Vision: Values and Purpose

Purpose
We are committed to improving the quality of life of the communities we serve. We do this
by striving for leadership and global competitiveness in the business sectors in which we
operate.
Our practice of returning to society what we earn evokes trust among consumers,
employees, shareholders and the community. We are committed to protecting this heritage
of leadership with trust through the manner in which we conduct our business.

Core values
Values continue to direct the growth and business. The five core Tata values underpinning
the way business is done are:
Integrity: We must conduct our business fairly, with honesty and transparency. Everything
we do must stand the test of public scrutiny.
Understanding: We must be caring, show respect, compassion and humanity for our
colleagues and customers around the world, and always work for the benefit of the
communities we serve.
Excellence: We must constantly strive to achieve the highest possible standards in our
day-to-day work and in the quality of the goods and services we provide.
Unity: We must work cohesively with our colleagues across the group and with our
customers and partners around the world, building strong relationships based on tolerance,
understanding and mutual cooperation.
Responsibility: We must continue to be responsible, sensitive to the countries,
communities and environments in which we work, always ensuring that what comes from
the people goes back to the people many times over.
MATCHING DELL CASE ANALYSIS

This analysis describes the case of computer and peripherals industry especially the successful
management of Dell Computer Corporation which grew twice as fast as its major rivals like Compaq,
Gateway, Hewlett Packard and IBM. The main reason for the success of Dell was their "Direct Model"
of selling computers which eliminated all traditional channels like distributors, resellers and retailers.
Traditionally all its competitors like IBM, HP, and Compaq etc. used reseller, retailers and distributors
to sell their computers to end users. IBM was the first company to launch its PC in 1981 and soon held
42% of the market. But the growth of IBM proved to be short lived as with Schumpeterian rents when
it failed to take any proprietary competitive advantage and ceded rights of the microprocessor and
operating system to Intel and Microsoft. Dell through its direct selling approach used to take orders
directly from the customers, thus selling customized machines. This proved to be a revolutionary
business strategy which would enable it gain cost leadership and competitive advantage in the PC
market, enabling the company to eliminate wholesale and retail dealers that proved to be very
expensive and wastage of time. It also provided for a cheap and efficient way of distribution and
production of computers. Furthermore the direct model also provided a better understanding of
customer needs.
This efficient system of distribution was possible only because the company was able to align its
resources and capabilities with customer expectations. The company was able to build huge and highly
integrated and efficient external as well as internal sales forces. The external sales force was
entrusted with the responsibilities of understanding customer expectations and making sure that each
and every aspect of the PC was build according to customer specifications. The internal sales force was
assigned to take orders from customers. An important point to mention here is that the internal sales
force also had an additional responsibility of creating customer loyalty and convincing them of buying
the best available product. This also helped eliminate the roles of resellers thus proving to be a strong
competitive advantage for the company. It also subdivided its customers into two large groups:
relationship buyers and transaction buyers with specific sales group catering to each cadre of
customers. This was a good market segmentation strategy as it helped the company retain customers.
While sales representatives looked after relationship buyers, Dell serviced transaction buyers via
telephone. The company also provided an intensive after sales service, both online and in call centers
to improve customer satisfaction. The problems which appeared complex were outsourced to other
companies. As its sales and customer base increased the company further divided its customers into
businesses, governments, individual customers and educational institutions.
An important aspect of its capability which helped achieve competitive advantage was that it produced
computers based on actual orders rather than demand forecasts. It was only possible because of the
resources which it employed in assembling its PC's. It manufactured the PC's based on cellular
manufacturing units which consisted of five employee manufacturing cells. This enabled to achieve
fewer defects and zero inventory targets. Thus successful application of just in time manufacturing
and just in time delivery provided Dell the ability to deliver products in one or two days after receiving
an order. An good example mentioned in the case in this regard is that of the company shipping eight
customized, tested severs within 36 hours when it received emergency orders from the NASDAQ stock
exchange. The just in time delivery was also successful mainly because the company had sound
relationships with its suppliers via close electronics links and thus communicating replenishment needs
to them on an hourly basis. It also enabled the company to direct some supplier shipments such as
monitors from Sony directly to customers which was a major cost advantage. Another important
aspect of the logistics strategy adopted by Dell was that suppliers were encouraged to locate
warehouses and production facilities close to its assembly operations to ensure smooth flow of
materials across the value chain. This ensured that its value chain was capable enough to handle the
largest of orders in smallest possible time frame. Through this value chain the company was able to
introduce a wide range of products. All the above stated resources and capabilities decreased
operating costs with enhanced customer service and thus helped maintain substantial profit margins
through relatively low inventory and capital expenditures in comparison to the revenues. Thus if we
talk in terms of the strategy triangle we can say that Dell had the resources and capabilities such as
highly integrated sales forces, efficient supplier relations, a able leadership in Michael Dell, cross
functional excellence and outstanding corporate culture, which eventually led the company to achieve
its core strategy of direct distribution and selling and hence maintain a relatively high growth rate. I
would also like to mention that to improve its systems and processes, Dell hired management
experience from other companies like Motorola, Apple computer and Intel who focused especially on
operations and manufacturing and thus focused on return on invested capital It is also important to
mention here that the company had achieved a radical innovation in the industry as far as its direct
model was concerned.
Competitors of Dell like IBM, Compaq and HP tried to imitate the direct sell strategy but faced a lot of
issues to do so not only because of inefficiencies in their value chain but also because of deviations in
their business strategies which they were following since many years. IBM which moved from a
market leader to third position in the market tried to replicate the direct sell strategy in its own way
by initiating programs like the joint manufacturing authorization programs and the enhanced
integration and assembly programs with its distributors and resellers such as MicroAge, Ingram Micro
and Tech Data thus shipping heavily configured PC's to these distributors who in turn completed the
configuration according to customer specifications. Also to integrate the value chain, IBM set
component prices such that total costs were same for channel-assembled and IBM assembled PC's. To
combat clones, it launched division Ambra to produce low end PC's with direct selling available
through phone, mail and later on website. IBM failed to show results because of inefficient customer
service, higher operating costs. It was also not easy to replace suppliers to smoothen the flow of
goods.
Compaq in 1994 became the world's largest manufacturer and had a large range of distribution
networks. But in order to counter the direct sell strategy of Dell, it moved from a production system in
which it relied on forecasts made by channel partners. But this type of a system proved to be too slow
because of high inventory and long lead times before delivery to the customer. Consequently in order
to smooth out the inefficiencies of the supply chain, the company introduced an optimized distribution
model under which the PC's were built only after orders were received. Compaq also introduced
standardization in their production processes with standard machines built to order in its plants. In
1998 the company introduced the direct plus program offering PC's to small and mid size companies
via telephone and the internet with a lead time of around 5 days. But high degree of resistance from
the resellers and distributors made sure that Compaq's movement to online sales was quiet
troublesome.
HP had a reputation for high quality and performance, offering a comparable range of products as
Compaq. They also had a wide distribution network of suppliers and resellers. In 1997 the company
introduced an extended solutions partnership program which was aimed at building customized
solutions for large corporate offices. Their supply chain comprised of ten channel partners. The
company hoped to considerably cut costs, reduce inventories and minimize defects through this
program. The company also tried to imitate Dells' online selling strategy by introducing a web service
known as HP shopping village through which customers could make purchase PC's directly from the
website.
Gateway adopted a similar model to Dell but served different needs as Dell. It focused on home and
small office users aimed at the PC server business. But they couldn't manage a rapid change from
individual and small business customers to a wider product range and consequently was forced to
refocus on its original market of small business. It also tried to smooth out its supply chain by
introducing divisions like Gateway Partners.
Thus we can say the competitors of Dell were unsuccessful in imitating Dell's direct sell strategy
because they had inefficient capabilities and resources like inefficient customer service, lack of quality
suppliers which can ensure smooth movement of products along the supply chain, inefficient supplier
relationships, and lack of understanding and knowledge of the value chain. Also it was not easy for
them to eliminate distributors, retailers and resellers who once were a part of their core competencies.
The case mentions that 70% of their business came from distributors and resellers.
A major concern for Dell is to be a continuous improvement firm. It has to indulge in systematic
innovation so that it does not fall under the category of Schumpeterian rents as happened with IBM.
The reason for this is that the direct model of selling is difficult to imitate but over the time, its
competitors will be able to catch up and since it is a low profit industry, the pressure of growing and
improving simultaneously could cause it to loose its competitive advantage.
Dell needs to improve its range of customers thus moving from business and individual customers to
educational institutions thus targeting a new segment.
As the competition in the US market increases, Dell will have to look to expand internationally. But the
company needs to understand the basic dynamics of customer relations before introducing the direct
model to every market. For example in most Asian countries customers are still do not rely on internet
buying because of security and thefts of information over the internet and somewhat unreliable
purchasing mechanisms and are still dependent on retailers and resellers for purchasing specific items
such as computers. A good example in this regard is the Walmart store in Germany. It did not
understand the market dynamics and hence was a failure.
Also with advent of software solutions in every aspect of business like health care, production and
manufacturing, the onus would shift from being just a computer manufacturer to a company which
provides a total solution. This could be a major threat for the company. For that Dell needs to
vertically integrate with companies providing such solutions so that its products can be projected as a
total package rather than just any other computer.
Also Dell needs to concentrate on the design and styling of its new products and hence focus on it
being in the status symbol in addition to its high performance product symbol. That is an important
part of systematic innovation.
Finally it needs to continue its excellent supplier relationships looking to identify and work with new
suppliers who would be a solid value addition to its value chain.
In the end I would like to say that in order to have a sustainable competitive advantage, Dell needs to
focus on satisfying its internal i.e. its employees as well as its external customers to achieve
organizational leverage and be a continually improving firm.