1

Framework-Confusion: Market Entry, etc.

Hi!

I have questions with regard to frameworks (I'm following Victor Cheng's profitability and business situations, realizing they can be adapted to the individual situation of course, if anyone would have time to answer/discuss, sorry in advance if it's long):

1.In a "what factors should client X consider when entering the market", I often start off by mentioning 1. i.Customers, ii.Product, iii.Company, iv.Competition. I often include the market-sizing as a first point under i.Customers since it seems most important to consider the market size and growth first (althogh I'm unsure whether this could perhaps be done as a seperate heading, but minor detail).. Questions that come to mind:

--Sometimes it feels more natural to say I'd like to look at potential Revenues and Costs first. But that would effectively be a mix of frameworks and I'd like to be consistent. When using the business situations, Revenues would be decided by i. Customers/Market Size and iv. Competition (since depending on nr of competitors, I would know our market share of total market and thus Revenue). Costs, in turn, would be decided under iii. Company. Especially financial feasability and investment costs would be determined here, which could also be a starting point. This feels like jumping around a lot in the framework to explain this to the interviewer though! Anyone else has the same "issue" and perhaps advice on how to do it? I could stick with this approach, but sometimes it feels very odd.

2. When given a Profitability-case, of course there are more external variables to consider, beyond the Profitability-framework. How do you guys do it here in the beginning; do you simply start with Profitability with no mention that you will later switch framework to business situations if needed? (Victor gave no initial mention that he would look at additional factors in one of his LOMS, but to me, it could appear to the interviewer that one forgot..) Perhaps one could say something like: "I'll start off with Revenues minus Costs, this is what I want to know within each, etc, etc. [give specific mention, e.g. segment break-down, over time, industry wide or not..], then I might switch to look at i. Customers, ii.Product, iii.Company iv.Competitors to analyze more in depth". That feels a bit awkward too though! In addition, you have effectively already touched upon the customers and competition then in the profitability.

Again, I realize there's no "right" answer here and that it depends on the situation. Mainly looking to see if anyone else is confused and whether there's any relief :) Many thank you // Xie xie // Danke schön

Feel free to answer here or PM me for further discussion

Hi!

I have questions with regard to frameworks (I'm following Victor Cheng's profitability and business situations, realizing they can be adapted to the individual situation of course, if anyone would have time to answer/discuss, sorry in advance if it's long):

1.In a "what factors should client X consider when entering the market", I often start off by mentioning 1. i.Customers, ii.Product, iii.Company, iv.Competition. I often include the market-sizing as a first point under i.Customers since it seems most important to consider the market size and growth first (althogh I'm unsure whether this could perhaps be done as a seperate heading, but minor detail).. Questions that come to mind:

--Sometimes it feels more natural to say I'd like to look at potential Revenues and Costs first. But that would effectively be a mix of frameworks and I'd like to be consistent. When using the business situations, Revenues would be decided by i. Customers/Market Size and iv. Competition (since depending on nr of competitors, I would know our market share of total market and thus Revenue). Costs, in turn, would be decided under iii. Company. Especially financial feasability and investment costs would be determined here, which could also be a starting point. This feels like jumping around a lot in the framework to explain this to the interviewer though! Anyone else has the same "issue" and perhaps advice on how to do it? I could stick with this approach, but sometimes it feels very odd.

2. When given a Profitability-case, of course there are more external variables to consider, beyond the Profitability-framework. How do you guys do it here in the beginning; do you simply start with Profitability with no mention that you will later switch framework to business situations if needed? (Victor gave no initial mention that he would look at additional factors in one of his LOMS, but to me, it could appear to the interviewer that one forgot..) Perhaps one could say something like: "I'll start off with Revenues minus Costs, this is what I want to know within each, etc, etc. [give specific mention, e.g. segment break-down, over time, industry wide or not..], then I might switch to look at i. Customers, ii.Product, iii.Company iv.Competitors to analyze more in depth". That feels a bit awkward too though! In addition, you have effectively already touched upon the customers and competition then in the profitability.

Again, I realize there's no "right" answer here and that it depends on the situation. Mainly looking to see if anyone else is confused and whether there's any relief :) Many thank you // Xie xie // Danke schön

Feel free to answer here or PM me for further discussion

(edited)

1 answer

  • Upvotes
  • Date ascending
  • Date descending
Best Answer

Hi!

I had the similar thoughts and I resolved them for myself through hypothesis-driven approach and more tailored frameworks (not those of Victor Cheng).

1. For market entry

I say, I’d like to analyze 4 things:

  1. Market (size, growth, segments, competition)
  2. Financials (investment cost for entry, revenue, cost, metrics (ROI, …))
  3. Way of entry (JV, green field, M&A,…)
  4. Capabilities (do we need new capacity, do we need to build new competences,…)

Then I say let’s prioritize. I wanna test the hypothesis that this is a good idea to enter. So, I start with market – if it is good (size, competition,…), I say ok, let’s move to financials, if not – let’s stop here and reject hypothesis. If Financials are ok, so let’s see how we can enter it and so on.

I give this reasoning when I present framework at the early beginning and only then start asking for data about the market.

2. For profitability

I say, I’d like to analyze 3 things:

  1. Revenues (market size, trends, competition, customer segments)
  2. Products (products themselves, pricing, features)
  3. Costs (FCs, VCs, benchmarking)

Then I say that 1) and 2) are mostly Volume and Price and I mark them this way when I present the framework.

Hope it makes sense.

Hi!

I had the similar thoughts and I resolved them for myself through hypothesis-driven approach and more tailored frameworks (not those of Victor Cheng).

1. For market entry

I say, I’d like to analyze 4 things:

  1. Market (size, growth, segments, competition)
  2. Financials (investment cost for entry, revenue, cost, metrics (ROI, …))
  3. Way of entry (JV, green field, M&A,…)
  4. Capabilities (do we need new capacity, do we need to build new competences,…)

Then I say let’s prioritize. I wanna test the hypothesis that this is a good idea to enter. So, I start with market – if it is good (size, competition,…), I say ok, let’s move to financials, if not – let’s stop here and reject hypothesis. If Financials are ok, so let’s see how we can enter it and so on.

I give this reasoning when I present framework at the early beginning and only then start asking for data about the market.

2. For profitability

I say, I’d like to analyze 3 things:

  1. Revenues (market size, trends, competition, customer segments)
  2. Products (products themselves, pricing, features)
  3. Costs (FCs, VCs, benchmarking)

Then I say that 1) and 2) are mostly Volume and Price and I mark them this way when I present the framework.

Hope it makes sense.

Thank you! It really helps!!! Great new way of thinking and makes more sense. Now however I feel like Chengs frameworks are so engrained into my mind, so Ill work with them I think but just make everything very clear . Should be fine hopefully :) — Alice on Jan 16, 2017

I wonder in your market entry framework, the market part, shall we move " segment" in the clarification at the beginning or at the start of the market part? — grace on Oct 15, 2019

cos if there is segment, then the following analysis should follow the segment instead of the whole market. that may influence the framework. like victor cheng's LOM case "moving" — grace on Oct 15, 2019

Related BootCamp article(s)

Getting Up to Speed

In order to repeatedly demonstrate prerequisite skills under the pressure of a real case interview, you need to learn the basics and practice cases.

1 Q&A

Focusing on The Core: Mock Interviews

It is to practice as many cases as possible - both as interviewee and as interviewee. Here are a couple of guidelines to help you get started

Case Studies

The case study is the most important element of the case interview, which you'll have to nail in order to get into strategic consulting. Here you can learn the specific skills and concepts necessary to solve them.

Related case(s)

Espresso, Whatelse?

Solved 2.7k times
Espresso, Whatelse? Espresso Whatelse is an Italian company that produces coffee and espresso machines since 1908. It is the Italian market leader and has a strong presence overall in Europe. In 2019, Espresso Whatelse has increased its revenues but it has seen declining profit margin. Your client wants to understand the root causes of this 2019 trend and how to increase its profit margin again.  
4.6 5 112
| Rating: (4.6 / 5.0)

Espresso Whatelse is an Italian company that produces coffee and espresso machines since 1908. It is the Italian market leader and has a strong presence overall in Europe. In 2019, Espresso Whatelse has increased its revenues but it has seen declining profit margin. Your client wants to understand ... Open whole case

MBB Final Round Case - Smart Education

Solved 2.1k times
MBB Final Round Case - Smart Education Our client is SmartBridge, a nonprofit educational institution offering face-to-face tutoring services. The client operates in the US. The mission of SmartBridge is to help as many students as possible to complete studies and prevent that they drop from the school system, in particular in disadvantaged areas. The client is considering starting operations for its services in the Chicago area. They hired us to understand if that makes sense. Due to the nonprofit regulation, SmartBridge should operate on its own in the market, without any partnership. How would you help our client?
4.6 5 74
| Rating: (4.6 / 5.0)

Our client is SmartBridge, a nonprofit educational institution offering face-to-face tutoring services. The client operates in the US. The mission of SmartBridge is to help as many students as possible to complete studies and prevent that they drop from the school system, in particular in disadvant ... Open whole case

Chinese Chess - Airline Business During COVID-19

Solved 600+ times
Chinese Chess - Airline Business During COVID-19 Sky China, a government-backed Chinese airline, has recently seen profits plummet due to COVID-19. Profits are down 80% in the months of February and March, but are showing early signs of a rebound in April.  They've brought you in to first investigate what can be done immediatedly to prevent hemorrhaging cash and surive in the short-term. They are also looking to see how the current situation can be viewed as an opportunity, and what can be done to prepare for the future. 
4.3 5 15
| Rating: (4.3 / 5.0)

Sky China, a government-backed Chinese airline, has recently seen profits plummet due to COVID-19. Profits are down 80% in the months of February and March, but are showing early signs of a rebound in April. They've brought you in to first investigate what can be done immediatedly to prevent hemor ... Open whole case

YodaPhone

Solved 400+ times
YodaPhone Our client is Yoda's Phones, a national telecommunications company. They have embarked on a three-year, multi-million dollar digitization program. Unfortunately, two years into the program, they realize they are significantly behind schedule and over budget. You have been brought in to right the ship and ensure the digitization program is delivered as planned.
4.4 5 25
| Rating: (4.4 / 5.0)

Our client is Yoda's Phones, a national telecommunications company. They have embarked on a three-year, multi-million dollar digitization program. Unfortunately, two years into the program, they realize they are significantly behind schedule and over budget. You have been brought in to right the sh ... Open whole case

Hot Wheels

Solved 400+ times
Hot Wheels Problem definition: Our client is Korean Car Parts (KCP), a multi-national original equipment manufacturer (OEM) of car parts based in Korea. They've recently seen a decline in profits and have brought us in to understand how to address this falling profitability.
4.3 5 15
| Rating: (4.3 / 5.0)

Problem definition: Our client is Korean Car Parts (KCP), a multi-national original equipment manufacturer (OEM) of car parts based in Korea. They've recently seen a decline in profits and have brought us in to understand how to address this falling profitability. Open whole case