The McKinsey Quarterly

  • Recommend (228)
  • Text Size
  • Print
  • Download PDF
  • Link to This

Enduring Ideas: The strategic control map

In this interactive presentation—one in a series of multimedia frameworks—Lowell Bryan, a director in McKinsey’s New York office, describes the strategic control map, a framework that tracks the dynamics of market capitalization within industries.

The strategic control map uses market capitalization dynamics to help companies identify their biggest opportunities and threats, as well as to boost their odds of hunting for acquisition targets rather than being hunted themselves. Developed in 1996 by McKinsey’s Vijay D’Silva, Bob Fallon, and Asheet Mehta, the framework tracks the relationship between the two dimensions of market capitalization by plotting a company’s size (measured by book value) against its performance for shareholders (measured by market-to-book ratio).

Companies mapped in this way fall into four groups, each with its own challenges and corresponding strategic imperatives. The large, high-performing companies in the upper-right quadrant are the least likely to be acquisition targets. Their challenge is to maintain a strong position by pursuing fresh opportunities without watering down returns. Companies in the lower-left quadrant, the most vulnerable to takeover, must improve the performance of their existing businesses or reinvest in others and divest losers. Companies in the upper-left quadrant often possess proprietary knowledge or skills that enable them to earn high returns from intangibles. They can largely maintain strategic control unless their performance drops, making them vulnerable. Finally, if large companies in the lower-right quadrant don’t improve their performance, they could become inviting cost-consolidation targets for even-larger, better-performing industry leaders.

Launch the interactive, or download the audio file.


Enduring Ideas: The strategic control map
Market capitalization dynamics help companies identify acquisition opportunities and threats.

The enduring power of the framework lies in its ability to visualize how changes in market capitalization affect the market for strategic control. You can see at a glance which companies in a given industry are likely to be acquirers and which are likely to be acquired. When companies map their or their competitors’ performance trajectories, they can get a sense of the combination of size and performance that will enable them to remain competitive and independent.

Recommend (228)
  • 21 OCTOBER 2010
    Niraj Dadoo
    COO
    TBWA
    Mumbai India

    Nice model but it clouds other aspects of business, especially organic growth.

    .
    Niraj Dadoo
    COO
    TBWA
    Mumbai India

    Nice model but it clouds other aspects of business, especially organic growth.

    .
  • 29 SEPTEMBER 2010
    Dave Angelow
    Exec Principal
    Business Foundations
    Austin ,TX USA

    ...Where’s the operational focus of the tool/approach? Seems quant heavy with an assumption that M&A is core to growth—am I missing something obvious?

    .
    Dave Angelow
    Exec Principal
    Business Foundations
    Austin ,TX USA

    Interesting from an M&A perspective, yet unclear how to use when PE, private, and closely-held firms dominate an emerging market.

    Where’s the operational focus of the tool/approach? Seems quant heavy with an assumption that M&A is core to growth—am I missing something obvious?

    .
  • 9 AUGUST 2010
    Claudius Mundoma
    Consultant - Commercialization
    BUC Technologies
    Tallahassee, FL USA

    ...Does this framework apply to companies in the technology-heavy sector where high innovation trends foreclose the option of becoming too big?...

    .
    Claudius Mundoma
    Consultant - Commercialization
    BUC Technologies
    Tallahassee, FL USA

    Very interesting model and easy to conceptualize. Does this framework apply to companies in the technology-heavy sector where high innovation trends foreclose the option of becoming too big? These companies are usually in the lower-left and upper-left corner. Very few are in the upper-right and lower-right quadrants.

    .
  • 26 JULY 2010
    Saurabh N Sinha
    Consultant
    Independent
    India

    ...Interestingly, this relates to game theory, where the companies aim at equilibrium. The scenario depends on the relative positioning of the sector in which the company is in....

    .
    Saurabh N Sinha
    Consultant
    Independent
    India

    The structure discussed is a probabilistic course of action. The isoquant traversal can act as guidance or a road map. Interestingly, this relates to game theory, where the companies aim at equilibrium. The scenario depends on the relative positioning of the sector in which the company is in. Watching the statistical trend of the company being acquired and the variation can be of use in studing the vulnerability and opportunity of the company.

    .
  • 13 JULY 2010
    Henry Clampitt
    Principal and Managing Director
    Strategy Execution Services LLC
    Wilmington, DE USA

    Nice concise model! How would you revise it for comparison of small, privately-held firms?

    .
    Henry Clampitt
    Principal and Managing Director
    Strategy Execution Services LLC
    Wilmington, DE USA

    Nice concise model! How would you revise it for comparison of small, privately-held firms?

    .
  • 13 JULY 2010
    Rahul Singhal
    Student
    Indian School of Business
    Hyderabad, India

    The strategic control map is indeed quite interesting. What I would like to have some thoughts on is the movement among the different quadrants....

    .
    Rahul Singhal
    Student
    Indian School of Business
    Hyderabad, India

    The strategic control map is indeed quite interesting. What I would like to have some thoughts on is the movement among the different quadrants. Is it easier for companies in the top-left quadrant to move to the top-right or for companies in the bottom-right to move to the top-right? In my view it is very difficult for companies in the vulnerable quadrant to move diagonally to the top-right. So it becomes a very important strategic decision for companies in the vulnerable range to decide as to where they want to reach first—the bottom-right or the top-left and then make their way to the top-right quadrant.

    In my view, it is easier for companies in the top-left quadrant to move to the complete control quadrant rather than for companies in bottom-right. This is because of higher capital access to high performing companies. And companies in the top-left corner can grow organically to move to the right. Whereas the most feasible option of bottom-right companies to move up north is through acquisitions which can be quite uncertain.

    .
Submit Your Comments

The user information you enter into this form will not update your site profile. To update your profile, please visit your profile page.

Subject Enduring Ideas: The strategic control map

*Required

We may publish your comments online and in the print edition of McKinsey Quarterly. Those chosen, which may be edited for length and clarity, will appear along with your name and details, but not your e-mail address. We will use your e-mail address only to send you a confirmation copy of your comments and to notify you if we publish them online.

We value your feedback and will consider it carefully. Nonetheless, we receive so many comments that we cannot acknowledge all of them.

See also:
Preview

Embed E-mail