Differentiation Strategyand Impact On Business

Strategic Journal of Business and Social Science (SJBSS) Volume 1, Dec 2018
Website: www.sj-bss.com Email: editor@sj-bss.com
DIFFERENTIATION STRATEGYAND IMPACT ON BUSINESS

1 Obinna Tony- Okeke and 2Ugwuegbu Charles Onyemachi
1, 2, discipline: Business Management Imo State University Nigeria
Abstract:
Differentiation strategies are based on providing buyers with something that is
different or unique, that makes the company’s product or service distinct from that of
its rivals. The study aimed at discussing the impact differentiation strategy has on
business using empirical studies. The study is grouped on four sections which are:
introduction, literature review, conceptual framework, and conclusion. The study
concludes that there exist significance relationship between differentiation strategy
and business performance. It implies that organization irrespective of industry must
pay greater attention to the products or services they offer to their esteemed
customers’ in terms of quality, design, innovations, and unique features. Based on the
descriptive nature of the study, a conceptual model was developed that will guide
further studies that might be empirical in nature.
Keywords: Differentiation Strategy, Business Impact
1. Introduction
The victory of APC as political party in Nigeria in the 2015 general election was as
a result of the strategy pursued. The slogan ‘change’ was adopted in creating a
different ideology in the political history of Nigerian which resulted to a huge loss
to the PDP’ making them challengers’ both in the upper and lower house. In USA,
Bill Clinton used a simple strategy expressed in four words ‘It's the economy, stupid’
in defeating George Bush.
Strategic Journal of Business and Social Science (SJBSS) www.sj-bss.com

Obinna Tony- Okeke: Differentiation Strategy and Business Impact, 2018
pg. 1
In the world of business, one could ask why some organizations always seem to beat
their competition, the answer to the question is based on a thoughtful strategy. The
competitiveness of an organization to a large extent depends on the choice of generic
strategies pursued at any given time (differentiation, cost leadership, & Niche).
Looking at the nature of environmental dynamism of business, maintaining a
sustained competitive advantage entails an organization developing a core
competency which will enable it in differentiating its products/services in terms of
processes, quality and packaging, advertising, and distribution channels with that of
its competitors. For instance, “Mangero’ table water is among the bestselling table
water in Owerri, Imo State. This is because, the company was able to differentiation
its product with beautiful design. Again, Tummy-Tummy Noodles was able to gain
a substantial share in the food industry by adding vegetable as an additional spices
in its noodle thereby differentiating itself from other brands of noodles in the market.
In achieving this differentiation, a good number of firms have resorted to ‘‘brand

awareness war through advertising’’ in order to create an image or identity in the
minds of their target market for their products, brands, and even their organizations.
A good example of differentiation strategy through advertising was the case of Coca-
Cola and their rival Pepsi. These two firms have long ago used different advertising
slogans in creating superiority in the soft drink industry. The following are some of
the advertising slogans used by Coca-Cola in telling their customers’ that its product
is more superior than Pepsi ( Coca-Cola satisfies, Delicious and Refreshing, Good
all the way down, Thirst quenching - delicious and refreshing, Cooling...
refreshing... delicious, Delicious, wholesome, refreshing, Delicious, wholesome,

pg. 2
thirst quenching etc). Pepsi had to find a way to make people think different of what
they were used to. Making Coke look old was solution they found (Now It's Pepsi
for Those Who Think Young, Come Alive! You're in the Pepsi Generation, The
Choice of a New Generation, A Generation Ahead, Be Young, Have Fun, Drink
Pepsi etc) (Paulo, 2009)). The above slogans were used by Coca- Cola and Pepsi in
differentiating their products in price, quality, packing, and other features making
them leaders and challengers in the soft drink industry.
Differentiation strategies are based on providing buyers with something that is

different or unique, that makes the company’s product or service distinct from that
of its rivals. The key assumption behind a differentiation strategy is that customers
are willing to pay a higher price for a product that is distinct (or at least perceived as
such) in some important way. Superior value is created because the product is of
higher quality, is technically superior in some way, comes with superior service, or
has a special appeal in some perceived way. In effect differentiation builds
competitive advantage by making customers more loyal-and less price-sensitive-to
a given firm’s product. Additionally, consumers are less likely to search for other
alternative products once they are satisfied (Jeff, 2009).
The study aimed at discussing the impact differentiation strategy has on business
using empirical studies. The section discussed the concept of differentiation strategy,
building differentiation base advantage followed by theoretical and empirical
review. Next is the conceptual framework that will guide further studies and
conclusion.

pg. 3
2. Review of Related Literature

2.1 The Concept of Differentiation Strategies
Differentiation strategy is among the generic strategic approaches in building
competitive advantage. Differentiation strategies are based on providing buyers with
something that is different or unique, that makes the company’s product or service
distinct from that of its rivals. The key assumption behind a differentiation strategy
is that customers are willing to pay a higher price for a product that is distinct (or at
least perceived as such) in some important way. Superior value is created because
the product is of higher quality, is technically superior in some way, comes with
superior service, or has a special appeal in some perceived way. In effect
differentiation builds competitive advantage by making customers more loyal-and
less price-sensitive-to a given firm’s product. Additionally, consumers are less likely
to search for other alternative products once they are satisfied (Jeff, 2009).
Aaker (1984) cited in Tom (2008) defines a differentiation strategy as one in which
a product is different from that of one or more competitors in a way that is valued
by the customers or in some way affects customer’s choice. A successful
differentiation strategy allows firm to earn above the average returns. Aaker (1984)
cited in Tom (2008) further argues that a differentiation strategy is often but not
always associated with higher price because it usually makes price less critical. It
provides the organization with insulator to competitors because of the brand loyalty
and the need to overcome the uniqueness. Differentiation strategy has successfully
been used to build customer loyalty and compete effectively in the market.
Through differentiation a customer is given reason to choose the brand and not any
other service or product. Although all products or services can be differentiated not

pg. 4
all brand difference are worthwhile or meaningful to the customers (Porter (1980),
Aaker, (1984 cited in Kotler, (2000)). The challenge is to establish a difference that
is relevant to customers. An organization is also faced with a challenge of how many
differences to promote (Aaker, 1984 cited in Tom, 2008) thus helping an
organization to avoid the risks of over-positioning, under-positioning, confused
positioning and doubtful positioning. Furthermore, the success of a differentiation
strategy lies in adopting a differentiation that is important to customers, distinctive,
superior, affordable and profitable.
Differentiation is one of Porter’s key business strategies (Reilly, 2002). When using
this strategy, a company focuses its efforts on providing a unique product or service
(Hyatt, 2001). Since, the product or service is unique, this strategy provides high
customer loyalty (Hlavacka et al., 2001). Product differentiation fulfills a customer
need and involves tailoring the product or service to the customer. This allows
organizations to charge a premium price to capture market share. The differentiation
strategy is effectively implemented when the business provides unique or superior
value to the customer through product quality, features, or after-sale support. Firms
following a differentiation strategy can charge a higher price for their products based
on the product characteristics, the delivery system, the quality of service, or the
distribution channels. The quality may be real or perceived based on fashion, brand
name, or image. The differentiation strategy appeals to a sophisticated or
knowledgeable consumer interested in a unique or quality product and willing to pay
a higher price.

pg. 5
When using differentiation, firms must be prepared to add a premium to the cost
(Hyatt, 2001). This is not to suggest costs and prices are not considered; only it is
not the main focus (Hlavacka et al., 2001). However, since customers perceive the
product or service as unique, they are loyal to the company and willing to pay the
higher price for its products (Hlavacka et al., 2001). Some key concepts for
establishing differentiation include: speaking about the product to select panels
(McCracken, 2002), writing on key topics affecting the company in the association's
magazine or newsletter (McCracken, 2002), becoming involved in the community
(McCracken. 2002), being creative when composing the company's portfolio
(Tuminello. 2002), offering something the competitor does not or cannot offer
(Rajecki, 2002), adding flair and drama to the store layout (Differentiation will be
key, 2002), providing e-commerce (Chakravarthy. 2000), making access to company
information and products both quick and easy (Chakravarthy, 2000), using company
size as an advantage (Darrow et al., 2001), training employees with in- depth product
and service knowledge (Darrow et al., 2001), offering improved or innovative
products (Helms et al., 1997 in Tom, 2008), emphasizing the company's state-of-
the-art technology, quality service, and unique products/services (Hlavacka et al.,
2001; Bright. 2002), using photos and renderings in brochures (McCracken, 2002),
and selecting products and services for which there is a strong local need (Darrow et
al., 2001).
Examples of companies that have successfully pursued differentiation strategies
include Mercedes, Toyota, Honda, and BMW in automobiles, Heineken, Indomie
Noodles, Tummy-Tummy Noodles, Coca-Cola, Zenith Bank Plc etc.

pg. 6
2.1.2 Building a differentiation-Based Advantage

According to (Jeff, 2009) firms practicing differentiation seek to design and produce
highly distinctive or unique product or service attributes that create high value for
their customers. Within the firm, according to him, differentiation-based sources of
competitive advantage in value-adding activities can be built through a number of
methods. An important strategic consideration managers must recognize is that
differentiation does not mean the firm can neglect its cost structure. While low unit
cost is less important than distinctive product features to firms practicing
differentiation, the firm’s total cost structure is still important. Jeff (2009) further
argued that the costs of pursuing differentiation cannot be so high that they
completely erode the price premium the firm can charge. Firms pursuing
differentiation must still control expenses to balance somewhat higher costs with a
distinctive edge in key activities. The cost structure of a firm or business pursuing a
differentiation strategy still needs to be carefully managed, although attaining low-
unit costs is not the overriding priority. A firm selecting differentiation must
therefore aim at achieving cost parity or, at the very least, cost proximity relative to
competitors by keeping costs low in areas not related to differentiation and by not
spending too much to achieve differentiation. Thus, the cost structure of a firm
practicing differentiation cannot be that far above the industry average (Jeff, 2009).
Differentiation shouldn’t be an end to itself; organizations’ practicing it must
endeavor in searching for new ways to improve the distinctiveness or uniqueness of
their products/services they offer to their customers’.
In almost all differentiation strategies according to Jeff (2009), attention to product
quality and service represent the dominant routes for firms to build competitive

pg. 7
advantage. For example, firms may improve a product’s quality or performance

characteristics to make it more distinctive in the customer’s eyes, as Lexus does with
its sleek line of automobiles or Tiffany & Company does with its broad line of
jewellery and gift items. The product or service can also embody a distinctive design
or offering that is hard to delicately, thus conveying an image of unique quality; as
with (Jeff, 2009).
After-sales service, convenience, and quality are important means to achieve
differentiation for numerous firms, such as for IBM in computer and electronic
commerce technology or Hewlert-Packard in desktop printers and digital imaging
technologies (Jeff, 2009).
Organizations can still purse differentiation through technologically advanced
products like adding new features that convey a sense of quality that enables firms
to distinguish themselves from competitors, as Sony has done with great success in
its Walkmans, Discmans, Trinitron television sets, and now Playstation 1 and 2
video game systems (Jeff, 2009). Technological innovation will enable firms to stay
ahead of competition, improve new product development and remain in touch with
market trends and consumers’ needs. It is not unusual for firms practicing
differentiation to invest in production processes that use specially designed
equipment that makes it hard for rivals to imitate the product’s quality (Jeff, 2009).
Olympus Optical fine camera lenses are one example says Jeff. Olympus’s skills in
fine optics and lens grinding make it difficult for other competitors to rapidly imitate
its fine quality of cameras, microscopes, and other laboratory instruments that
command premium prices through the world (Jeff, 2009). Any potential source of
increased buyer value represents an opportunity to pursue a differentiation strategy.

pg. 8
According Jeff (2009), buyer value can be increased or made more distinctive
through several approaches, including (1) lowering the buyer’s cost of using the
product, (2) increasing buyer satisfaction with the product, and (3) modifying the
buyer’s perception of value. Of course, these three approaches to increasing buyer
value are not mutually exclusive; a distinctive product or service that lowers buyer’s
direct costs can certainly increase their level of satisfaction as well. Nevertheless,
increasing buyer value on any dimension usually means a need to reconfigure or to
improve other activities within the firm’s value chain (Jeff, 2009).
Among the advantages of differentiation is that it enables an organization in
generating customer loyalty, higher prices increasing market share, and reducing the
threat of possible entrant in an industry. On the basis of increasing market share, any
differentiation strategies based on high quality may, up to a point, actually increase
the potential market share that a firm can gain (Jeff, 2009). One landmark study
noted, in fact, that competitive strategies based on high product quality actually
increased market share resulted in significantly increased profitability. Product
quality often leads to higher reputation and demand that translate into higher market
share. Finally, differentiation processes substantial loyalty barriers that firms
contemplating entry must overcome. Highly distinctive or unique products make it
difficult for new entrants to compete with the reputation and skills that existing firms
already possess (Jeff, 2009). For example the Nigerian Noodl’s industry has
experienced several series of liquidation (Dangota noodles and Mimee Noodles)
based on differentiation on quality. Dangota and Mimee noodles liquidated because
they unable to compete based on quality.

pg. 9
On the side of disadvantage of differentiation, a firm is faced with a great challenge

of being “out differentiated” by firms that already have distinctive products by
providing a similar or better product. Irrespective how effective a firms’
differentiation is in terms of generating customer loyalty and higher price might be,
it cannot seal completely the presence of new entrants in the market especially where
the new entrant has the needed capabilities and resources to compete favorably with
established firms’.
In fact, excessive product proliferation according to Jeff (2009) can even hurt a
firm’s attempt to de-differentiate, since customers may become confused with the
wide variety of offerings. For example, H.J. Heinz’s recent moves to offer ketchup
with different coolers may have backfired, as some buyers are turned off by the
prospect of putting purple or green ketchup on their French fries (Jeff 2009). The
move to out-differentiate another rivals can be seen among Radio Stations in Imo
State. Hot Fm differentiated itself from Heartland and Orient Fm by incorporate
programms like ‘Birth Day Shows, New Paper Review and ‘People’s Assembly’.
The Peoples’ assembly allows people to call in and participate in national issues as
reviewed in the national newspapers and is being done in English Language. Today,
the emergence Darling Fm has rebranded the people’s assembly as initiated by Hot
Fm making it more interesting as the programme is now being done in Igbo
Language allowing people to listen and participate to national issues in their dialects.
Also Gold Fm has improved on the Birthday Show as introduced by Hot Fm by
allowing callers who wants to celebrate their loves once to choose any music of their
choice they want them to play for their loves once.

pg. 10
Furthermore, Price premiums may become difficult to justify as customers gain more
knowledge about the product. The comparatively high cost structure of a firm
practicing differentiation could become a real weakness when lower-cost product
imitations or substitutes hit the market (Jeff 2009). For example, in 2017, Coca-Cola
Nigeria increased the price of its 60cl plastic bottle form N100 to N150 while Pepsi
maintained the price of its 50cl to remain at N100. Customers who were price
sensitive brand switched from Coco to Pepsi resulting to huge loss of sales and
market share for Coca-Cola. In responding to the above threat, Coca-Cola lunched
35cl at N100 to compete with Pepsi’s 50cl being sold at N100. Still at that, majority
of people still prefer Pepsi because of they have gained more knowledge about
product quality and price.
More also, differentiation also leaves a firm vulnerable to the eventual
“commoditization “of its product, service offering. Or value concept when new
competitors enter the market or when customers become more knowledgeable about
what is available (Jeff, 2009). Over time, firms that are unable to sustain their initial
differentiation-based lead with future product or service innovations will find
themselves at a significant, if not dangerous, cost disadvantage when large numbers
of customers eventually gravitate to those forms that can produce a similar product
or service at lower cost. Finally firms also face risks of overdoing differentiation that
may overtaxes or overextend the firm’s resources. For example Nissan Motor of
Japan during the past decade became so obsessed with finding new ways to
differentiate its cars that it produced more than thirty types of steering wheels for its
line of cars and a broad line of engine, all of which eventually confused customers
and made manufacturing costly. Nissan recently announced a sharp reduction in the

pg. 11
number of steering wheel sizes, optional accessories, and other features in its cars to
lower its operating cost. In 2000, Nissan reduced the number of core automobile
platforms to seven in order to reduce the high cost of overlap and design. Excessive
differentiation can seriously erode the competitive advantage and profitability of
firms as rising operating costs eat into price premiums that customers are willing to
pay (Jeff, 2009).
2.2 Theorizing Differentiation Strategy as source of Competitive Advantage
In order to understand the concept differentiation strategy as source of competitive
advantage, the Resource-Base View (RBV) Theory and the Capability Theory was
reviewed.
The resource-based view theory has defined firm resources as all assets, capabilities,
organizational processes, firm attributes, information, knowledge controlled by a
firm (Barney, 1991cited in Joy, Oluwole, and Ibidunni, 2013). The theory explains
the strategic position a firm would be able to maintain when its resources cannot be
duplicated by a current or potential competitor. Similarly, the theory states that for
resource and capability to give a firm competitive edge, it must be rare, valuable,
unable to be imitated, with no substitute, and not transferable.
The resource based theory believes that an organization’s resources are diverse in
nature and not completely/freely movable which has led to differences among
organizations. Put differently, the heterogeneity of resources has led to business
heterogeneity. Since the resources are not completely mobile, the heterogeneity
among organizations is bound to exist for a long time. If an organization with scarce
resources is able to create value and its resources either cannot be imitated by its
competitors, or easily replaced by other resources, then such an organization has

pg. 12
monopoly position and thus condition necessary for achieving sustainable

competitive advantage and the excess profits (Joy, Oluwole, and Ibidunni, 2013).
The Resource-Based-View (RBV) helps to explain why some resources are more
advantage-generating than others and also why resource asymmetries and
consequent competitive advantages persist even in conditions of open competition.
Organizations with similar resources often have difference in the efficiency of
resources usage brought about by the differences in capability, which is the reason
for the deep-seated competitive advantage (Liu and Huang 2009). Prahalad and
Hamel (1990) cited in Joy, Oluwole, and Ibidunni (2013) defined core capability as
the accumulated knowledge of organization, especially about how to coordinate the
different skills of production and the organic integration of a variety of technical
flow of knowledge. Core competitiveness is a mixture of many factors; it is the
combination of technology, governance mechanisms and collective learning. Core
competitiveness is the collection of a set of skills and technology, not a single
technology or skill. It is a source of competitive advantage.
There are three main features of core capability as cited by Joy, Oluwole, and
Ibidunni (2013):
1. The core capability has the full user value, able to create value and reduce costs.
2. The core capability is unique, it is difficult to imitate by competitors.
3. The core capability must have the ability to provide support for the organization
to access a number of markets.
Barney (1991) cited in Joy, Oluwole, and Ibidunni (2013) concludes that resources
and capabilities of firms are keys to creating sustained competitive advantage and
achieving superior performance.

pg. 13
2.3 Impact of Differentiation Strategy on Business
In order to investigate the impact of differentiation strategy on business

performance, the following empirical reviews were carried out:
Tom (2008) carried out a descriptive survey with the objective of determining the
relationship between differentiation strategy and competitive advantage using radio
stations in Nairobi as a case study. A questionnaire was used to collect data which
was administered using drop and pick method to the management of various radio
stations. Data was analyzed using descriptive statistics and correlation. The study
found out that there is a relationship between differentiation strategy chosen by the
radio stations and competitive advantage.
In another study by Hashem, Hamid, and Samira (2012) on the Effects of Cost
Leadership Strategy and Product Differentiation Strategy on the Performance of
Firms. The study collected data from 45 firms in the Tehran Security Exchange
(TSE) during 2003-2010. The results indicated a positive relationships between
leverage; cost leadership strategy and dividend payout with performance. The results
also suggested that there were positive relationships between leverage and firm's size
with performance in the firms with product differentiation strategy, but the relation
between product differentiation strategy and dividend payout with performance was
negative.
Similarly, Enida, Vasilika, & Amali (2015) investigated the impact of generic
competitive strategies on organizational performance. The data was collected using
questionnaires and analyzed using ANOVA statistical model. The study found

pg. 14
significant positive effects of cost leadership, differentiation and focus strategies on

performance.
The study findings of Acquaah and Yasai-Ardekani (2008) show the viability and
profitability of implementing cost leadership, differentiation, and the combination
of the singular strategies. Nevertheless, the incremental performance benefits to
firms implementing a combination strategy do not significantly differ from the
performance of firms implementing only the differentiation strategy. In addition,
firms that implement a coherent competitive strategy (combination, cost-
leadership, or differentiation) tend to gain considerable incremental performance
benefits.
Also, the study findings of Amoako-Gyampah and Acquaah (2008) who examined
the relationship between manufacturing strategy and competitive strategy and their
influence on firm performance indicate that there is a positive relationship between
competitive strategy and the manufacturing strategies of cost, delivery, flexibility,
and quality. In addition, the result shows that quality is the only manufacturing
strategy component that influences performance indirectly.
Prajogo and Sohal’s (2006) results also indicate that Total Quality Management
(TQM) is positively and significantly related to differentiation strategy, and it only
partially mediates the relationship between differentiation strategy and three
performance measures. Allen and Helms (2002) were of the opinion that different
types of reward practices more closely complement different generic strategies and
are significantly related to organizational performance. Mosakowski (1993) cited in
Joy, Oluwole, and Ibidunni (2013) study’s results generally supported the

pg. 15
hypotheses that, when the focus and differentiation strategies are established,
performance is higher than for other firms.
Finally, Joy, Oluwole, and Ibidunni (2013) whose study on product differentiation:
a tool of competitive advantage and optimal organizational performance found a
significant positive relationship between product differentiation and organizational
performance. Based on the above empirical review, we can conclude, that there is a
positive relationship between differentiation and business performance.
3. Conceptual Framework
This study developed a conceptual model that will guide further studies
Differentiation Organizational
Strategies Performance
Product Innovation
Market Share
Higher Product Quality

Customer Loyalty
Lower Cost
Differentiation
Figure 1. Conceptual frame work

pg. 16
4. Conclusion
Maintaining sustained competitive advantage in any given industry entails adopting
the generic competitive strategies of which differentiation is among them. In
building differentiation advantage, an organization must ensure that its cost structure
is control, product/services is of quality, design is enticing, and finally, innovation
should be on continual basis so as to enable the organization to stay ahead of
competition.
In conclusion, from the empirical review, it can be established that there exist
significance relationship between differentiation strategy and business performance.
It implies that organization irrespective of industry must pay greater attention to the
products or services they offer to their esteemed customers’ in terms of quality,
design, innovations, and unique features. Based on the descriptive nature of the
study, a conceptual model was developed that will guide further studies that might
be empirical in nature.
References
Amoako-Gyampah, K. and Acquaah, M. (2008). Manufacturing strategy, competitive

strategy and firm performance: An empirical study in a developing economy
environment. International Journal of Production Economics, vol.111
Acquaah, M. & Yasai-Ardekani, M. (2006). Does the implementation of a combination
competitive strategy yield incremental performance benefit? A new perspective
from transition economy in Sub-Saharan Africa. Journal of Business Research 61,
346 – 354.

pg. 17
Allen, R.S. & Helms. M.M. (2006). Linking strategic practices and organizational
performance to Porter’s generic strategies. Business Process Management. Vol
12(4), pp. 433-454.
Bright, J. (2002). The missing revenue link. Communications International. March, pp.
46-7 October 4
Chakravarthy, S. (2000), "Business line: e-strategy: different strokes", Businessline.
Darrow. W.P., Algin. B„ King, D.H. (2001), "David vs Goliath in the hardware industry:
generic strategies and critical success factors as revealed by business practice".
The Mid- Atlantic Journal of Business. Vol. 37No.2/3, pp.97-109
Hashem Valipour, Hamid Birjandi and Samira Honarbakhsh (2012). The Effects of Cost
Leadership Strategy and Product Differentiation Strategy on the Performance of
Firms. Journal of Asian Business Strategy, Vol. 2, No.1, pp. 14-23
Enida Pulaj, Vasilika Kume, Amali Cipi (2015). The Impact of Generic Competitive
Strategies on Organizational Performance. The Evidence from Albanian Context.
European Scientific Journal October edition vol.11, No.28 ISSN: 1857 – 7881
(Print) e - ISSN 1857- 7431 273
Hlavacka, S., Ljuba, B., Viera. R., Robert, W. (2001), "Performance implications of
Porter's generic strategies in Slovak hospitals", Journal of Management in
Medicine. Vol. 15 No.l, pp.44-66
Hyatt, L. (2001), "A simple guide to strategy”. Nursing Homes, Vol. 50 No.l, pp.12-3
Prajogo, D. I. and Sohal, A. S. (2006). The relationship between organization strategy,

total quality management (TQM), and organization performance the mediating
role of TQM. European Journal of Operational Research, Vol.168

pg. 18
Porter, M. (1980). Competitive Strategy: Techniques for Analyzing industries and

competitors. New York.
Hlavacka, S., Ljuba, B., Viera, R. and Robert, W. (2001), “Performance implications of
Porter’s generic strategies in Slovak hospitals”, Journal of Management in
Medicine, Vol (1), pp. 44-66.
Jeff Bordes (2009). Strategic Management Assignment ‘Building and Sustaining
Competitive Advantage’ Atlantic International University Honolulu, Hawaii.
Required Assignment for Bachelor Program
Joy I. Dirisu, Oluwole Iyiola, & O. S. Ibidunni (2013). Product Differentiation: A tool of
Competitive Advantage and Optimal Organizational Performance. European
Scientific Journal December edition vol.9, no.34 Issn: 1857 – 7881 (print) e - issn
1857- 7431
McCracken, L. (2002), "Differentiation: win new business with less effort". Principal's
Report, Vol. 2 No.4, pp.l
Paulo Gabriel (2009) Branding: Slogan Wars Between Coke and Pepsi
https://abduzeedo.com/branding-slogan-wars-between-coke-and-pepsi
Rajecki. R. (2002), "What's your brand". Contracting Business, Vol. 59 No.3, pp.40
Reilly, T. (2002), "Be a champion of the solution". Industrial Distribution. Vol. 91 No.5.
pp.62
Tom Otieno (2008). Gaining Competitive Advantage through Differentiation: A Case of
Radio Stations in Nairobi. MBA Dissertation, School of Business, University of
Nairobi.

pg. 19
Tuminello, R. (2002), "The psychology of client selection", Northwest Construction.

Vol. 5 No.2, pp. 14

pg. 20

Differentiation Strategyand Impact On Business

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Differentiation Strategyand Impact On Business

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Strategic Journal of Business and Social Science (SJBSS) Volume 1, Dec 2018

Website: www.sj-bss.com Email: editor@sj-bss.com

DIFFERENTIATION STRATEGYAND IMPACT ON BUSINESS

Keywords: Differentiation Strategy, Business Impact

Strategic Journal of Business and Social Science (SJBSS) www.sj-bss.com

In achieving this differentiation, a good number of firms have resorted to ‘‘brand

Strategic Journal of Business and Social Science (SJBSS) www.sj-bss.com

Differentiation strategies are based on providing buyers with something that is

Strategic Journal of Business and Social Science (SJBSS) www.sj-bss.com

2. Review of Related Literature

Strategic Journal of Business and Social Science (SJBSS) www.sj-bss.com

Strategic Journal of Business and Social Science (SJBSS) www.sj-bss.com

Strategic Journal of Business and Social Science (SJBSS) www.sj-bss.com

2.1.2 Building a differentiation-Based Advantage

Strategic Journal of Business and Social Science (SJBSS) www.sj-bss.com

advantage. For example, firms may improve a product’s quality or performance

Strategic Journal of Business and Social Science (SJBSS) www.sj-bss.com

Strategic Journal of Business and Social Science (SJBSS) www.sj-bss.com

On the side of disadvantage of differentiation, a firm is faced with a great challenge

Strategic Journal of Business and Social Science (SJBSS) www.sj-bss.com

Strategic Journal of Business and Social Science (SJBSS) www.sj-bss.com

Strategic Journal of Business and Social Science (SJBSS) www.sj-bss.com

monopoly position and thus condition necessary for achieving sustainable

Strategic Journal of Business and Social Science (SJBSS) www.sj-bss.com

2.3 Impact of Differentiation Strategy on Business

In order to investigate the impact of differentiation strategy on business

Strategic Journal of Business and Social Science (SJBSS) www.sj-bss.com

significant positive effects of cost leadership, differentiation and focus strategies on

Strategic Journal of Business and Social Science (SJBSS) www.sj-bss.com

Higher Product Quality

Figure 1. Conceptual frame work

Strategic Journal of Business and Social Science (SJBSS) www.sj-bss.com

Amoako-Gyampah, K. and Acquaah, M. (2008). Manufacturing strategy, competitive

Strategic Journal of Business and Social Science (SJBSS) www.sj-bss.com

Prajogo, D. I. and Sohal, A. S. (2006). The relationship between organization strategy,

Strategic Journal of Business and Social Science (SJBSS) www.sj-bss.com

Porter, M. (1980). Competitive Strategy: Techniques for Analyzing industries and

Strategic Journal of Business and Social Science (SJBSS) www.sj-bss.com

Tuminello, R. (2002), "The psychology of client selection", Northwest Construction.

Strategic Journal of Business and Social Science (SJBSS) www.sj-bss.com

You might also like