**Please see attachment for case study.
Strategic Alternatives and Recommended Strategy:
A. Strategic Alternatives
1. Can the current or revised objectives be met by the simple, more careful implementing of those strategies presently in use (for example, fine-tuning the strategies)?
2. What are the major feasible alternative strategies available to this corporation? What are the pros and cons of each? Can corporate scenarios be developed and agreed upon? (Alternatives must fit societal environment, industry, and company for next 3-5 years.)
a) Consider cost leadership and differentiation as business strategies.
b) Consider stability, growth, and retrenchment as corporate strategies.
c) Consider any functional strategic alternatives that might be needed for reinforcement of an important corporate or business strategic alternative.
B. Recommended Strategy
1 . Specify which of the strategic alternatives you are recommending for the corporate, business, and functional levels of the corporation. Do you recommend different business or functional strategies for different units of the corporation?
2. Justify your recommendation in terms of its ability to resolve both long- and short-term problems and effectively deal with the strategic factors.
3. What policies should be developed or revised to guide effective implementation?
4. What is the impact of recommended strategy on the company's core and distinctive competencies?
CAN CURRENT STRATEGIES SERVE THE OBJECTIVES?
No. The current strategies cannot serve the objectives, there is net loss, which the business is incurring, and the loss has reduced in the current year because the sales have fallen! The company further wants to increase its resources on costly advertising and marketing efforts rather than depend on word of mouth. The development of an operating system to compete with products which are having operating systems of their own is likely to be very costly and lead to further financial losses.
MAJOR FEASIBLE ALTENATIVE STRATEGIES AVAILABLE TO THIS CORPORATION
1. To develop an operating system which would be compatible with microsoft's operating system.
2. To further develop the product so that it is technically superior to that of most of the competitors.
3. To reduce the cost of Treo so that it can compete on the basis of price.
4. To depend on alliances so that Treo is purchased as a tie up products with computers or with other communication devices like the upper end cell phones.
5. To reposition Treo so that it is perceived as a desirable add on to computers rather than a communication device.
6. To focus on institutional purchases by marketing Treo directly to large companies and organizations and target it as a device for improving organizational communication.
COST LEADERSHIP VS DIFFERENTIATION
If Treo is to become the most attractively priced product in the market, then this strategy would be an attractive strategy, however, it would face fierce ...