Swot Ryanair

Miriam Mennen An Analysis of Ryanair’s Corporate Strategy Essay Document Nr. V145623 http://www. grin. com/ ISBN 978-3-640-56879-6 9 783640 568796 Global Corporate Strategy – A Case Study on Ryan Air An Analysis of Ryanair’s Corporate Strategy Executive Summary Ryanair was founded in 1985 as a family business that originally provided full service conventional scheduled airline services between Ireland and the UK.

The airline started to compete within the confines of the existing industry by trying to steal customers from their rivals, especially the state monopoly carrier Air Lingus, outlined by Chan Kim and Renee Mauborgne (2004) as “Bloody or Red Ocean Strategy”. Ryanair seemed to follow a “me-too strategy”; according to Osborne, K. (2005), they “tried to be all things to all people”. Even they started restructuring; their strategy was not enough differentiated and their cost advantage was too low to be profitable. In 1986, they got “stuck in the middle”, outlined by Porter (1985) as they had a limited cost advantage and no service advantage.

Ryanair then created a competitive advantage through the alignment of the three components of business systems; 1) Creating superior value for their customers (outside perspective) 2) Supplying their superior value-adding activities in an effective and efficient manner (which jointly form the “Value Chain”) 3) Possessing over the resource base required to perform the value-adding activities, (inside perspective) According to Porter (1987), “corporate strategy is what makes the corporate whole add up to more than the sum of its business unit parts. It is seen to be concerned with the overall purpose and scope of the organisation and to meet the expectations of major stakeholders. All aspects of Ryanair’s value chain are important to the company and their shareholders as Ryanair’s decisions add value to both. The following report outlines the three perspectives of shaping Ryanair’s business system. The value creation dimension of Ryanair’s business model will be outlined, considering the theories of Porter and the more recent authors Kim and Mauborgne (2004).

Order custom essay Swot Ryanair with free plagiarism report

450+ experts on 30 subjects Starting from 3 hours delivery

Get Essay Help

Further, the linkages in the airline’s value chain and their resource base will be analysed, considering Hamel and Prahalad’s (1990) core competency model (inside-out approach). 1 Global Corporate Strategy – A Case Study on Ryan Air In section 2, the future challenges of the airline are considered. Ryanair’s strengths and weaknesses will be analysed, internal value creating factors such as assets, skills or resources, to consider how the airline can create alignment to its opportunities and threats, external factors.

An stronger “outside – in” approach for Ryanair’s future corporate strategy will be considered, applying Porter’s five forces model, placing the market, the competition, and the customer at the starting point of the strategy process. I An evaluation of Ryanair’s key strategic perspectives 1) Creating superior value for their customers The low cost market segment Ryanair has found a source of leveraging a competitive advantage; the knowledge about the opportunities associated with implementing the low cost strategy, which was created by Southwest Airlines.

The Texas airline found a unique approach to the market through reconceptualisation of market segments. In 1990, Ryanair successfully applied their model in the European market, becoming a “no frills” airline, focussing on short haul destinations and keeping its planes in the air as frequently as possible in a 24 hour period. The new low price market segment, which did not exist before in Europe, could be described as the development of a ‘blue ocean’, uncontested market space through the expansion of boundaries of the existing industry, outlined by Kim and Mauborgne (2004).

Ryanair’s low fares created demand, particularly from fare-conscious leisure and business travellers who might otherwise have used alternative forms of transportation or would not have travelled at all (Case Study, p. 3). The competition became less relevant and allowed Ryanair to develop and sustain high performance in an overcrowded industry. Up to now he airline benefits from the early profitable and rapid growth within the blue ocean and successfully executes the low cost business model, which became obvious when the airline announced that it has beaten its own downbeat forecasts to record a 29 % increase in pre-tax profits and 19 % passenger growth, having carried more than 27. 6 million passengers in the past financial year (Jameson, A. , 2005). 2 Global Corporate Strategy – A Case Study on Ryan Air Ryanair’s position within the industry However, ‘blue oceans’ are not easily protected and Ryanair has been facing competitors that try to copy their low cost approach.

Further, Ryanair has always been competing within the ‘red ocean’, by targeting a broad range of customers, e. g. the business segment and “stealing customer from rivals”. This outlines that Kim and Mauborgne’s strategy approach cannot be seen as exclusive. Competing with new entrants of competitors (and differentiators), Ryanair was able to launch an “all out war”, lowering prices and remaining profitable whilst increasing the frequency of flights and establishing new routes (Case Study). According to Porter (1980, 1985), the relative competitive position within an industry lies at the core of success or failure of firms.

He defined two basics types of competitive advantage; cost leadership and differentiation (and focus). Ryanair set out to be best in the budget market segment, becoming the lowest cost airline in its industry (cost focus), e. g. no paper tickets, no passenger meals, no pre-arranged seating, enabling to cope and remain profitable, even on low yields. The airline constantly strives to reduce or control four of the primary expenses involved in running a major scheduled airline; their aircraft equipment costs, personnel productivity, customer service costs, airport access and handling costs.

The airline deals successfully with competitive forces and is Europe’s leader in low fares by generating a superior return on investment (Osborne, 2005). This supports Mintzberg’s argument of price leadership being more relevant to competitive advantage than cost leadership. Planning to turn into a “no-fares-airline” by offering flights for free (Case Study), Ryanair can be argued to follow price leadership as one of the six ways to differentiation outlined by Minzberg.

According to Mr O’ Leary (2005), new planes will enable him to drive down average fares by 5% a year causing a “bloodbath”. We are going to show up in your market and trash your yields. ” (“Ryanair rolls out plans for European domination”, 2005). Differentiation through price outlines the superseding of Porter’s generic strategies by the resource/competence-based strategy frameworks. In addition to low prices, Ryanair’s branding emphasises on punctuality and efficiency, which is mainly achieved through operating from secondary airports.

According to Ryanair, their success is not just due to their low fares “but also a winning combination of our No. 1 on-time record, our friendly and efficient people and our new Boeing 737-800 series aircraft” (Ryanair, 2005). It can therefore be argued that in a globalized competitive environment, even cost leaders need to differentiate 3 Global Corporate Strategy – A Case Study on Ryan Air their message (‘hybrid strategy’), contradicting Porter’s original idea of fundamentally different routes to competitive advantage.

International expansion Ryanair further constantly created value for customers by following generic growth and internationalisation strategies; they moved their operations into more and more countries, expanding the route system from its primarily Irish-UK emphasis to serve 86 destinations on 133 routes across 16 countries. According to Mr. O’ Leary (2005), they “will deliver 34m passengers from 12 European bases and have identified a further 48 potential bases. ” The airline expanded recently by placing an order for 70 more Boeing 737-800 aircraft to keep growing at 20% a year (“Ryanair rolls out plans for European domination”, 2005).

Ryanair can compete on price, as the airline has besides its low cost product offering an activity system and resource base that match the price positioning, opposite to traditional airlines that seem to get “stuck in the middle”, as outlined by Porter, when undergoing severe cost cutting which affects their areas of differentiation, e. g. Aer Lingus. 2) Supplying superior value-adding activities in an effective and efficient manner The “Value Chain” As Ryanair’s low cost/price pproach leads to overlapping value chains, the company is a perfect example of linking its opportunities, as outlined by Campbell and Goold (1998, in Meyer and de Witt, 2004). From a Value Based Management point of view, Porter's Value Chain framework can be seen as one of two dimensions in maximizing corporate value creation, outlining how well a company performs relatively towards its competitors (‘Relative Competitive Position’). Even Ryanair subscribes to a similar basic model compared to e. g. Easyjet, the airline has an entirely different value chain.

Ryanair’s low cost/price approach adds value to most of Ryanair’s processes, e. g. clear corporate identity and brand image in addition to limited organisational complexity, increasing the differentiation towards their competitors. Ryanair maintains their efficient, high quality and low cost services through operating from secondary airports and by exploiting the advantages of outsourcing, a strategic management model, transferring the business processes of services to outside firms, e. g. passenger and aircraft handling, ticketing. This allows the 4 Global Corporate Strategy – A Case Study on Ryan Air ompany to achieve competitive rates at fixed prices and to stay focused on its core competencies. Further, outsourcing can improve customer satisfaction (primary activity), mitigate risks, and add value to their reputation, accessed skills and technology, increased overall visibility of accounting and performance (controlled infrastructure), and avoided capital investments. Their strategy is to deliver the best customer service performance in its peer group, having just six staff in their customer care department; one for every two million passengers compared to British Airways which has 10 times the coverage (Ryanair, 2005).

Porter’s Value Chain Firm Infrastructure Support Activities Human Resource Management Technological Development Procurement M g ar in Primary Activities The technology of the company’s Internet booking system allowed to capture more value from its operations, to improve its contact with its customers (outbound logistics) and to increase control over the quality of their services. According to Mr O'Leary (2005), Ryanair saves 15% on the price of every ticket by using direct booking through the internet.

For the fiscal year ended March 31, 2004, Ryanair generated virtually all of its scheduled passenger revenues through direct sales (Ryanair, 2005). All value-creating activities that transform the inputs into the final service of Ryanair are kept extremely lean. Ryanair does not interlink its operations with competitors, avoiding costs of trough service and delays and their Human Resource Management is tailored to continually improving the productivity of its already highly-productive work force whilst controlling their labour costs. 5 M Logistics Logistics ar gi n Inbound

Operations Outbound Marketing & Sales Service Global Corporate Strategy – A Case Study on Ryan Air Ryanair focuses on centralised recruitment and training. In the year ended March 31, 2004 productivity calculated on the basis of passengers booked per employee continued to improve by 21% on the year ended March 31, 2003 (Ryanair, 2005). Ryanair emphasizes on modest base salaries and productivity-based pay incentives, including commissions for on-board sales of products for flight attendants and payments based on the number of hours or sectors flown by pilots and cabin crew personnel.

Employees can participate in Ryanair’s stock option programs (worth up to 5% of the share of the company, Ryanair 2005). Ryanair even adds value to their low cost reputation through the refusal to recognise trade unions whilst having a competitive advantage over the heavily unionised nature of employment of the state owned Aer Lingus. (Ethical considerations, outlined in section 2). Ryanair has extremely low airport access fees by focusing on secondary and regional airport destinations that offer competitive cost terms, e. g. ess expensive outdoor boarding stairs, and allow for higher rates of on-time departures, faster turnaround times, fewer terminal delays, which maximises aircraft utilisation, eases restriction on slot requirements and on the number of allowed takeoffs and landings, adding value to customer satisfaction. Ryanair further added value to their infrastructure, procurement and reputation through negotiating favourable contracts with Boeing (inbound logistics); knowledge that is difficult to codify and replicate for competitors, as it is not only observable facts or data but complex and difficult to specify (core competence).

Ryanair is said to be paying less than half the Boeings list price of $66m each (Money Telegraph, 2005). The procurement with Boeing 737-800s allows the airline to benefit from synergies through fleet commonality, limited costs associated with training (Human Resources), maintenance efficiency, and greater flexibility in the scheduling of crews and equipment (inbound logistics). Again, the new aircrafts provide the newest technology; blended winglets that reduce drag and drive down 2% of the fuel cost, driving down the average fares by 5% a year (O’ Leary, 2005).

Ryanair’s business model as a whole is distinct, having an entirely different configuration altogether, in relation to their competitors in the airline industry, increasing the barriers to imitation or substitution. According to Teece, Pisano and Shuen (1997, in Meyer and de Witt, 2004, p. 253), “even if competitors are successful at identifying embedded competences and imitating them, the company with and initial lead can work at upgrading its competences in a race to stay ahead (‘Dynamic capabilities view’).

Ryanair seems to have “outpaced” their 6 Global Corporate Strategy – A Case Study on Ryan Air competitors through upgrading its resources, activity system and product offering more rapidly, as outlined by Gilber and Strebel (1989). Ryanair’s unique firm resource; their knowledge of demand for the low cost airlines, made it possible to implement their strategy before others and to benefit from first mover advantage, outlined by Lieberman and Montgomery (1988). ) The resource base required to perform the value-adding activities Ryanair’s resource heterogeneity In general, the airline industry is characterised by supply side similarity (Kay, 1993, in Meyer and de Wit, 2004), as only marginal differences between air carriers can be displayed, particularly in a deregulated environment. Ryanair's business model was designed to challenge the limitations of these constraints. The airline focuses on value-adding process or resources, which give them a superior position relative to its competitors and which seems most appropriate to draw boundaries in the airline industry.

Ryanair’s internal characteristics are most relevant in achieving sustained competitive advantage, outlined by Barney (1986, 1991). In contrast to Porter, Barney assumes that firms within an industry or group may develop long-term superior resources that can be protected in their mobility across firms by some form of isolating mechanism. According to the resource based view already outlined by Edith Penrose (1959, in Meyer and de Wit, 2004) and extended by Wernerfelt (1984, n Meyer and de Wit, 2004), Ryanair can be argued to have a sustained competitive advantage, as their competitors in the same segment are unable to duplicate the benefits of their strategy. The “winner-takes-all” dynamic (Case Study, p. 15) in the low cost segment, seems to have only worked in combination with this first mover advantage. Ryanair’s assets, e. g. their capabilities and attributes, are not successfully implemented by any current or potential competitor, e. g. negotiation for airport deals, employee contracts and fleet prices.

Budget airlines that attempted to enter Ryanair’s market segment lost money or were taken over, e. g. Go’s foray into Dublin (Case Study). Their main competitor easyJet has carefully differentiated by focussing on different geographical markets and higher value through better transfer situations of main airports, addressing the business segment. However, Ryanair’s external environment, e. g. a saturated market and changing customer demands, can threaten Ryanair’s future growth (outlined in section 2). 7 Global Corporate Strategy – A Case Study on Ryan Air

Ryanair’s Core Competence Approach Ryanair can be argued to follow the core competencies model of Hamel and Prahalad (1990), (inside-out perspective), as they build their strategy around their strength of distinctive competences, which offers an attractive base of competitive advantage, e. g. secondary airport approach. Ryanair competitiveness derives from an ability to build their competences at lower cost and more speedily than competitors. The real sources of Ryanair’s advantage are to be found in O’Leary’s ability to consolidate corporate-wide skills into competencies.

Ryanair has strong relationships with their suppliers and a strong corporate identity. The airline can be argued to follow a strategic ‘stretch’ as they are overall resource led and create new opportunities, e. g. ancillary services. Strongly focussing on their core competences allowed for high strategic capability and potential access to a wide variety of markets, making a significant contribution to the perceived customer benefits of the end service and limiting the risk of imitation. The corporate centre tightly controls and co-ordinates by enunciating the strategic architecture that guides the competence acquisition process, e. . outsourcing. Ryanair’s resources include all means at the disposal for the performance of value-adding activities, e. g. through the acquisition of Buzz in 2003 (Case Study, p. 5), the airline gained a range of resources, e. g. know how, outlined by Preece as learning. The airline benefited from increased infrastructure and value-chain activities (leaning), integrated operations (leveraging), closer co-ordination of their vertical activities (leaping), expanded market opportunities and reduced competitive pressure (locking out). Resources consist of tangible assets, e. g.

Ryanair owns all of its aircraft and holds net cash of 286 million euros (Money-telegraph, 2005), leading to the advantages that large firms have from large volumes enabling them to spread their costs (economies of scale), and intangible assets, e. g. the human capital; skills, competences and capabilities. Ryanair’s resource heterogeneity towards their competitors hinders other firms to conceive and implement the cost focus strategy, as outlined by Barney. Ryanair takes advantage of leveraging its resources, e. g. relationships and reputation, which are not readily transferable.

They are inheritably attributed to O’Leary and his team and are influenced by the airline’s culture and governance. Ryanair possesses over a range of funny value-adding stories which defined their past, e. g. how Mr O’Leary ‘went to war’, driving in a military jeep to his competitor (Case Study). Personal involvement in battles of O’Leary against lobbying politicians, EU commissioners and competitors are part of the company culture and promote their aggressive 8 Global Corporate Strategy – A Case Study on Ryan Air low cost image.

Ryanair’s reputation for commitment to Safety and Quality Maintenance, not having “a single incident involving major injury to passengers or flight crew in its 20- year operating history” (Case Study), is another value adding aspect. Ryanair’s distinct activity system provides the base for competitive advantage and raises the barriers to imitation. In conclusion, Ryanair does not follow a linear ‘inside – out’ or ‘outside – in’ approach. On the one hand, the airline continual upgrades its unique resources; on the other hand, it occupies specific market positions to emain competitive, creating superior value by closely fitting their services to customers’ needs and focussing on a relatively limited set of businesses and markets (narrow competitive scope). Ryanair increasingly focuses on exploiting market opportunities in their business environment though, e. g. expansion and horizontal integration, leaving their original organic growth model and benefiting from all aspects of the framework of international strategic alliances, outlined by Preece. External forces, e. g. he industry deregulation in 1997 that allowed the airline to go continental and the technological advancement of the internet, also strongly influenced the airline’s success story (external value adding activities). Ryanir can be argued to have a discrete organisation perspective, emphasising on competition over co-operation, having high bargaining power and a highly independent approach with distinct firm boundaries. The airline has an essentially logical structure, characterised by planning and control, prediction and forecasting.

Especially in relation to the dynamic hostile environment, the airline has a relatively deliberate strategy that is based on rational thinking. The limited complexity of the system is characterised by few organisational levels and centralisation. The airline benefits from the entrepreneurial spirit of O’ Leary who seemed to understand the activities that are likely to have a significant impact on Ryanair and that build valuable internal linkages within the boundaries of their business model (organisational leadership perspective). So far, he was highly successful in understanding the low cost attributes that made Ryanair unique. Global Corporate Strategy – A Case Study on Ryan Air II An evaluation of the future strategic direction of the company The sustainability of a firm’s competitive advantage is said to be threatened by the development in the market. Customer needs and wants are in constant flux. The SWOT analysis of Ryanair, a tool for analyzing the internal strengths and weaknesses and the external opportunities and threats (see Appendix), outlined the paradox for Ryanair of creating alignment either from the outside-in (market-driven strategy) or from the inside-out resource driven strategy). So far, Ryanair has been strongly focussing on their core competences. Considering their environment, opportunities and threats, as the starting point when determining their strategy (outside-in perspective), is crucial though; to re-check the fit between their competitive advantage and the environment, as outlined by Rumelt, (1980). The model of ‘environmental consonance’ seems of great importance to the airline, outlining the requirement of continual adaptation of the business system to the demands and new opportunities in the market place.

As outlined by Leonar-Barton (1995), Ryanair’s core competences seem to be simultaneously Ryanair’s core rigidities, locking them out of new opportunities (in Meyer and de Wit, p. 253), e. g. Ryanair’s “Dublin saga”, the fight over the desired second low cost terminal at Dublin airport instead of considering the creation of a new lucrative base in continental Europe, threatening easyJet’s. Ryanair should consider market development, outlined by Ansoff, e. g. Greece and Turkey, which have a combined population of around 70 million people and offer extremely profitable market opportunities through year-round and holiday flights.

The airline should further initiate additional routes from the U. K. or Ireland to other locations in continental Europe that are currently served by higher-cost, higher-fare carriers. Market opportunities of new domestic routes within EU countries, especially new member countries, and increased frequency of service on its existing routes will allow Ryanair to remain focussed on low cost/price and prolong its unprecedented and high levels of growth without jeopardising their core competences. Rivalry among existing players could be reduced by damaging the package tourism industry, e. . Thomas Cook, Lunn Polly and Neckerman (Porter’s 5 forces). Further acquisitions should be considered in the long-term. Ryanair seems to have enough power to counterbalance the demands of buyers and suppliers, to outperform rival airlines in their market segment, and to discourage new firms from entering the business. Their main 10 Global Corporate Strategy – A Case Study on Ryan Air challenge will be threatening easyJet in its home market, currently serving Athens, and to fend off the “Value for money” segment that threatens to substitute Ryanair’s services (Porter’s 5 forces).

The industry attractiveness for long-term profitability, outlined by Porter (1985), will have a strong influence on Ryanair’s profitability. Porter had ignored the aspect that differentiation strategies can be used to increase sales volumes rather than to charge a premium price. With negative forecast for the low price market, with growth rates of no more than 20 to 25 % of the total market, market saturation is said to be not far off for budget airlines in Western Europe (Ottink, 2004). Instead of the lowest price, the optimal balance between service and price is seen to be the growth market of the future.

Value market share will eventually hover around 60 % of the total market (Ottink, 2004). Regarding this threat, the main challenge will be to respond to changing demands and at the same time to ensure consistency, effectiveness and the coherence of Ryanair’s low cost strategy. At this stage, Ryanair should not compete on service advantage by entering the value market, turning into a portfolio organisation. They should so far seek for other niches, than compromise their low cost approach by reactively adapting to the unpredictable development in the current market.

Retrenchment involves cutting back to focus on your best lines, often referred to this as “sticking to the knitting”. Ryanair should consider the mistakes of their competitors entering new market segments, e. g. Lufthansa by offering deeply discounted flights to Mallorca and Nice, standing up to easyJet. Ryanair should therefore further engage in market penetration and strengthen their market development approach, rather than diversify their services, as outlined by Ansoff (Product Market Framework).

However, Ryanair should be aware that its knowledge is a fluid mix of framed experience, values, contextual information and expert insight that provides a framework for evaluating and incorporating new experiences and information, as outlined by Davenport and Prusack. Even the company’s formula has been highly successful in the last decades; Ryanair has to check whether their organisational routines are still valid in the new markets (double or tripleloop learning), e. g. the way Mr O’Leary aggressively promotes the low cost strategy.

Especially in the new EU member countries his practices, which are said to threaten industrial peace and put EU ministers at unease, need to be revised. 11 Global Corporate Strategy – A Case Study on Ryan Air The self interest of Ryanair might be best served by developing attitudes to ethical issues before they become acute, as the airline is especially vulnerable to hostile campaigns (Value Chain). Ryanair should consider ethical corporate behaviour and social responsibility, currently facing the paradox of profitability (shareholder value perspective) and responsibility (stakeholder value perspective), e. . policies regarding disabled passengers, employee rights and environmental standards. At the moment, the simplicity inside the company does not seem to match Ryanair’s complex environment. Ryanair has to differentiate its message to fend off competitors, e. g. the airline should consider the co-operation with environmental organisations, offering passengers the possibility to pay the price of competitors in the value segment and paying the difference to the original Ryanair price to an organisation that invests in solar energy to reduce the world emissions.

Ryanair’s Boeings could be green and the message should be “flying cheap and doing good”. Customers that might otherwise have switched to the value segment do not mind the voluntary environmental charge and are likely to accept more difficult transfer situations for the “feeling of doing good”. This differentiation aspect will add value to the company’s reputation and public relations. Ryanair can become the first mover in an industry that will sooner or later need to address the issue of emissions. Creativity and radical innovation are a strategic orientation to sustained competitive advantage.

Ryanair should further consider the involvement of employees in the search for unsatisfied customer demand, as outlined by Kim and Mauborgne (2004). Free exchange and flow of information will foster new creative knowledge and help the airline to continually transform itself, e. g. the contact between flight attendants and management should be increased to foster a climate of openness and trust and to capture opportunities. The concept of organisational learning, as outlined by Senge (1990) and extended by Pedler, Bourgoyne and Boydell (1991) and Wang and Ahmed (2003), is crucial to nurture new and expansive patterns of thinking. 2 Global Corporate Strategy – A Case Study on Ryan Air References Barney, J. (1991). Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage. Journal of Management. Vol. 17, No. 1, p. 99–120 Oklahoma State University. In: De Wit, B. and Meyer, R. (2004). Strategy: Process, Content, Context. An International Perspective. 3rd ed. London: Thomson Learning. Campbell and Goold (1998). Why Links Between Business Units Often Fail and How to Make Them Work. Capstone Publishing Ltd, Oxford. In: De Wit, B. and Meyer, R. (2004). Strategy: Process, Content, Context.

An International Perspective. 3rd ed. London: Thomson Learning. De Wit, B. and Meyer, R. (2004). Strategy: Process, Content, Context. An International Perspective. 3rd ed. London: Thomson Learning. Gilber, X. and Strebel, P. (1989). From Innovation to Outpacing. Business Quarterly. Summer pp. 19-22. In: De Wit, B. and Meyer, R. (2004). Strategy: Process, Content, Context. An International Perspective. 3rd ed. London: Thomson Learning. Hamel, G. and Prahalad, C. K. (1990). The Core Competence of the Corporation. May-June 1990. Vol 68. Harvard Business School Publishing.

In: De Wit, B. and Meyer, R. (2004). Strategy: Process, Content, Context. An International Perspective. 3rd ed. London: Thomson Learning. Jameson, A. (2005). Ryanair confident of European goal. [Internet] Times Online. Available from: (http://business. timesonline. co. uk/article/0,,8209-1635966,00. html). [01/06/2005] Kay, J. (1993). Foundation s of Corporate Success: How Business Strategies add value. Oxford: Oxford University Press. In: De Wit, B. and Meyer, R. (2004). Strategy: Process, Content, Context. An International Perspective. 3rd ed. London: Thomson Learning.

Kim, W. C. and Mauborgne, R. (1999). Strategy, Value Innovation, and the Knowledge Economy. Sloan Management Review. 40 (3), pp. 41-54. In: De Wit, B. and Meyer, R. (2004). Strategy: Process, Content, Context. An International Perspective. 3rd ed. London: Thomson Learning. Kim, C. and Mauborgne, R. (2005). Blue Ocean Strategy: How to Create Uncontested Market Space and Make the Competition Irrelevant. Boston: Harvard Business School Press. Liebermann, M. B. and Montgomery, D. B. (1988). First Mover Advantages. Strategic Management Journal. 9 (1), pp. 41-58. In: De Wit, B. nd Meyer, R. (2004). Strategy: Process, Content, Context. An International Perspective. 3rd ed. London: Thomson Learning. Porter, M. E. (1980, 1988). Competitive Strategy: Techniques for Analysing Industries and Competitors. The Free Press. In: De Wit, B. and Meyer, R. (2004). Strategy: Process, Content, Context. An International Perspective. 3rd ed. London: Thomson Learning. 13 Global Corporate Strategy – A Case Study on Ryan Air Marquardt, M. and Reynolds, A. (1994). The Global Learning Organization: Gaining Competitive Advantage through Continuous Learning. New York. In: De Wit, B. and Meyer, R. (2004). Strategy: Process, Content, Context. An International Perspective. 3rd ed. London: Thomson Learning. Money Telegraph (2005) Ryanair lands better result than forecast. [Internet]. Available from: (http://money. telegraph. co. uk/money/main. jhtml? xml=/money/2005/02/25/cnryanair25. xml) [5 June 2005]. Osborne, A. (2005). Ryanair rolls out plans for European domination. [Internet]. Business Telegraph Available from: (http://www. telegraph. co. uk/money/main. jhtml? xml=/money/2005/02/25/cnryanair25. ml enuId=242=/portal/2005/02/25/ixportal. html). [1 June 2005] Ottink, F. (2004). Winner in the wrong market. [Internet]. Yeald Available from: (http://www. yeald. com/Yeald/a/29541/ryanair__winner_in_the_wrong_market. html) [5 June 2005] Rumelt, R. P. (1980). The Evaluation of Business Strategy. In: De Wit, B. and Meyer, R. (2004). Strategy: Process, Content, Context. An International Perspective. 3rd ed. London: Thomson Learning. Ryanair (2005). Strategy. [Internet]. Available from: (http://www. ryanair. com/site/about/invest/docs/Strategy. pdf). 27 May 2005] Teece, D. J. , Pisano, G. , and Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic Capabilities and Strategic Management. Strategic Management Journal. 18 (7). Pp. 509-533. In: De Wit, B. and Meyer, R. (2004). Strategy: Process, Content, Context. An International Perspective. 3rd ed. London: Thomson Learning. 14 Global Corporate Strategy – A Case Study on Ryan Air Appendix: SWOT- Analysis Strength - Quality processes and procedures: features important to the clientele, e. g. punctuality, few cancellations, few lost bags, frequent departures, baggage handling and consistent on-time services. low cost – low fares approach (differentiated service) - Low aircraft equipment costs - Lower maintenance costs and low depreciation costs due to ownership of aircrafts - Fleet commonality - Focus on low cost alternative airports; low airport access and handling costs - Low customer service costs; Internet booking system avoiding costly systems, commissions and sales headcount - Low marketing costs - Revenue enhancing and cost-cutting features, e. g. no seat pockets to allow faster turnaround times - Relationships to suppliers; strong bargaining position with respect to aircraft procurement, e. g. argain price of Buzz acquisition, airport deals and staff recruitment - Concentration on core business through outsourcing - Low labour cost through performance related pay structure; high personnel productivity / staff efficiency ratio - Overall high value and profitability - Location of business; focus on Europe's largest airline market; the UK, in particular the London Area - Increased take-off and landing slots trough acquisition of Buzz, KLM subsidiary - Increased number of seats per plane, enabling lower individual fares but higher per plane income - Short turn-around times increasing the available operational hours per plane. Strong brand and low fare reputation -foreign exchange hedging in transactions involving the euro, UK sterling and the US$ Weaknesses - falls in fare yields - Transfer situations from Airports - reputation - no non-essential extras - falling load factors due to continuing decline in unit costs - Decreasing frequency of flights due to need for high load factors, reducing business travel - climate protecting charge on aircraft taking off and landing in the EU, environmental fee might double no-frills operator’s fares, disproportionately greater effect on budget airlines - Ethics and Corporate Social Responsibility 15

Global Corporate Strategy – A Case Study on Ryan Air Opportunities - initiating additional routes from the U. K. or Ireland to other locations in continental Europe, currently served by higher-cost, higher-fare carriers - Developing European market for budget sector with large population base / expansion into 10 new EU states - New domestic routes within continental Europe. Strongly moving into intercontinental business “using the principle of simplification and cherry picking” - increasing the frequency of service on its existing routes - considering possible acquisitions that may become available in the future, e. . Lufthansa - connecting airports within its existing route network -Exploiting profitable destinations with both a tourist as well as business segment - Conversion from low fares to a no-fares airline - Fall in average ticket price and increased threat of entry for competitors - loosening of regulations - Decreasing competition - Increased ancillary service revenues - Increasing in-flight sales on longer flights - employee loyalty - focus on environmental issues - innovative marketing for differentiation

Threats - Limited market in the North of Europe resulting in low occupancy levels and efficiency of usage of planes - Tougher competition from the traditional and charter airlines which offer cheap hard to beat all-in holiday packages in continental Europe. New competitors in home market - Adaptation of Ryanair’s business model by competitors and innovative substitute services - Incumbent airlines selectively copying the tactics of Ryanair’s on competition routes - small potential markets - high speed trains, subsidised by the state in GER and France, - high speed rail plan in Benelux region -good highway connections in the major market around cities in the Middle and Southern Europe - Scarcity of appropriate located, low cost airports around major cities / decreased bargaining power of airlines - Price war - increasing landing charges - Dependency on world jet fuel prices - war and terrorism - epidemics - EU commission decisions - lobbying politicians - formation of a trade union for pilots - the weakness of sterling against the euro - Mergers between competitors, e. g. Air France and

Don't let plagiarism ruin your grade

Run a free check or have your essay done for you

Check my essay Hire Writer