Running head: COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE OF THE NATIONAL PARK FOUNDATION 1

Competitive Advantage of the National Park Foundation

American Dream Consulting

OGL355: Leading Organizational Innovation and Change

Dr. B

November 13, 2019

Arizona State University

COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE OF THE NATIONAL PARK FOUNDATION 2

Competitive Advantage of the National Park Foundation

The American Dream Consulting team believes the National Park Foundation has much

to gain with a competitive edge over their competitors. In order to gain a competitive advantage,

the National Park Foundation must have strong strategies to compete effectively against those in

the same industry. It must also be able to determine what it does or has better than its

competitors. Ahead, competitive advantage in general is discussed, as is the choice of

competitive advantage selected by American Dream Consulting, the point-of-view to analyze it,

and the rational for both.

Competitive Advantage Is…

To outperform competitors, organizations of all types execute different strategies to give

themselves a competitive advantage over other organizations in the same industry. To have a

competitive advantage is one concept; to keep it is another:

A competitive advantage is what makes an entity's goods or services superior to all

of a customer's other choices…To be successful, you need to be able to articulate

the benefit you provide to your target market that's better than the competition.

That's your competitive advantage. (Amadeo, 2019)

According to Amadeo (2019), the three components that make competitive advantage can

be achieved through cost leadership, differentiation and focus. Cost leadership refers to keeping

costs low in order to benefit the consumer, while differentiation from competitors is about

benefits an organization’s product or service provides that the competition’s does not (Amadeo,

2019). Lastly, an organization’s focus means better caring for their target market using their cost

leadership and differentiation. Once an organization has achieved competitive advantage, it is not

a one-and-done deal, however, they need to sustain it by adapting to the changing market. “The
COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE OF THE NATIONAL PARK FOUNDATION 3

percentage of companies falling out of the top three rankings in their industry increased from 2%

in 1960 to 14% in 2008.” (Reeves & Deimler, 2011).

Competitive Advantage and POV

The National Park Foundation has a unique position for competitive advantage. As the

recognized non-profit for the National Park Services, NPF stands to provide its visitors an

unmatched experience in visitation to its parks and monuments (National Parks, n.d.). This is

confirmed by 2018 numbers showing national parks crushed competitive means of experiences at

318 million visits; exceeding both Disney and Major League sports – combined (Perna, 2019).

This advantage can also be seen by the stretch of opportunities provided to patrons with Park

locations existing throughout the United States (National Parks, n.d.). While technology

advances, the national parks remain an authentic encounter with nature and stand supreme

(Perna, 2019).

Therefore, American Dream Consulting believes RBV is clearly the logical choice for

point-of-view as it speaks to an organization’s resources (Coulter, 2013, p. 31). Exploitation of

resource-use being the primary focus of RBV for competitive advantage, this highlights the

National Park Foundation’s unique resource of the parks and monuments of the National Park

Service as its chief asset (Coulter, 2013, p. 31). Based on parks and monuments as national

resources being the “crown jewels” of the National Park Foundation, utilizing a resource-based

perspective to weigh competitive advantage follows.

Rationale

Choosing the parks and monuments of the National Park Service as the competitive

advantage of the National Park Foundation may seem like an obvious choice, but it is one fully

supported by appropriate determinants: benefits, customers, and competitors (Amadeo, 2019).

COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE OF THE NATIONAL PARK FOUNDATION 4

The benefits of visiting national parks are numerous, “Inspiring us, uplifting our spirits, they

serve as powerful reminders of our national origins and destiny” (National Park Service, 2001).

Indeed, “…our quality of life-our very health and well-being-depends in the most basic way on

the protection of nature…” (National Park Service, 2001). Who needs the national parks? The

National Park Foundation’s website claims in its vision that it works to connect all people with

their national parks, but particular focus is made on children, outdoor enthusiasts, people

interested in American history, native cultures, and those intent on protecting our most beautiful

and precious public spaces (National Parks, n.p.). The market perspective says those

organizations who can fulfill the needs of another organization’s customers are their competitors

(Coulter, 2013, p. 128). By that definition, any business or organization promoting and

protecting the outdoors is a competitor of the National Park Service, and therefore the National

Park Foundation. But none of them have Yellowstone. Or Yosemite. They do not have the Grand

Canyon.

According to Coulter (2013), the resource-based view of competitive advantage looks for

exclusive assets (p. 30). While there are 419 individual ‘units’ in the national park system, each

one is unique in its own right, and an irreplaceable treasure (NPS, 2001). These 419 assets are

each distinct sites of supreme outdoor grandeur, or important historical record, and are therefore

not only priceless themselves but offer incalculable opportunities for revenue as determinants of

profitability (Coulter, 2013, p. 30). Of course, the primary concern in choosing the nation’s parks

and monuments as the strategic advantage of the NPF lies in the National Park Service’s ability

to fully utilize these precious resources (Coulter, 2013, p. 30). According to the National Park

System Advisory Board’s report to the Director of the National Park Service in 2001, the board

has already outlined seven broad recommendations for the National Park Service to implement
COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE OF THE NATIONAL PARK FOUNDATION 5

that will better harness the breadth and width of their resources and impact on the nation, thus

supporting their advantage (NPS, 2001).

The RBV point-of-view reflects an organization’s resources as key to gaining and

maintaining a competitive advantage, and that it is situated for success if it has and can exploit

those resources well (Coulter, 2013, p. 31). Examining what makes a resource unique, the

answer to if the national parks add value is a simple, unwavering, undisputed yes; it is also the

only answer to the question of raritythere is only one Mt. Rushmore (Coulter, 2013, p. 32). The

National Park Foundation is already effectively exploiting the unduplicatable national parks on

behalf of the National Park Service, with plans in place to address current challenges while

harnessing today’s opportunities in technology and environmental sustainability (Coulter, 2013,

p. 32; NPS, 2001).

No defense of a competitive advantage is complete without a discussion of how it can be

leveraged against three crucial aspects of success in today’s business scene: ability to embrace

change, creativity and innovation, and being a world-class organization (Coulter, 2013, p. 40).

Having the national parks as a competitive advantage, the NPF can move from a defender

strategy of protectionism and expand into the arena of a prospector strategy in its pursuit to better

innovate for sustainable environmental protection, and the use of new technologies to connect

people and places (Coulter, 2013, p. 132; NPS, 2001). This shift will enable creative and

innovative idea generation that will keep the competitive advantage stable, while at the same

time enabling the National Park Service to adapt to external and internal forces of change. It will

also allow for the use of new defensive moves that will aid in the long-term protection of the

NPF’s competitive strategy (Coulter, 2013, p. 144).

COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE OF THE NATIONAL PARK FOUNDATION 6

Making these changes will pave the way to becoming a world-class, world-wide

organization with significant technological support, a strong customer focus, continual learning

and development of staff, a flexible org structure, resourceful HR teams, and an egalitarian

climate (Coulter, 2013, p. 41). Being world-class, even with all its resources in the same country,

means helping similar organizations supporting national parks in other countries to reach the

same levels of success. It means partnerships across borders where the NPF can share its

successful strategies and actions while also assimilating alternative ideas. Being world-class will

help ensure the foundation remains vigilant, never complacent, and never behind the times-

proactive to the fluctuations around them and adapting at the speed of change.

Conclusion

The National Park Foundation has much to gain from the competitive advantage of the

parks and monuments of the National Park Service. With a competitive advantage such as this, it

is only appropriate that a resource-based view be used to examine it. That the National Park

Service, as a non-profit organization, was able to compete with and surpass visitation numbers of

two top-level entertainment organizations such as Disney and major league sports is proof

enough that our natural parks cannot be replicated or substituted. It is also proof that their

selection as the competitive advantage of the National Park Foundation is merit-based and sound.
COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE OF THE NATIONAL PARK FOUNDATION 7

References

Amadeo, K. (2019). What is competitive advantage? Three strategies that work. Retrieved from

https://www.thebalance.com/what-is-competitive-advantage-3-strategies-that-work-3305

828

Coulter, M. K. (2013). Strategic management in action (6th ed.). New York, NY: Pearson.

National Parks. (n.d.). National park foundation. Retrieved from https://www.nationalparks.org/

National Park Service. (2001). Rethinking the national parks for the 21st century. Retrieved from

https://www.nps.gov/policy/report.htm

Perna, G. (2019). America's national parks: An opportunity for csr. Retrieved from

https://chiefexecutive.net/americas-national-parks-an-opportunity-for-csr/

Reeves, M., & Deimler, M. (2011). Adaptability: The new competitive advantage. Retrieved

from https://hbr.org/2011/07/adaptability-the-new-competitive-advantage