Competitive Profile Matrix (CPM) Analysis: Onitsuka Tiger, Nike, and Adidas
The Competitive Profile Matrix (CPM) is a strategic tool used to compare companies within
an industry based on critical success factors. This CPM evaluates Onitsuka Tiger, Nike,
and Adidas across ten key factors, assigning weighted scores to reflect each company's
strengths and weaknesses. The total score provides insight into each brand’s competitive
standing in the global market. Based on the analysis, Nike (3.80) emerges as the
strongest competitor, followed by Adidas (3.20), while Onitsuka Tiger (2.35) lags
behind.
One of the most crucial factors in this assessment is market share, which carries the
highest weight (0.20) to reflect the actual global footwear market distribution. Nike holds a
27% market share, Adidas has 15%, and Onitsuka Tiger only 3%. As a result, Nike received
the highest rating (4.0) in this category, while Adidas received 3.0, and Onitsuka Tiger
scored the lowest (1.0). This dominance in market share significantly contributes to Nike's
overall advantage.
Another key factor is brand reputation, where both Nike and Adidas score highly due to
their strong global presence, widespread brand recognition, and long-standing reputations in
the sportswear industry. Onitsuka Tiger, although recognized for its heritage and quality,
does not have the same brand recall or mass-market appeal, resulting in a slightly lower
score. Similarly, product quality is an area where all three companies perform equally well,
as they each offer high-quality footwear designed for different consumer segments.
Innovation and technology are critical in the highly competitive footwear market, where
Nike consistently leads due to its heavy investment in research and development (R&D),
introducing cutting-edge technologies such as Nike Air, Flyknit, and React foam. Adidas
follows closely with its boost technology and sustainability initiatives, while Onitsuka
Tiger remains more traditional and focuses less on technological advancements, thus
receiving a lower rating.
Marketing and advertising play a vital role in brand growth, and Nike is again at the
forefront due to its global marketing campaigns, sponsorships with top athletes, and
high visibility through digital and social media platforms. Adidas also has strong
marketing strategies but slightly less aggressive than Nike, while Onitsuka Tiger relies more
on niche branding and organic growth rather than high-budget advertising, leading to a lower
score. Distribution network and global expansion follow a similar pattern, where Nike and
Adidas have extensive worldwide reach through direct stores, e-commerce platforms, and
retail partnerships, whereas Onitsuka Tiger has a more limited presence.
Finally, customer loyalty and financial position are also important factors. Nike and
Adidas have built strong consumer trust through consistent product quality, brand
engagement, and exclusive collaborations. On the other hand, while Onitsuka Tiger has a
dedicated following, it does not have the same level of customer retention and financial
backing as its larger competitors. Nike and Adidas also have stronger financial positions,
enabling them to invest in further expansion and innovation, whereas Onitsuka Tiger has a
more constrained financial capacity.
In conclusion, Nike leads the competition with a total score of 3.80, followed by Adidas
at 3.50, and Onitsuka Tiger at 2.35. Nike’s dominance is largely attributed to its market
share, innovation, marketing efforts, and financial strength, making it the strongest
brand in the industry. Adidas, while also a powerful competitor, scores slightly lower due to
less aggressive marketing and expansion. Onitsuka Tiger, although recognized for its quality
and heritage, remains a niche brand with limited global influence, requiring significant
improvements in marketing, distribution, and technological advancements to compete
with its larger rivals.
