Lakhasly

Figure 1.EXTERNAL ANALYSIS A plethora of writers and authors agreed that if a business entity wants to strive on major development, identify future implications, and capitalize on opportunities and mitigate against threats within the business world, an external environmental analysis of the firm is required (Gupta, 2013; Khan and Khalique, 2014).While it can be acknowledged from Table 3 that Porter's Five Forces can be used as a guideline for evaluating the competitive forces that tend to influence businesses, it goes without noting some of its drawbacks, for instance, the framework is usually used to assess all five forces equally when some industries such are not as heavily impacted by all the five forces as that of Weetabix whicA strategic framework, PESTLE (Political, Economic, Social, Technological, Legal, and Environmental) was therefore recommended to enable the firm to understand the strategic risk and the external macro-environment (Johnson et al., 2008; Sammut-Bonnici and Galea, 2015).Holdings acquisition of the company upon further evaluation of organizational fitness.

Figure 1. Porter’s Generic Strategies.
Holdings acquisition of the company upon further evaluation of organizational fitness.
A representation of the mapping of typical organization analyzed is shown in Figure 1 for illustration. However, organizations must configure their value chain to match whichever of the generic strategies they intend to adopt.
Bowman’s Strategy Clock
Cliff Bowman postulated that companies can critically access the strategic positioning of their brand in the market as well as determine the position of their rivals based on their price and perceived customer value. On Bowman’s Clock, there are eight classified possible positions to analyze the position of the company’s products.
Bowman’s assumed that it is very likely that customers would patronize your products based on perceived value. On the Bowman’s Clock (as shown in Figure 2), Weetabix could be strategically placed under a differentiation strategy (position 4). This position simply implies the fact that the firm is deemed to be offering the highest level of perceived added value. The brand has played a key role
in this clock. BBC Business report (2017) reported that Weetabix exports its cereal products to over 80 countries across the world, this implies that Weetabix has done due diligence in learning about differentiated markets on their products across the world. Weetabix must invest in Research and Development, R&D to identify their customer needs in the target market of their various localities to maintain their differentiation position.
Retailer brands such as Tesco, Sainsbury's, Asda are categorized under Low price strategy placed on position 2 because they offer exponential savings to their customers (Tsaltas, 2018). In 2018, it was estimated that about 15.8 million people consumed Kellogg's products in the UK, a figure placing its product ahead of Nestlé and Weetabix who were ranked second and third respectively (Statista Research Department, 2020). Kellogg’s products are a step notch above the differentiation clock and can be recorded under Focused Differentiation (position 5). These products are positioned at the highest price levels. Customers buy their products because of the high perceived value. It is however pertinent to note that companies adopting strategies at the clock position 6, 7 and 8 representing risky high margins, monopoly pricing,

38 Res. J. Bus. Econ. Manag.
Figure 2. Bowman’s Strategic Clock.
and loss of market share respectively are regarded as the most undesirable points on the Bowman’s Strategy Clock, as such, these companies must ensure to match their product prices with the value that customers aim to get, otherwise, they are regarded to be destined for ultimate failure (Tsaltas, 2018).
STAKEHOLDER ANALYSIS
Every organization is made up of a cluster of certain individuals or groups of the individual whose interest relatively affect the performance of the organization (Freeman, 1984; Nutt and Backoff, 1992, Bryson, 1995; Eden and Ackermann, 1998; Walker et al., 2008). It will be interested to know that each stakeholder possesses a different level of power and interest in every organization. So, how really can these be categorized? To manage the internal and external environment, organizations must know the various strategies to employ for stakeholder analysis (Bryson, 2003). In so doing, Bryson (2003) presented an analytical tool for grouping stakeholders based on their level of power and interest on a 2x2 grid as highlighted in Figure 4. With a critical consideration of Post Holding-Weetabix as an entity, the various stakeholder was classified and mapped in Figure 3 in a holistic manner.
The matrix in Figure 4 would now considered, illustrating
the interrelationships between stakeholders’ power and interests that exist among Weetabix’s operation. With this, the level of attention each of them pays to the company would understoo as well as knowing the actions/energy that is expected to be directed towards them on each matrix.
The stakeholder matrix shown in Figure 4 further illustrated with the justification of their influence/power on Post Holdings-Weetabix as well as their level of interest/impact in Table 1.
EXTERNAL ANALYSIS
A plethora of writers and authors agreed that if a business entity wants to strive on major development, identify future implications, and capitalize on opportunities and mitigate against threats within the business world, an external environmental analysis of the firm is required (Gupta, 2013; Khan and Khalique, 2014). A strategic framework, PESTLE (Political, Economic, Social, Technological, Legal, and Environmental) was therefore recommended to enable the firm to understand the strategic risk and the external macro-environment (Johnson et al., 2008; Sammut‐Bonnici and Galea, 2015). This analysis is tabulated for clarity of thoughts in Table 2.

Local Community
INTERNAL
Employees Management
Business Analyst
Figure 3. Stakeholder mapping.
UK Government Media
Oshilalu and Amaugo 39
EXTERNAL
Customers Suppliers Creditors
Distributors
Control Groups
Shareholders
Management
Local Government
Figure 4. Power-Interest Matrix is mapped with stakeholders.
THE INDUSTRY ANALYSIS
In the breakfast cereal industry where Weetabix operates, there are a host of other competitors such as Kellogg, Nestle, Quaker Oat, Tesco, Sainsbury's, etc operating in the same market. However, to get the full insight of Weetabix’s competitive edge over its competitors, and industrial analysis involving its evaluation within this sector is required. Porter (2008) therefore developed the Five- Force model which can be deployed to analyze the competitive strength of different rivals in the same industry.
Figure 5 display a statistical analysis showing the ranking of the leading breakfast cereal brands in Great Britain in 2018 where Kellogg’s take the first seat followed by Nestlé, then Weetabix. The graph shows a gradual
reduction in the consumption of breakfast cereal in the United Kingdom from 2015 up till 2018. The figure had therefore fallen to 126 grams of breakfast cereal per person which is roughly equivalent to 25 percent of a standard package of Kellogg's Just Right cereal.
As similarly presented in the previous section, the industry analysis will be tabulated for the clarity of thoughts in Table 3.
While it can be acknowledged from Table 3 that Porter’s Five Forces can be used as a guideline for evaluating the competitive forces that tend to influence businesses, it goes without noting some of its drawbacks, for instance, the framework is usually used to assess all five forces equally when some industries such are not as heavily impacted by all the five forces as that of Weetabix whic