns-og NæringslivsForskning As, Bergen, July 2003.

    Competitive advantage is defined as the superior customer value provided by the complementary product relative to competitors. To attain competitive advantage, companies should strive to build strong brands and strong brand relationships.

    Sengupta (1998) proposed that organizational fit, firm size, complementary product opportunity, multiplier effect, and innovativeness all had positive effects on the competitive advantage of complementary products. Empirical results showed support for the effect of innovativeness and the multiplier effect on competitive advantage of complementary products.

    Sengupta, S. (1998): Some approaches to Complementary Product Strategy, Journal of Product Innovation Management, vol. 15, pp. 352-367.

    Innovativeness points to the degree to which a complementary product serve customers need better than existing products. The multiplier effect is the incremental sales volume of the core product that the complementary product generates. The strength of the multiplier comes from the incremental value that the new and complementary product gives customers of the core product. This multiplier effect is unique to complementary products in that increased use of the complementary product increases the use of the core product.

    It is revealed by Kleinschmidt and Cooper (1991) that innovative products bring greater reward to companies. The more innovative the complementary product the greater is its ability to provide customer value and differentiate the brand or company from competitive brands or companies. Consequently, increasing innovativeness of complementary products increases the complementary product’s positive effect on competitive advantage. Thus, by focusing on key technologies and innovative solutions (e.g. SMS and MMS services), complementary products have the potential to differentiate brands from its competitors in the minds of the consumers. This differentiation will result in better performance and competitive advantages.

    Kleinschmidt, E. J., and Cooper, R. G. (1991): The Impact on Product Innovativeness on Performance, Journal of Product Innovation Management, vol. 8, pp. 240-251.

    Companies may obtain competitive advantages by adding new channels for marketing and distribution. In particular, this potential can be realized if the services presented are related and integrated across the channels being used. Thus, the use of synergistic channels, meaning mutual enforcement of the channels used, should be implemented by companies. In such situations, addition of new channels will lead to increased use of existing channels (complementary channels). Furthermore, customers will get an increased flexibility in their channel choice when using a service, probably increasing their overall satisfaction with the service.

    Valerie Lee Schutte, Building Brand Equity: Execution, Brand Implementation and Brand Management, The Design Depot, July 2004.

    The more you know about your competition the stronger brand equity you can build. You can create a successful competitive advantage by your ability to differentiate yourself. Consider creating a folder on each of your key competitors. This information will also be a gold mine when it comes to creating and refining your selling process.

    Kao, Key Drivers for Profitable Growth: Brand Equity, Superior R&D and TCR (Total Cost Reduction) activities, dalam Kao Annual Report 2001.

    Our R&D has also produced a competitive advantage in developing innovative and unique products and demonstrated ability to link R&D to meeting emerging consumer needs supports the Company’s success.

    Rainer Zimmermann, ed, Brand Equity Excellence, Volume 1: Brand Equity Review, BBDO, Düsseldorf, Nov.2001.

    brand positioning leads to “the set of associations and behaviors on the part of brand customers, channel members and parent corporation that permits the brand to enjoy the sustainable and differentiated competitive advantages (i.e. brand strength results in barriers to competition and, therefore, some degree of monopolistic power controlling the brand).”

    Srivastava, R. K. and Shocker, A. D. (1991): Brand Equity: a perspective on its meaning and measurement, Cambridge, U.K.: Marketing Science Institute, 1991, p.9

    Christel Binnie, Constructing University Brands Through University Research Magazines, Thesis, Department of Communication, Faculty of Arts, University of Ottawa, 2008.

    According to Aaker (1996), a pioneer and icon of branding, ‘brands are pivotal resources for generating and sustaining competitive advantage’. Such an advantage is thought to be generated through the words and actions of consumers, resulting in the value of a brand or brand equity (Hoeffler & Keller, 2003).

    D.A. Aaker, Building strong brands, The Free Press, 1996.

    S. Hoeffler dan K.L. Keller, The marketing advantages of strong brands. Brand Management, 10(6), 2003, 421-445.

    Kitchen and Schultz (2001) argue that “creating, and maintaining positive relationships with publics or stakeholders” should be added to the traditional two pillars of marketing: customer needs and competitive advantage (p. 88).

    P.J. Kitchen dan D.E. Schultz, Raising the Corporate Umbrella: Corporate Communication in the 21st Century. Palgrave, New York, 2001.

    Aaker (2003) emphasizes the multiple benefits of a well differentiated brand: added credibility, easy recall among consumers, more efficient and effective communication, and a sustainable competitive advantage.

    D. Aaker, The Power of the Branded Differentiator, MIT Sloan Management Review, Fall 2003, 83-87.

    Francisco Guzmán, A Brand Building Literature Review, Excerpt from PhD Thesis “Brand Building Towards Social Values: Associating to Public Goods”, Esade, 22.02.2005

    Urde (1999) presents Brand Orientation as another brand building model that focuses on brands as strategic resources. “Brand Orientation is an approach in which the processes of the organization revolve around the creation, development, and protection of brand identity in an ongoing interaction with target customers with the aim of achieving lasting competitive advantages in the form of brands” (p. 117-118). Brand orientation focuses on developing brands in a more active and deliberate manner, starting with the brand identity as a strategic platform. It can be said that as a consequence of this orientation the brand becomes an “unconditional response to customer needs and wants” (p. 120).

    Mats Urde, “Brand Orientation: A Mindset for Building Brands into Strategic Resources”, Journal of Marketing Management, 15, 2003, 117-133.

    High brand equity is considered to be a competitive advantage since: it implies that firms can charge a premium; there is an increase in customer demand; extending a brand becomes easier; communication campaigns are more effective; there is better trade leverage; margins can be greater; and the company becomes less vulnerable to competition (Bendixen, Bukasa, and Abratt 2003).

    Mike Bendixen, Kalala A. Bukasa, and Russell Abratt, “Brand Equity in the Business-to-Business Market”, Industrial Marketing Management, 33, 2003, 371-380.

    ResearchAndMarkets.com, Integrated Marketing Communication, 26.05.2009.

    The ultimate goals of IMC are to institute customer-oriented sensibilities and business processes in all aspects of the organization and its operations to add value for customers, provide a framework for resource allocation, and achieve sustainable competitive advantages.

    Camilla Kulluvaara dan Johanna Tornberg, Integrated Marketing Communication and Tourism: A Case Study of Icehotel AB, Bachelor’s Thesis, International Business and Economics Programme, Department of Business Administration and Social Sciences, Luleå University of Technology, 09.06.2003.

    To gain competitive advantage, it is becoming increasingly important for tourist marketers to discern how travelers perceive a competing set of choice of alternatives (destinations) and to their offerings of travel and tourism activities, attractions and amenities. (Javalgi, Thomas & Rao, 1992)

    G.R. Javalgi, E.G. Thomas, dan S.R. Rao, US Pleasure Travellers Perceptions of Selected European Destinations: European Journal of Marketing, Vol.26, No.7, 1992, pp. 45-64.

    The objectives of any promotional strategy can be drawn from an appropriate mixture of the roles of promotion; to increase sales, maintain or improve market share, create or improve brand recognition, create a favourable climate for future sales, inform and educate the market, create a competitive advantage relative to competitor’s products or market position and to improve promotional efficiency.

    Dalmé Mulder, Driving.IMC@home.org/effectiveness (Driving integrated marketing communication home for organisational effectiveness), ANZCA2007 Conference Proceedings, 10.02.2008.

    Kitchen, Brignell and Tao (2004) suggest that IMC is the major communications development of the last decade, and that it is a potential driver of competitive advantage.

    P.J. Kitchen, J. Brignell, dan L. Tao, The emergence of IMC: A theoretical perspective. Journal of Advertising Research, 2004, 44(1): 19-30.

    IMC is defined as a dynamic, holistic approach, integrated into all strategic levels of an organisation. It manages and fuses every point of contact between the organisation and its stakeholders. Through this coordinated efforts it supports a targeted, integrated, consistent brand communication strategy for the purpose of building positive lifetime relationships through data-driven techniques, by customer-conscious employees ultimately giving an organisation a competitive advantage and brand equity.

    29.12.2004

    marketing research (that is to learn more about their customers’ requirements, expectations, perceptions, and satisfaction levels) provides a foundation for building competitive advantage through well-informed segmenting, targeting, and positioning decisions.

    A positioning built on meaningful differences, supported by appropriate strategy and implementation, can help the company build competitive advantage

    Guna Ozolina, Differences in Applied Marketing Communications for Selected Product Classes in Cosmetics and Household, Telecommunication and Information Technology, Food and Beverages, Amusement and Culture Industries, Master’s Thesis, Tallinn University, May 2008.

    companies are rather reluctant to apply new tools if they are not tried by somebody else before, they do not realize that being a pioneer gives competitive advantage.

    Tauno Jokinen et al (eds), Estiem Vision of Cycles Seminar, Oulu University, Finland, 03-04.02.2006.

    Kati Seppälä dan Jukka Päkkilä, Environmental Management.

    according to Porter (1985), there are two main strategies for reaching competitive advantage; cost leadership and differentiation.

    Antti Tauriainen dan Ville Anttila, Information and Knowledge Management.

    Core competency: Know-how, skills, knowledge that helps and sustains companys value chain towards customers and gives competitive advantages. (Hamel and Prahalad 1994)

    Intellectual capital management (ICM). Categorizes and measures IC and finding knowledge and intellectual capital to create competitive advantage. Points direction for company’s future investments in terms of company’s internal education and training. Aims at increasing company’s IC and targets the improvement investments to the field of core competencies

    Suvi Kumpulainen, Quality Management.

    In the middle 1990s started to strengthen an idea that it is not enough if good quality is created only inside the company: quality management was considered partly as an intercompany total quality culture but also as a relationship between the companies. Quality became a critical competitive advantage. (Laatuakatemia)

    Anne Lukkarila dan Katri Pitko, Strategic Management.

    Competitive Strategy

    Competition is at the core of the success or failure of firms. Competition determines the appropriateness of a firm’s activities that can contribute to its performance, such as innovations. Competitive strategy is the search for a favourable competitive position in an industry. Competitive strategy’s goal is to establish a profitable and sustainable position against the forces that determine industry competition. (Porter, 1985.)

    Competitive strategy defines the ways that a firm creates value to its customers and distinguishes from its competitors. Other purpose of competitive strategy is to ensure the accomplishing of strategic cost effectiveness- and market position goals. (Hannus, 1999)

    Different types of firms exist because they want to satisfy the different type of needs of people or organizations. Demand and supply meet each other in competition situation, and customers have alternative ways to satisfy their needs. They want to have the best profit/cost –relation available. To be competitive, a firm has to have some kinds of competitive advantages. (Kamensky, 2000)

    Competitive advantages cannot be understood by looking at the firm as a whole. It stems from the many discrete activities a firm performs in designing, producing, marketing, delivering, and supporting its product. Each of these activities can contribute to a firm’s relative cost position and create a basis for differentiation. (Porter, 1985)

    Porter (1985) argued that there are two ”basic types of competitive advantage a firm can possess: low cost or differentiation”. These combine with the “scope” of a particular business –the range of market segments targeted- to produce “three generic strategies mediocrity for achieving above-average performance in an industry: cost leadership, differentiation and focus”. (Mintzberg, 1998)

    Cost leadership strategy aims at being a low-cost producer. The cost leadership strategy is realized through gaining experience, investing in large scale production facilities using economies of scale, and carefully monitoring overall operating costs. (Mintzberg, 1998)

    This strategy is typical for branch of businesses where prices are prescribed by the markets, and in the long run the winner is the company that has the lowest costs. The success of the cost leadership strategy is always based on lower costs than higher prices. (Kamensky, 2000)

    Differentiation strategy involves the development of unique products or services, relying on the brand/customers loyalty. A firm can offer i.e. higher quality, better performance or unique features, any of which can justify higher prices. (Mintzberg, 1998) Higher prices are reasonable only when the customer feels that they gain some kind of extra value that they don’t get form the competitors, and they are ready to pay for it. Differentiation is a very demanding strategy and it requires strong will to get competitive advantages and sustaining them. (Kamensky, 2000)

    Focus strategy wants to serve narrow market segments. A firm can focus on particular customer groups, product lines, or geographic markets. The strategy can be either “differentiation focus”, where the differentiation happens in focal market, or “overall cost leadership focus”, where the firm sells at low price in the focal market. The firm is able to concentrate on developing its own knowledge and competences. (Mintzberg, 1998)

    Harri Salo, Product Returns: Causes and Implications

    Reverse logistics can be a factor in creating competitive advantage (Trebilcock 2002b; Richey 2004

    • A brand name (eg. Toyota) may represent a good reputation in product service, which furthermore can be decisive factor for buying decision. If the return is not handled properly, the vulnerability is that the consumer may not buy the same brand again (Zieger 2003).

    Timothy J. Sturgeon dan Richard K. Lester, The New Global Supply-Base: New Challenges for Local Suppliers in East Asia, Paper prepared for the World Bank’s Project on East Asia’s Economic Future, Industrial Performance Center, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Feb.2003.

    Deverticalization.

    Lead firms have focused on the areas and functions that they believe to be essential to the creation and maintenance of competitive advantage, especially product innovation, marketing, and other activities related to brand development, and have increasingly come to rely upon specialized suppliers to provide “non-core” functions. The belief is that by divesting non-core functions, lead firms can more quickly reap value from innovations while spreading risk in volatile markets (Venkatesan, 1992).

    Firms that develop, market, and sell electronic hardware, cars, and clothing have turned to suppliers for production and, increasingly, post-architectural (i.e., detailed) design services. By tapping the competencies of suppliers, lead firms are able to maintain substantial market presence without the fixed costs and risk of building and supporting a vertically integrated corporate organization (Sturgeon, 2000, 2002).

    Among the advantages claimed for these production networks are that they are more adaptable than an integrated firm would be, and that they are capable of providing better economic performance in highly competitive and volatile markets (Powell, 1990; Cooke and Morgan, 1993).

    Design and engineering.

    Lead firms in the advanced economies are asking their suppliers to take on more responsibility for the design and engineering of products and sub-systems. Suppliers are increasingly being chosen and brought into the development process before products are fully designed. By doing so, the lead firm is able to spread risk and reduce costs.

    When suppliers participate in prototype development, moreover, they typically improve their performance in design for manufacturability and in implementing subsequent engineering change orders. Product redesign for different markets is also easier and quicker if the suppliers are actively involved from the outset.

    Suppliers must support assemblers as a sole source for global products lines to support commonalization. We must supply the same part, with the same quality and price, in every location. If [the automaker] says to go to Argentina, we must go or lose existing, not just potential, business. Logistics are becoming a key competitive advantage; we must have the ability to move production to where customer’s facilities are.

    Dieter Ernst, Inter-Organizational Knowledge Outsourcing: What Permits Small Taiwanese Firms to Compete in the Computer Industry, East-West Center, Working Paper, No.1, Honolulu, May 2000.

    Fu-Lai Tony Yu, Ho-Don Yan, dan Shan-Yu Chen, Adaptive Entrepreneurship and Taiwan’s Economic Dynamics, Laissez-Faire, 24.07.2006

    Entrepreneurial Strategies in Taiwan

    (1) Alertness, adaptability and guerrilla entrepreneurship

    (2) Original equipment manufacture (OEM), imitation, and entrepreneurial learning

    original design manufacturing (ODM) products

    the OEM proportion has been rising and that of own-brand manufacture (OBM) falling over time

    (3) Small enterprises, flexibility and production networks

    (4) Regional arbitrage: alertness to cost reduction opportunities

    Flexibility as competitive advantage

    The electronics industry is highly volatile, with frequent and unexpected changes in demand and technology. Taiwanese firms can succeed in this industry because they are able to respond and adjust quickly to change. By combining incremental product innovation with incredibly fast speed-to-market, they have been able to establish a strong international market position relatively early in the product cycle.

    As Wang (1995/1996) notes, Taiwan’s small firms fit into the IT industry due to their “flexibility, agility and assiduity.” PC firms in Taiwan have maintained close ties with global technological markets and by hooking up with multinational corporations.

    Tung An-chi, a research fellow in economics at Academia Sinica (Taiwan’s leading thinktank), attributes this in part to the “flexibility and keen entrepreneurship of Taiwanese businessmen who learned to find all possible niches, then grow, and compete in the world market without expecting prolonged government help” (Matthews 2002).

    The primary source of this flexibility appears to be the specific organization of the domestic supply base in Taiwan, especially for parts and components. Two main features of this domestic supply base have contributed to the flexibility of Taiwanese producers, the first being an extreme form of specialization.

    By engaging in single tasks and by producing, purchasing and selling in small lots, subcontractors avoid heavy fixed capital costs. This, in turn, makes it relatively easy to shift production at relatively short notice, and with minimum costs. The second feature is a certain network structure of multiple, volatile and short-term links that involve only limited financial and technology transfers.

    Spot-market transactions play an important role, but so do “temporary spider web” arrangements that are assembled for the duration of a particular job. The result of these characteristics is a form of open and volatile production networks, arguably even more so than the highly flexible production networks that characterize California’s Silicon Valley.

    These flexible firms maximize the number of jobs in order to compensate for the razor-thin profit margins; as a result, they avoid being locked into a particular production network. Domestic supplier networks thus have been highly flexible and capable of rapid change, but short-lived and foot-loose.

    In summary, the competitive edge in the PC firms in Taiwan is sustained through the support of their competent

    suppliers. Most of the PC components are supplied by small specialized enterprises.

    On the one hand, the specialization enables small firms to deliver costcompetitive and good quality parts to the larger PC companies. On the other hand, small firms allow for greater flexibility in meeting customized requirements from buyers, such as orders of various sizes and specifications.

    These small firms are willing to provide constant technical services to large PC firms in solving their production problems. In turn, small firms also improve their technological competence (Chang 1992, p. 209).

    John Power dan Susan Whelan, A Conceptual Model of the Influence of Brand Trust on the Relationship between Consumer and Company Image, Academy of Marketing Conference (AM2005), School of Marketing, Dublin Institute of Technology, Dublin, Ireland, 05-08.07.2005

    Bruijns (2003) argues that a correlation does in fact exist between CEO image, corporate reputation and corporate performance and that intangible assets (i.e. image, symbolic leadership) are significantly responsible in gaining competitive advantage in today’s competitive markets.

    C. Bruijns, “Commentary: Should an organisation devote communication dollars to making the CEO famous?”, Prism, Vol.1, Iss.1., 2003.

    Nusrath Jahan Maldar, ed, Case Studies on Brand Management, Vol.I, Icfai Business School Case Development Centre, Hyderabad, 2007.

    However, new-age thinking provides an alternative perspective, stating that,

    • Branding is a strategic point of view, not a select set of activities

    • Branding is central to creating customer value, not just images

    • Branding is a key tool for creating and maintaining competitive advantage

    • Brand strategies must be ‘engineered’ into the marketing mix. (Holt)

    Douglas B. Holt, “Brands and Branding”, Harvard Business School (Note), Harvard Business School Publishing, 11.03.2003, p.1.

    LG Electronics, Sustainability Report 2006-2007: Action Creates Value, 21.10.2008.

    In chapters 2 and 3 of its Code of Ethics, LG Electronics stipulates that

    “Our global business activities conform to relevant laws and regulations of host nations. At the same time, we employ only fair and just means in securing our competitive advantage in the global market”

    to stress the importance of fair competition and that

    “All business transactions will occur based on the principles of fair competition with equal opportunities for all entities to participate. We build trust and cooperative relationships through fair and transparent transactions. Such relationships are built with a long-term perspective for mutual growth”

    to stress the principle of fair trade.

    To promote these principles, LG Electronics became the first Korean company in 1995 to introduce fair trade compliance program. We have since set up a related organization and steadily improved related work process, in addition to holding voluntary training and supervision activities. LG Electronics has strived to ensure that the principle of fair competition and trade is followed throughout the company’s value chains.

    LG Electronics, LG Code of Ethics, 23.04.2008

    Chapter 2. Fair Competition

    Our global business activities conform to relevant laws and regulations of the host nations. At the same time, we employ only fair and just means in securing our competitive advantage in the global market.

    LG Electronics, The LG Electronics Code of Conduct: Creating Value for our Stakeholders, 30.04.2009.

    Even sales and promotional activities can risk the Company losing its valuable competitive advantage if this knowledge is advertised prematurely.

    Intellectual property consists of:

    • Designs, technologies, inventions and other materials and information that are protected by patents, design patents, trade marks and copyrights.

    • Trade secrets, such as product designs and technologies, provide the Company a competitive advantage in remaining secret. A trade secret must never be disclosed internally or externally without specific authorization.

    Richard N. Langlois dan W. Edward Steinmueller,  “The Evolution of Competitive Advantage in the Global Semiconductor Industry: 1947-1996”, paper presented to the DRUID seminar on Industrial Dynamics and Competition, Skagen, Denmark, June 1997.

    Henri Weijo, A Concept Analysis on Modern Branding: Defining Key Concepts in Mind-Share, Emotional, Viral, and Cultural Branding, Master´s Thesis, Department of Marketing and Management, Helsinki School of Economics, 16.04.2008.

    Michael E. Porter, Competitive Advantage: Creating and Sustaining Superior Performance, Free Press, 1985.

     
c
Compose new post
j
Next post/Next comment
k
Previous post/Previous comment
r
Reply
e
Edit
o
Show/Hide comments
t
Go to top
l
Go to login
h
Show/Hide help
shift + esc
Cancel
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 25 other followers

%d bloggers like this: