Research and analysis of the competitiveness of banks (CSP) using methods strategic management allows you to take into account both quantitative and qualitative indicators of their activities. The blog uses such benchmarking methods as maps in practice strategic groups competitors, as well as the Radar method, which give a graphical interpretation of the results.

Their combination makes it possible to comprehensively analyze the positions of banks in the market, determine the closest competitors, as well as the competitive advantages and disadvantages of financial institutions.

The purpose of mapping strategic groups of competitors is to identify the banks closest to each other - the level of competition between them will be the highest. The second most important competitors are institutions from the closest groups. Members of strategic groups that are far apart on the map usually do not compete with each other. The sample of banks studied by the Radar method will include those with the most pronounced competition. With it, we will determine their competitive advantages and disadvantages in the consumer lending segment.

For this study, the segment of consumer lending was chosen, since it has the largest number market participants (27 out of 50 leading banks researched by Prostobank Consulting as of the beginning of April 2013), respectively, and the level of competition in it is the highest.

Initially, to build maps of strategic groups of competitors in the designated segment, I selected 10 banks with the largest loan portfolio individuals, according to the NBU data as of the end of the first quarter of 2013 (table 1), which issue unsecured consumer loans according to the data of the Prostobank Consulting company as of April 1, 2013.

Table 1. Ranking of banks by the size of the loan portfolio of individuals as of April 1, 2013, according to the NBU

It should be noted that the results of the study would be more accurate and objective if instead of the indicator "loan portfolio of individuals" we take the indicator "consumer lending portfolio". However, the author does not have such data, since they could not be found in the public domain.

In order to build a map of strategic groups of competitors, it is necessary to single out two indicators by which banks can be characterized in the market in the designated segment:

• 1st criterion (displayed along the X axis) - characterizes the CSP of the loan program itself,
• The 2nd criterion (displayed along the Y axis) characterizes the financial institution's CSP in the consumer lending segment (indicators according to quarterly reports of banks on the official website of the NBU as of April 1, 2013, as well as data from Prostobank Consulting).

The last step in the analysis of maps of strategic groups of competitors will be the grouping of banks-competitors (located closest to each other), according to the selected characteristics and the identification of the top 5 leaders of the indicated segment.

To build the first "map", criteria were selected and evaluated: the 1st indicator "effective rate, % per annum", the 2nd indicator "the number of bank branches in Ukraine" (according to the data of Prostobank Consulting). Note that the method for calculating the effective interest rate includes the nominal value of loans, commission costs (one-time, monthly commission), and also takes into account the form of debt repayment (classic / annuity). Each bank took the program with the lowest effective rate

For a correct graphical interpretation of the results, the column "effective rate of the program" will be represented as "100% - effective rate of the program", then the most competitive banks on the market (their programs) will be placed in the upper right corner of the map. The radius of the circle depends on the proportion of branches of the institution/institutions in the total number of branches of the studied banks.

Rice. 1 Map of strategic groups of competitors in the segment of unsecured lending for a period of 2 years, taking into account the parameters - "bank branches" and "effective loan rate"

To build the second "map", the following criteria were selected and evaluated: the 1st indicator "the maximum amount of lending" (according to the data of the company "Prostobank Consulting"), the 2nd indicator "reserve for depreciation of loans and debts of individuals" (according to the official website of the NBU ). The second indicator most accurately reflects the degree of risk of credit transactions conducted with individuals in the bank, as well as the risk management process. Since, according to Article 4 of the NBU Resolution N 268, it is special reserves (in our case, for the depreciation of loans and debts of individuals) that are the source of compensation for possible losses from non-standard debt, since general reserves cannot be used for such a purpose. The radius of the circle depends on the share of special reserves of the institution/s in total amount reserves of the studied banks.

Rice. 2 Map of strategic groups of competitors in the segment of unsecured lending for a period of 2 years, taking into account the parameters - "special bank reserves" and "maximum loan amount" as of April 1, 2013

It should be noted that the author assumes the reliability of the “reserve for loan impairment” indicator, which objectively characterizes the quality of the loan portfolio formed by the bank. Such provisions are formed when there is objective evidence that the bank is unable to collect amounts due in accordance with the original terms of the loan agreement. However, in the domestic banking system there is a high probability of manipulation of this indicator.

To build the third "map", the following criteria were selected and evaluated: the 1st indicator is "insurance costs", since they are not included in the effective loan rate (according to the data of Prostobank Consulting), the 2nd indicator is "the volume of the loan portfolio of individuals" (according to the official website of the NBU).

For a more correct graphical interpretation of the results, we will present the column “insurance costs” as “100% - insurance costs”, then the most competitive programs on the market will be placed in the upper right corner of the graph. The radius of the circle depends on the share of the portfolio of loans to individuals of the institution / institutions in their total amount of the studied banks.

Rice. 3 Map of strategic groups of competitors in the segment of unsecured lending for a period of 2 years, taking into account the parameters - "insurance costs" and "loans to individuals" as of April 1, 2013

After analyzing the three maps of strategic competitor groups that we built, we can identify three single-valued competitors in the segment of consumer cash lending in hryvnia for a period of 2 years and, if possible, identify groups of strategic competitors (the results are presented in Table 2).

It should be noted that Raiffeisen Bank Aval cannot be included in any group of strategic competitors, because thanks to the most developed network of branches, the largest special reserve fund(that is, indicators that characterize the position of the bank as a whole, and not its credit program), he took separate positions on all maps. It should also be noted positions of Delta Bank in the consumer lending segment: on all three cards The bank competes with different institutions:

• “network of branches – cost of loans” - with Platinum Bank;
• "special reserves - the maximum amount of loans" - with OTP Bank;
• "loan portfolio of individuals - insurance rate" - with Nadra Bank.

In the process of evaluating the KSP of three competing banks, we use the method of strategic management - the “Radar Method” . The latter makes it possible to analyze the CSP of the unsecured consumer lending program in more detail, taking into account not only its quantitative indicators, but also its qualitative ones: the speed of obtaining a loan, the obligation to have a certificate of income. To build the "Radar", we used and evaluated the following indicators (see Table 3):

Table 3. Estimates of the CSP of banks' programs in the segment of consumer cash lending based on the Radar method

Graphical interpretation of the results is shown in Figure 4.

Rice. 4 Evaluation of CSP of institutions from the list of competing banks in the segment of consumer cash lending using the "Radar" method

After analyzing the data in Figure 6, we can conclude that the Bank's program "Finance and Credit" ("Cash Loan") is ahead of its closest competitors in 2 out of 4 analyzed indicators. At the same time, the bank has the least competitive advantages according to parameter 1 - “one-time commission level”, due to which, among other things, the effective rate under the program is the highest, namely 63.6% per annum.

According to the Radar method, the programs of VTB Bank (First Step, 51.28% real per annum) and Pravex-Bank (Cash Loan with a Guarantor, 50.25% real per annum) scored the same number of points. In the first one there is no one-time commission, and in the second - monthly. The above institutions are the largest strategic competitors according to the performance of banks in the retail lending market, as well as indicators of consumer lending programs.

Hot deals

All operating and competing organizations in the industry, according to certain strategic characteristics, can be grouped into several groups based on their competitive approaches, similar market positions and strategies used. The groups allocated in this way are called strategic groups of competitors.

A strategic group of competitors is a set of competing organizations in a particular industry that have common features(similar competitive strategies, identical market positions) and features. These features include the technologies used, prices or quality of goods and services, distribution channels, target audience, service and other elements of marketing.

Within these strategic groups, there is the most tangible intra-industry competition between organizations. According to M. Porter's model, the five forces of competition have different effects on the prospects and profitability of each strategic group. If the industry consists of one strategic group, then the model of five forces of M. Porter as a whole is applicable to the analysis of competition in it. Otherwise, it is necessary to use the five forces model in relation to each specific strategic group. These same five forces will affect every organization within every strategic group. One strategic group of competitors differs from another in one or more key strategic characteristics of its competitive strategy.

The following can serve as the main strategic characteristics by which organizations, including tourism companies, that are members of various strategic groups of competitors, are distinguished:

• - specialization (product specialization, focus on certain consumer groups, the scale of competition, etc.);
• - use of trademarks (brands), trademarks in competition;
• - choice of channels for promoting goods and services, including the use of own and intermediary channels;
• - the quality of the goods and services offered, including those designed for certain user groups or mass consumers;
• - technological leadership, i.e. the degree of intensity of the use of new technologies in the processes of production of goods and provision of services;
• - the presence of vertical integration, i.e. acquisition or inclusion in the operating organization of other organizations that are members of technological process the production of goods or the provision of services at the stages before and after the technological process;
• - the desire of the organization to achieve leadership in terms of costs within the process of production and promotion of goods and services;
• - customer service, including the service provided, individualization of service, etc.;
• - pricing policy that corresponds to the chosen pricing strategy;
• - the ratio between own and borrowed funds;
• - attitude to the parent organization and its influence.

To analyze the competitive positions of organizations in the industry, a position map of strategic groups of competitors is used.

The construction of a positional map of strategic groups of competitors is carried out in the following sequence. From the set of characteristics listed above, the two most important and indicative features of industry organizations are selected. There may be several such pairs. Further, in the coordinates of the selected pairs of characteristics, a graph is drawn, on which points are plotted, reflecting the position of industry organizations. Closely located organizations on the chart are combined into a strategic group. The strategic group thus identified is outlined by a circle, the diameter of which is equal to the market share occupied by the organizations included in the circle. Based on the use of a position map, a strategic group of competitors is determined to which a particular analyzed organization belongs. When constructing a positional map of strategic groups of competitors, it is necessary to keep in mind several features.

The established characteristics of strategic groups of competitors should be independent or weakly correlated values, i.e. must be informative. With a strong correlation of two of the three pre-selected characteristics (with a linear correlation coefficient of more than 0.75), it is advisable to use one of the most informative characteristics from the point of view of the researcher. As a result, the two most independent characteristics will remain, which will be used.

The characteristics used to build the graph should be the most striking, the main criteria for dividing industry organizations into strategic groups. The most optimal indicators will be those that determine the main barriers in the industry.

The highlighted circles on the graph should correspond to the relative sizes of the groups.

With a large number of selected informative characteristics, for each pair of characteristics, their own positional maps are built. Strategic groups are established on the basis of the position map, which most clearly shows the division of industry organizations into groups.

Based on the use of a position map, a strategic group of competitors is determined to which a particular analyzed organization belongs.

The selected strategic groups differ from each other in several essential strategic features of the competitive strategy they have chosen.

Strategic groups of competitors can be established not only for the organization, but also for the products (services) produced (rendered) by these organizations. Let's demonstrate this on the example of tourist organizations and the services they provide.

Tourist organizations competing with each other differ in the quality of services provided in organized tours and their average price. The expert group determined the average quality of services of tourist organizations on a 100-point scale. The average price of tours was determined on the basis of the prices for tours in force in organizations.

Thus, the position map of services details and clarifies the competitive position of individual services within the previously identified strategic groups of competitors.

The five forces of competition operating in an industry will have different effects on identified strategic groups, so the attractiveness and profitability of strategic groups and their constituent organizations will be different. The analysis of strategic groups of competitors using the five forces model of M. Porter is aimed primarily at studying the impact of one of the five forces that determines the rivalry of organizations within the industry and at the same time has

The impact of the threat of new organizations depends on the entry and exit barriers in the industry and in each strategic group. The current high barriers, on the one hand, protect the existing profitability of organizations of strategic groups from new organizations, and on the other hand, increase competition within and between groups. In the presence of high barriers, group organizations cannot leave it and enter the neighboring one, which increases competition. As a result, existing barriers define the boundaries between groups and the structure of specific groups. However, barriers can change over time, for example, with the spread of innovations, which in some cases become the only way saving group organizations from bankruptcy. With positive results from the introduction of innovations, organizations move to other groups or form new ones.

Competition between strategic groups is determined by their number in the industry, the distribution of market shares between them, the distance between groups, as well as the interdependence of groups, which is associated with the similarity of consumer segments of the product differentiation used. The larger the number of organizations in the group, the smaller their market share and the stronger the competition between them. If customer segments various groups strongly intersect, then the level of competition between these groups will be high. If it is possible to identify significant differences in consumer segments in groups, then each of them will be a separate industry. With high product differentiation (goods and services have unique properties), the level of competition between groups and within groups is low, and with low product differentiation it is high.

The impact of consumers and suppliers on strategic groups depends on how they are the same or different for the groups under consideration. Assuming the same consumers ( target audience) and group suppliers will differ in their strategies, the success of which will determine the strength of competition. In the case of heterogeneous consumer audiences and suppliers, competition in groups will be determined by the applied strategies, individual or joint influence of consumers and suppliers.

The impact of the threat of new substitutes on strategic groups will be determined by the strategies in place in the groups, especially those based on cost savings (throughout the supply chain). production process or part of it) for existing goods and services and for substitute goods. As a result, the competitive advantage in the groups in terms of cost savings can be called into question by the appearance of substitute products. The competitive position of each organization in a strategic group will affect the profitability of the other organizations in the group. In this regard, let's consider groups of factors that determine the competitive position of a particular organization in a strategic group:

• - the degree of internal rivalry between organizations in a group is determined by the number of organizations, the distribution of market shares between them, the existing distance between organizations, as well as their market interdependence, i.e. there is an analogy with rivalry between groups;
• - economies of scale provide increased profitability of organizations with a large market share;
• - the cost of entering the group depends on the organization's available financial resources and timeliness of entry;
• - the ability of the organization to implement the chosen strategy.

M. Porter believes that the five forces of competition determine the profitability of the industry, the profitability of strategic groups in the industry and the profitability of organizations in each group. Under these conditions, the task of the organization is the competent use of available resources, as well as taking into account emerging opportunities and preventing threats. external environment. This becomes possible when the organization chooses the most attractive strategic group in the industry and the appropriate strategy.

The practical use of the considered method involves the following successive steps:

• - conducting a five-forces analysis to identify the overall competitive structure in the industry as a whole;
• - identification of the main competitors in the industry using the characteristics listed above (specialization, use of trademarks, promotion channels, etc.);
• - construction of a positional map of strategic groups of competitors, i.e. distribution by groups of identified main competitors;
• - establishing sources of barriers to mobility between strategic groups, which can be: economies of scale, product differentiation, the cost of switching to other goods and services, cost advantages, access to distribution, benefits from the parent company, etc.;
• - identification of the impact of consumers and suppliers on strategic groups (depending on how they are the same or different for the groups under consideration);
• - assessment of the degree of internal competitive rivalry between groups;
• - conducting a final five forces analysis using the data obtained to assess the stability of mobility barriers between groups, the stability of market power between groups and suppliers with consumers, the threat of the emergence of substitute products between groups, the degree of internal competitive rivalry between groups;
• - identification of a strategic group with the greatest opportunities and the least threats under the existing strategy of the organization;
• - identification of possible changes in the industry in terms of their impact on the organization's capabilities and threats to it;
• - tracking possible changes in strategic groups and their impact on the organization.

The current analysis of the state of the tourism industry using five market forces has shown the following.

• 1. Entry barriers affecting the penetration of new organizations into the industry (estimated on a five-point scale):
  • - economies of scale (production and marketing), due to which a low level of prices and production costs for tourism services is ensured;
  • - a significant level of capital required for implementation in this industry and high risks associated with the production of new services;
  • - the existing preferences of consumers, their attachment to the current trademarks for travel services;
  • - the presence of product differentiation (the ability of companies to ensure the uniqueness of the goods and services produced).
• 2. Bargaining power of consumers (assessed on a two-point scale):
  • - the difficulty of finding similar travel services from competing organizations;
  • - the uniqueness of the services offered;
  • - stabilization of prices for tourist services.
• 3. Market power of suppliers (assessed on a two-point scale):
  • - a well-established system of relations in the organization of charter flights;
  • - no difficulties in supplying tourist organizations necessary materials, equipment, technologies, etc.
• 4. Market growth, which determines the rivalry of industry organizations (estimated on a five-point scale):
  • - individualization quality service tourists contributes to an increase in demand for tourism services;
  • - small number of tourist organizations providing such services;
  • - the absence of foreign organizations providing services in these areas.
• 5. The threat of the emergence of substitute services (assessed on a two-point scale):
  • - lack of consumer propensity for substitute services;
  • - high cost of switching to other services.

Thus, the current competitive forces in the industry are weak and the profitability of the industry is high.

Also, based on the most important characteristics, the main competitors in the industry were identified. The same characteristics were used as the basis for constructing a positional map of strategic groups of competitors, which revealed two strategic groups of competitors in the tourism industry that differ in entry barriers. In the first group as entry barriers are the effect of marketing scale, the relatively low cost of tours, the high quality of services provided, the preferences of consumers in the current trademarks, and in the second strategic group - a significant level of capital to enter the group, significant product differentiation for all types of tours, the uniqueness of the services provided. Let the analyzed tourist organization (“Z-tour”) be in the first group.

The impact of the threat of the emergence of new substitute services on the selected strategic groups (determined by the current strategies in the groups in the current period) can be considered minimal.

Assessing the current state of strategic groups, it can be argued that the current threats are weak, and the profitability of the groups is at a high level. At the same time, the profitability of the organizations of the second strategic group exceeds the profitability of the organizations of the first, so the analyzed organization accumulates funds for the proposed transition to the second strategic group.

A long-term analysis of the state of the tourism industry for three to five years using five market forces showed that life cycle industry in the future may shift somewhat from the stage of growth to the stage of maturity, which will contribute to a slowdown in industry growth. Industry organizations will accumulate sufficient experience in reducing production costs, staff qualification, and individualization of service. However, the transition of the industry to the stage of maturity will lead to increased intra-industry competition. At the same time, there is a danger of the emergence of new foreign organizations in the industry, which can lead to even greater intensification of intra-industry competition.

Thus, in a few years there will be an increase in competitive forces in the industry, including increased competition among industry organizations, a significant reduction in entry barriers, an increase in the power of consumers and suppliers, and an increase in the threat from substitute services. As a result, the profitability of the industry will decrease to the average.

Possible changes in the industry will lead to a change in the position of organizations in strategic groups. They will have to focus their efforts on developing strategies that will help to avoid the negative consequences of these changes. Organizations of the first group will have to pursue a strategy aimed at increasing the effect of marketing scale, ensuring a relatively low cost of tours by increasing production cost savings, ensuring High Quality services provided. This whole complex will contribute to the retention of permanent consumers and the positions won by the organizations of the first group. Knowing the industry forecast, the analyzed organization will have to abandon the idea of ​​moving to the second strategic group. In addition, it will have to strengthen its position in the aforementioned areas.

Organizations of the first group will have to either significantly change the direction of their activities, or adapt to new conditions, but with a significant loss of profitability. So, on the example of organizations in the tourism sector, we showed the following:

• - the feasibility of building a positional map of strategic competitors to identify the nearest competing organizations and services in the field of tourism;
• - The five forces of competition of the M. Porter model will have a different impact on the selected strategic groups, so the attractiveness and profitability of strategic groups and their constituent organizations will be different;
• - ways to determine the most optimal strategic behavior tourism organization when there are two strategic groups of competitors in the industry.

USING THE METHOD OF STRATEGIC GROUPS IN MARKET ANALYSIS (BY THE EXAMPLE OF A FOOD RETAIL NETWORK)

Astashova Yulia Vladimirovna 1 , Demchenko Alexander Ivanovich 2 , Vaganov Maxim Alexandrovich 3
1 South Ural State University (National research university), Candidate of Economic Sciences, Associate Professor of the Department of Marketing and Management
2 South Ural State University (National Research University), Candidate of Technical Sciences, Associate Professor, Department of Marketing and Management
3 South Ural State University (National Research University), Student of the Department of Marketing and Management

USING OF A METHOD OF STRATEGIC GROUPS IN THE MARKET ANALYSIS (ON THE EXAMPLE OF A NETWORK FOOD RETAIL)

Astashova Julia Vladimirovna 1 , Demchenko Alexander Ivanovich 2 , Vaganov Maxim Aleksandrovich 3
1 South Ural State University (National Research University), PhD in Economic Science, Assistant Professor of the Marketing and Management Department
2 South Ural State University (National Research University), PhD in Technical Science, Assistant Professor of the Marketing and Management Department
3 South Ural State University (National Research University), Student of the Marketing and Management Department

Bibliographic link to the article:
Astashova Yu.V., Demchenko A.I., Vaganov M.A. Using the method of strategic groups in the analysis of the market (on the example of a network of food retail) // Humanitarian scientific research. 2014. No. 8 [Electronic resource]..03.2019).

The food market is one of the strategically important markets for human life support. Food products are classified as essential goods and daily demand. Population growth predetermines an increase in demand for food, and therefore, the food business can be attributed to the most stable. All this determines the high level of competition in the food market.

Despite the relative stability of the market, it is also subject to change. One of the most significant changes In recent years, one can name the shift of profit cents from the production of "simple" food products to the sphere of their processing and packaging. All this leads to an increase in the importance of branding and forms the prerequisites for the use of market differentiation strategies.

This phenomenon also determined the conditions for changing the structure of competition in the link retail sales food . At present, there has been a shift from competition between small independent stores, which were more of a "store near the home" category, to competition between chain stores. At the same time, not only local chains, but also federal and international participants are actively developing in the markets of large cities, introducing new standards to the market. trade service, approaches to the formation of the assortment and pricing policy.

As part of this article, we will assess competition in the market of network food retail using the example of a large regional center - the city of Chelyabinsk.

The relevance of assessing the structure of competition in the market of food chains in the city of Chelyabinsk lies in the fact that the market in question is currently experiencing rapid growth. In many ways, this growth is associated with the overall growth of the economy of Chelyabinsk, the increase in the purchasing power of residents and the scale of real estate construction, including retail.

Assessment of the structure of competition involves an analysis of the position of competitors in the market. One of the methods for comparing the competitive positions of companies is the development of a map of strategic groups, which allows you to compare the market positions of companies, combine them into homogeneous groups and identify your closest competitors. A strategic group is made up of companies with similar strategies and positions. An industry can contain a single group or multiple strategic groups. The closer the strategic groups are to each other, the more intense the competition. This method is especially effective when there are a large number of competitors in the industry, and it is impossible to study them separately.

For a comprehensive and complete analysis of the industry under consideration, it is advisable to build a map of strategic groups using the key variables for the industry, which in no case should be correlated. Despite the fact that many chains develop stores of various formats, each operator has a share of outlets of one specific format significantly exceeds the share of others, with the exception of the Chelyabinsk Molniya chain. So, for buyers, they are associated with one particular format and compete mainly at the expense of stores of this particular format. To begin with, we list the distinctive competitive characteristics: the number outlets, format, level of service, location.

Let's make a map of strategic groups by two variables - the number of outlets and their format. The resulting map is shown in fig. one.

Figure 1 - Map of strategic groups

Analyzing the resulting map of strategic groups, certain conclusions can be drawn. First, according to the chosen two variables in the industry, 4 strategic groups can be distinguished, which include all market participants.

The first strategic group includes 5 competitors. There are only 4 chains on the city market, which have more than 10 outlets (Pyaterochka, Magnit, Dixy and Lightning). At the same time, Magnit, the closest competitor, which is part of the same strategic group of the Monetka chain, is ahead of the latter in terms of the number of outlets by almost 4 times. The leaders in this group (both in terms of the number of retail outlets and in terms of financial turnover) are the leaders of the Chelyabinsk and Russian markets at the same time. It is especially worth highlighting the Chelyabinsk Molniya, which owns outlets of various formats, including the so-called Molniya-Express, which are nothing more than convenience stores and therefore are included in this strategic group. These network operators are characterized by a strategy of reaching a larger number of customers by expanding the geography of the network, since they have enough resources for this. The total market share of networks included in this strategic group is 21.1%. These networks compete most closely with each other. Basically, the struggle between them is for small geographical markets (for example, microdistricts or quarters). The main competitive advantages in this strategic group are: location in densely populated residential areas and low prices. As a rule, these networks, due to the format they choose, are characterized by a relatively small assortment, which makes them especially vulnerable in the event of the appearance of substitute goods and services. So, buyers, instead of buying vegetables or fruits in a discount store, can easily choose a kiosk located nearby at home, where prices will be even lower, but the quality will not be worse. Change market conditions, such as a decrease in the purchasing power of citizens, will not affect the networks of this strategic group so much, because the price level is significantly lower than that of competitors developing other formats. At the same time, the margin of profit of these networks is relatively low and can be increased mainly due to economies of scale and purchases of goods in very large quantities at a reduced price.

The second strategic group is represented by 4 competitors (Lightning, Spar, Prospekt, Mir Eda). Moreover, three of these networks are represented by local Chelyabinsk operators, which indicates the attractiveness of this segment for local operators who are well acquainted with South Ural consumers. The leader in this strategic group is Molniya, largely due to the fact that it has been on the market since 1998 and during this time has enlisted the support of the population. In this strategic group, there is fierce competition for customer loyalty, which was started by Molniya. It was this network that was the first to introduce a cumulative discount system, which proved to be effective and after a while was adopted by other networks, including Prospekt. Competitive advantages in this strategic group are the location in the city center, at the intersections of main streets and road junctions, as well as the availability of parking. The presence of good parking is noted by many experts as one of the main advantages of supermarkets, which people usually stop by on their way home after work. The supermarket segment is less threatened by substitutes than discounters and convenience stores, as stores this format, as a rule, are located in the center, where there are no various trade pavilions or kiosks. Prices in supermarkets are mostly higher than in stores of other formats, and, as a result, the average check is almost the largest in the market. This is largely due to the expensive rental of premises in the city center. The main stake in the competition, as already mentioned, is on customer loyalty. This is facilitated by discount programs, a high level of service, the absence of large queues, as well as the availability of unique products, including premium ones. Due to the above conditions, the networks of this strategic group are more dependent on such economic indicators, as the purchasing power of citizens and the inflation rate in the country than the network of the first strategic group. At the same time, the profitability rate of the networks of this strategic group is higher than that of discounters and convenience stores.

The third strategic group is represented by the most big amount competitors. Among them: "Lightning", "Auchan", "OUR", "Crossroads", "Theorem", "Megamart" and "Carousel". The leader in this group can be called the Chelyabinsk network "Lightning", it owns the largest number of points - 4, one of which is the first point of this format in the city. This group is represented by networks of local, federal and international scale, which indicates the interest of this segment among companies of different levels of development. Barriers to entry into this segment are the highest due to the need for a large amount of resources. Due to the relatively small size of the Chelyabinsk market, networks, as a rule, run the risk of opening only 1-2 outlets. At the same time, these are mainly "anchor" projects located in large shopping malls, occupying at least 5-15% of their total area. The main competitive advantages are: location in large, advertised shopping malls, large trade area, as well as the availability of products under their own brand. It is vital for the networks of this strategic group to generate and attract a large flow of customers. Location in popular shopping complex is more acceptable than on the outskirts of the city or even more so on highways outside the city. Competitors in this group are more dependent on the emergence of new players, since in this case market shares and profits are strongly eroded, especially if a strong international player enters, truncating part of the consumers. In the strategic group under consideration, chains experience a minimal degree of threat from substitute goods, since they, as a rule, are characterized by a deep and wide assortment, that is, it is sufficient to satisfy the majority of buyers. Through their own branded products, hypermarkets have some independence from suppliers, whose power is greatly reduced when cooperating with large hypermarkets. Small suppliers, as a rule, are ready to do anything to get their products on the shelves of hypermarkets.

The fourth strategic group is represented by only one competitor - "Metro". This is the only network operating in the "Cash & Carry" format in the market of the city of Chelyabinsk. Being the owner of only one point, by the standards of the market, she owns a serious share - 1.4%. Metro is aimed at specific audience buyers, due to the very characteristics of the format, are the owners of small and medium-sized businesses, as a rule, the hospitality industry or HoReCa. At the same time, the main focus is on exclusivity, since only owners of client cards can make purchases. The largest value of the check on the market (3500 rubles), just the same, is due to the presence, among other things, of small-scale wholesale trade. In this segment, Metro is a kind of monopoly, so many of the competitive forces acting on representatives of other strategic groups have little or no effect on it. So, buyers are limited in their ability to bargain, since the most favorable possible conditions have been created for them. These also include the threat from substitute goods and services, which is almost completely absent. At the same time, suppliers are interested in selling in large quantities, so cooperation with Metro is important for them, which is reflected in a decrease in market power on their part. The most dangerous competitive force in this strategic group is the emergence of new players. These include the well-known European network Selgros, which already has 6 trade centers in Russia. However, it will most likely not appear on the Chelyabinsk market soon, since so far it is developing only in the central part of Russia. Thus, Metro still has the opportunity to quietly develop in the Cash & Carry format, while simultaneously taking market share from purely retail chains. .2014).

To identify the main competitors of the company, it is advisable to use the concept of strategic groups. 1 According to this concept, rival firms belong to the same strategic group if they use the same competitive strategies and occupy similar positions in the market.

The classification of firms into strategic groups is based on the compilation of a map of strategic groups. A strategic group map is constructed by denoting the market position of firms in an industry in two-dimensional coordinates, where the axes are two strategic variables that reflect the distinctive features of this industry.

The two extreme situations in which an industry is divided into strategic groups are:

a) the presence in the industry of one strategic group that unites all firms in the industry and implements the same strategies on the market; s

b) the presence of strategic groups in the industry, in terms of their number
corresponding to the number of competing firms, each of which has its own competitive strategy and its own competitive position in the market.

Procedure for Mapping Strategic Groups and Determining
belonging of firms to one or another strategic group consists
next.

Stage 1. First, a complete list of competitive characteristics that are typical for firms in this industry is determined. For each variable, a qualitative scale of gradations of a sign. Most often, the choice is made from variables such as:

♦ price/quality ratio (high, medium, low);

♦ geographical area of ​​activity (local, regional, national, global);

♦ degree of vertical integration (none, partial, full); product range (narrow, wide);

♦ product distribution channels (one, several, all);

♦ scope of services offered (simple, limited, full);

♦ technology used (stable, fruitful, changeable);

♦ competitive strength factor (flexibility, adaptability to the target market, high productivity, advance in innovations);

♦ patents, technological and marketing know-how (none, partial possession, full possession), etc.

If necessary, this list can also be supplemented with variables that take into account the specific features of the analyzed industry, if these variables significantly differ in the strategic positions of firms operating in the industry.

Stage 2. Formation of the axes of the map of strategic groups. From the identified set of strategic characteristics of the industry, pairs of characteristics are formed that meet the following principles:

1. The selected pair of characteristics should be relatively independent.

2. The characteristics chosen as the axes of the map should reveal a significant difference in the positioning of rivals in the market competition.

3. The variables used as axes need not be quantitative or continuous; for purposes of analysis, discrete variables or variables defined as classes and combinations are quite convenient.

4. More than two strategic characteristics of competition can be chosen as axes of the map.

To form pairs of characteristics used as axes of the map of strategic groups, it is convenient to use the method of paired comparisons. As part of this method for all the strategic characteristics of the industry selected at the first stage, they are compared in pairs. If in the compared pair one characteristic is more significant for assessing the differentiation of a competitive position than another, then this preference in the table is reflected in a pair of numbers (2.0) at the intersection of the corresponding rows and columns. If the characteristics are evaluated as equivalent, then a pair of numbers (1,1) is entered in the table. If there is a connection between the characteristics, which does not allow differentiating the strategic positions of firms for each of the characteristics, then this pair features are not comparable.

For each characteristic, a total score is calculated, on the basis of which a pair of variables with the highest score is selected for the axes of the map of strategic groups.

Stage 3. Positioning of firms on the map of strategic groups according to the specified pair of characteristics.

Stage 4. Formation of strategic groups.

Isolation of a set of firms that fall into one strategic space as an independent strategic group.

Stage 5. Determining the size of a strategic group. Graphically, the strategic group is represented as a circle, the size of which is proportional to the calculated share of the strategic group in the industry (Fig. 7.1).

Determining for a firm its strategic group allows not only
to assess the strategic position of the group itself in the industry, but you
identify the company's direct competitors.

Competitor analysis is a very important step. external analysis. Main tasks strategic analysis competitors is: 1. identification of significant and potential competitors; 2. identifying strengths and weaknesses competitors; 3. future forecast strategic decisions competitors; 4. predicting the reactions of competitors to the strategy and actions of a given organization; 5. determination of the influence of competitors on the advantage of this organization.

There are two main ways to identify competitors:

I. definition of competitors as strategic groups. The strategic group map is used to refine the analysis of the first strength of competition from 5 forces, allows you to identify the most obvious competitors and answer the question: “Which organizations have the strongest or weakest competitive positions?”. Strategic group of competitors - a set of competing organizations with the same ... .. competitive activity and the same positions in the market.

Firms that fall into the same strategic group may be similar to each other in the following main ways: 1. similarity of products; 2. the same place position; 3. activity in the same price range; 4. use of the same distribution channels; 5. use of the same technologies; 6. provision of similar services and the like.

The minimum number of strategic groups in an industry is one if all firms in the industry are similar to each other, and the maximum number of groups is the same as the number of firms in the industry if they are all similar to each other.

The algorithm for constructing a map of strategic groups: 1. establish the most important parameters that distinguish firms in the industry from each other. The minimum number of parameters required is two. 2. Map existing firms in the industry with 2 variables plotted along the axes. 3. combine firms that fall into approximately one part of the map into one strategic group. 4. draw circles around each strategic group, which should be proportional in diameter to the share of this group in the total sales of the industry.

Requirements for the parameters chosen to build the map: 1. parameters plotted along the axes of the map should not normalize to each other, that is, they should not reflect the same thing; 2. the parameters should have not a quantitative, but a qualitative scale of measurement; 3. if there are more than two important parameters, then several maps of strategic groups can be built. An example of a strategic group map for food retail in a major city.

Picture. Map of strategic groups of competitors.

Conclusions on the map of strategic groups: 1. The most obvious competitors for each other are in the same strategic group. 2. The more groups are located to each other, the stronger the competition between the firms included in them.

II. identification of competitors from the position of buyers. Sometimes it makes sense to identify competitors from the perspective of buyers, as they have needs for which it is considering alternatives. To identify competitors from the point of view of buyers, they use: 1. a survey of buyers about which brand specific product they would have stopped their choice if there was no familiar brand; 2. identifying associations between products and specific situations of use or ways of using them. To compile a list of such situations, it is necessary to interview 20-30 people. For each use case, they will have to name all relevant products. For each product, all relevant use cases must be named. Then the 2nd group of buyers evaluates how appropriate each product is in a particular situation.