If OneLife are to go ahead with the take-over from Company F, many people involved internally and externally will be affected. To help categorise the different stakeholder groups, Mendelow’s (1991) power interest matrix will be used. This will help to highlight the different stakeholders involved and priorities the outcomes related to their power and interest in the organisation.
(Adapted from Mendelow, 1991)
Low Power /Low interest
* Customers /Members of OneLife
The customers of OneLife, although being the most important aspect of the business due to the revenue they provide, with regards to the take-over would have little effect on the situation. If the company name and image were to be maintained then the customers influence will be minimal as business would continue to ...view middle of the document...
Employees often perceive a takeover as a threat and can lose motivation. The change of management can reduce employee’s efficiency. In many cases employee can lose their jobs.
Low Power/High Interest
* Individual investors
A takeover over competitors can create oligopoly in a market. In such case a company F can increase price of memberships and customers may need to pay higher memberships fees. If Company F takes over OneLife, their market shares will immediately increase. Such threat can destroy other competitors and can create higher barriers to entry
Many suppliers’ contracts may be terminated as the new owners have better relationships with the suppliers they have used before. New management team can have delays over payments.
High Power/ High Interest
* James Lellee
* Charles Juan
* Four DirectorsF
* Institutional investors
Shareholders main interest is to make profit through their shares. In case of a takeover, some shareholders can lose their shares. A takeover can have negative impact on shares value.
To highlight the core competencies at OneLife, Porters generic strategy model will help
At the moment, OneLife’s strategy is Differentiation where the clubs provide high quality equipment,
It has been established that building new OneLife clubs varies between clubs but all are maintained at high specifications with the average expenditure being at around E11.5M. The varying in prices is due to location, facilities. In the past some sites have not been acquired in the city centres where as competitors have been granted permission. The current situation of OneLife is all their cash is tied up in assets with the clubs and are
Mendelow, A. (1991) ‘Stakeholder Mapping’, Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Information Systems, Cambridge, MA (Cited in Scholes,1998).