CW1 - Pret A Manger

Pret A Manger

ABSTRACTA strategic report outlining Pret A Manger’s strategic position using analysis from SWOT, PESTEL and Porter’s 5 forces factors being plotted onto an Environmental Matrix. This then became the base for the two suggested strategies shown in this report.

Barry Stuck - 21315816Strategic Decision Making.

Pret A Manger | Barry Stuck - 21315816

Contents:Introduction ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Pg. 2

Business Operations -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Pg. 3The Business Canvas Model ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Pg. 3Value Chain Model ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Pg. 4

Strategic Capabilities ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Pg. 5Competitive Advantage Applied in the VRIN Framework ---------------------------------- Pg. 5

Macro Analysis --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Pg. 6Pret A Manger PESTEL Analysis ------------------------------------------------------------------- Pg. 6Political Factors --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Pg. 6Economic Factors ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Pg. 7Social Factors ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Pg. 7Technological Factors -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Pg. 8Legal Factors ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Pg. 9Environmental Factors ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Pg. 9

Competitive Analysis ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Pg. 11Porter’s 5 Forces ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Pg. 11Threat of New Entrants --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Pg. 12Bargaining Power of Buyers ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Pg. 12Threat of Substitute Products ------------------------------------------------------------------- Pg. 13Bargaining Power of Suppliers ------------------------------------------------------------------- Pg. 13Competitive Rivalry -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Pg. 14Environmental Matrix ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Pg. 15Interpretation and Analysis of Environmental Matrix ------------------------------------- Pg. 16Pret A Manger SWOT Analysis ------------------------------------------------------------------ Pg. 17Internal SWOT -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Pg. 17External SWOT -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Pg. 17Critical Analysis of SWOT Analysis ------------------------------------------------------------- Pg. 19

Strategic Planning --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Pg. 20Porter’s Generic Competitive Strategies Model Applied --------------------------------- Pg. 20Bowman’s Strategy Clock Applied -------------------------------------------------------------- Pg. 21

Business Canvas Model -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Pg. 22Pret A Manger Strategy One -------------------------------------------------------------------- Pg. 22Pret A Manger Updated Statements for Strategy One ----------------------------------- Pg. 23Pret A Manger Strategy Two -------------------------------------------------------------------- Pg. 25Pret A Manger Updated Statements for Strategy Two ----------------------------------- Pg. 26

Critical Discussion of Strategy One & Two With Relation to Pret’s Current SWOT and Strategic Capabilities ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Pg. 27

Strategy One ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Pg. 27Strategy Two ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Pg. 28

SAFe Analysis --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Pg. 28Strategy One ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Pg. 28Strategy Two ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Pg. 29

Buckinghamshire New University


Critical Comparison of Strategy One & Two using SAFe ---------------------------------- Pg. 30

Strategy Pret Should Choose and the Reason Why --------------------------------------------------------- Pg. 31

References ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Pg. 33

Appendices ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Pg. 37Appendix 1 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Pg. 37Appendix 2 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Pg. 37Appendix 3 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Pg. 38Appendix 4 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Pg. 38Appendix 5 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Pg. 39Appendix 6 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Pg. 39Appendix 7 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Pg. 40Appendix 8 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Pg. 40Appendix 9 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Pg. 41



Introduction:In 2013, the estimated value of the Sandwich and Lunchtime Foods market was £4,498m (Childe, H,

2013) and Pret A Manger is estimated to have a 16% market share (Hsu, J, 2013), the breakdown of which can be found in Appendix 1. For the growth in the market, trends of consumers who choose to spend their extra money on dining out has declined from November 2009 – March 2015 (Ford, R, 2015 A) which can also be seen in Appendix 2. The value of the market itself is estimated by Mintel to grow from £4,498m in 2013 - £5,089m in 2018 (Childe, H, 2013), seen in

Appendix 3. As for the growth of Pret, as well as product growth, according to chief executive Clive Schlee, they are looking outside of London as they have seen the potential away from the centre of the city (Childe, H, 2015). Pret have also started a trial of evening dining (until 11pm) and at one store (Strand) they trailed the serving of alcohol (Ford, R, 2015), this was from April 2015. More on Pret A Manger’s product growth can be seen in Appendix 4. As for profits, it reported the sandwich chain made underlying profits of £76m after revenues reached £594m (Butler, S, 2015). This report will also highlight Pret A Manger’s competitors such as Eat, Greggs and Subway.



Business Operations:The business canvas model:

Buckinghamshire New University 4


Value Chain Model:



Strategic Capabilities: Tangible/Resources: Intangible/Competences:

ThresholdCapabilities:

Customers in Pret’s market expect a good selection of food and a selection that is delicious whilst being well-presented (Morley, M, 2015).

Customers also want/expect a clean restaurant in which the décor is attractive and matches to quality of the food and matches the restaurants image (Morley, M, 2015).

Customers expect consistency from store to store, location to location (Work 911, 2013).

Although convenience is still important in Pret’s market, the food quality must be good (Work 911, 2013).

For the Eating Out market, Pret needs to create distinct points of difference from the cheaper retail or in-home options that are available to the consumers (Childe, H, 2015 C).

Customers walking into a restaurant, even one like McDonald’s, they want and expect to be acknowledged (Morley, M, 2015).

Family friendly with pricing to be in line with this and working people (Work 911, 2013).

Although convenience is still important in Pret’s market, the experience must be good (Work 911, 2013).

Capability OfCompetitiveAdvantage:

Pret is capable through monetary resources to produce a selection of food that is considered delicious and well-presented (VRIN #1).

Pret ensure that there is more than enough staff on in peak times to keep their stores in clean, quality condition (VRIN #2).

All stores (apart from small differences to match location) are all modelled in the same way to keep the Pret experience (VRIN #3).

Pret has the capabilities to ensure their food is quality with the use of fresh food, made on the day (VRIN #4).

Pret are capable of creating a difference than in-home options by adding ingredients that differentiate from in-house products (Childe, H, 2015 A) (VRIN #5).

Pret ensure staff are passionate and are able to conduct great quality service (Dudovskiy, J, 2014) (VRIN #6).

Through this experience, Pret are capable of ensuring the experience is good, thus creating their competitive advantage (VRIN #7).

Capability of Competitive Advantage applied in the VRIN Framework (Appendix 7) : #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 #7

Valuable (is it valuable?)

Rare (is it rare?)

Imitable (is it difficult to imitate?)

Non-substitutional (other resources cannot take its place)

Macro Analysis:



Pret A Manger PESTEL Analysis: Political factors:

Pressure from environmental groups about recyclable packaging (Environmental Protection Department, 2010).

British government on cracking down on targeting children with junk food (Williams, J, 2014).

Economic factors: People are not out of the ‘tightening

their belt’ stage because of this price of edible commodities (The Economist, 2008).

The market is expanding and becoming dense, even though people still choose to eat at home as it’s the cheaper option (Turchetti, C, 2012).

Social factors: Concerns with obesity (Malhotra, A,

2014). Chinese people are starting to favour

western food (Kollewe, J, 2012). Restaurant and fast food chains are

training their employees to be ‘sellers’ (Beaudoin, R, 2014).

Consumers are becoming more and more aware of the origins of the food products they buy, as well as its cleanliness (South China Morning Post, 2013).

Technological factors: People turn to their smartphone for

health advice (Diana, A, 2014). Entrepreneurs and business alike how

now started to develop 3D printed food (Wong, V, 2014).

With the World Wide Web, information is easier to get a hold of and people are becoming more responsive to information that may have been forgotten about or brushed off in the past e.g. the viral video of McDonald’s manufacturing of McNuggets which was false (Popken, B, 2014).

There is now lab-grown beef which is reportedly healthier than regular beef (Kader, B, 2014).

Legal factors: China is employing harsh and strict

regulations on food safety (Baojie, L, Yao, z & Li, Y, 2014).

Regulations on calorie counts being shown on packaging (Zajac, A, 2011).

Environmental factors: If the use of water continues and

increases at the rate it has been, by 2050, it is reported 40% the world’s population will be living in water-stressed countries (UNEP, 2008).

Sustainable farming.

Political factors: Meaning: Supporting reference:Political factor 1 (PF1) (Pressure from environmental groups about recyclable packaging):

Relating this to Pret, as their food is mostly packaged in plastic (to remain fresh and hygienic) this could end up being a problem. This is because an increasing number of pressure groups are pushing the government to take action. This could be threatening to Pret as they may have to invest in R&D to better their product packaging to become environmentally friendly, and if they don’t, they could fall

(Michelle, 2014)



short of the competition. Political factor 2 (PF2) (British government on cracking down on targeting children with junk food):

As Pret is a British business, they could use the governments push of obesity awareness to start targeting children but in a positive way with their health friendly foods and products. This is an opportunity to increase the awareness of their business ethics as well as their company image.

(Michelle, 2014)

Economic factors: Meaning: Supporting reference:Economic factor 1 (EF1) (People are not out of the ‘tightening their belt’ stage because of this price of edible commodities):

Relating the economic factor 1 to Pret, as they promote themselves as healthy and freshly made snacks, these obviously come at an extra cost to the consumer. This can be a problem as people aren’t quite fully out of the saving stage since the financial meltdown and it poses a challenge to Pret’s marketing team to find ways to attract consumers whilst avoiding the obvious added cost that most of their competitors do not have.

(Michelle, 2014)

Economic factor 2 (EF2) (The market is expanding and becoming dense, even though people still choose to eat at home as it’s the cheaper option):

Bringing this back to Pret, this means that they have to be very careful when pricing their products to not scare consumers back to their homes which is the cheaper option. They also need to ensure that their service quality is top notch, which is something they definitely cannot get at home.

(Michelle, 2014)

Social factors: Meaning: Supporting reference:Social factor 1 (SF1) (Concerns with obesity):

For Pret, with their health conscious foods, this is an opportunity to support these pressure groups and standing with them to gain not only recognition through PR, but an increase in the health conscious buyer.

(Michelle, 2014)



Social factor 2 (SF2) (Chinese people are starting to favour western food):

As Pret has now entered the Chinese market, this is good news for them. It is an opportunity now to push further and open more stores while this trend remains.

(Michelle, 2014)

Social factor 3 (SF3) (Restaurant and fast food chains are training their employees to be ‘sellers’):

As Pret is a fast food chain, this is an opportunity for their HR to really push their quality of service (which is already higher than the vast majority of fast food chains).

(Michelle, 2014)

Social factor 4 (SF4) (Consumers are becoming more and more aware of the origins of the food products they buy, as well as its cleanliness):

With this new found interest of the origins of products from the consumers, Pret could link in to social factor 2 (where Chinese people are favouring western food) and once again, push forward in that market, where the Chinese are willing to pay a little extra for the reassurance of quality food.

(Michelle, 2014)

Technological factors: Meaning: Supporting reference: Technological factor 1 (TF1) (People turn to their smartphone for health advice):

This factor could well become a threat to Pret if their content of ingredients are not monitored correctly and if there is something found in their food that has been ‘hidden’ or not clearly shown that could possibly go against their brand image. But on the flip side, if these app’s find that Pret’s food has what they say it does, and does indeed have health benefit, they could use it as a marketing strategy and increase awareness once again on their healthy image.

(Michelle, 2014)

Technological factor 2 (TF2) (Entrepreneurs and business alike how now started to develop 3D printed food):

This could well be a threat or an opportunity again. Pret, if they feel this has increased benefit, along with saving time and money, could use this to cut costs and boosts their healthy image, but they could stick with the handmade everyday image that has brought success throughout the years. If they stick with the

(Michelle, 2014)



latter, a competitor could come in with 3D food, so they will have to devise a marketing strategy to ensure Pret is the option among consumers.

Technological factor 3 (TF3) (With the World Wide Web, information is easier to get a hold of and people are becoming more responsive to information that may have been forgotten about or brushed off in the past e.g. the viral video of McDonald’s manufacturing of McNuggets which was false):

Relating back to Pret, as they pride themselves on quality in all aspects, from the condition of their outlets, their staff, their service and their product, they could use the World Wide Web to perhaps produce a viral video to once again, increase awareness of their brand and their healthy products.

(Michelle, 2014)

Technological factor 4 (TF4) (There is now lab-grown beef which is reportedly healthier than regular beef):

As Pret promote their food as healthy and natural, they would most likely choose to keep away from artificially made beef, but this beef could be used by a competitor, and with the added health benefits its reported to have, it could be a threat to Pret and take away some of their market share.

(Michelle, 2014)

Legal factors: Meaning: Supporting reference:Legal factor 1 (LF1) (China is employing harsh and strict regulations on food safety):

As China is a massive market, and one Pret is now involved with, these measures have to be considered by the senior levels of Pret, and ensure all their products meet these regulations because if they don’t, it could be a disaster for Pret in the Chinese market.

(Michelle, 2014)

Legal factor 2 (LF2) (Regulations on calorie counts being shown on packaging):

Once again, relating back to Pret, this could be an opportunity to furthermore boost their brand image of their healthy food.

(Michelle, 2014)

Environmental factors: Meaning: Supporting reference:Environmental factor 1 (EnF1) (If the use of water continues and increases at the rate it has been, by 2050, it is reported 40% the world’s population will be living in

Although years away, as their business is supported by farmers and the produce they make, if they happen to be affected with restrictions on water etc. they will be directly

(Michelle, 2014)



water-stressed countries): impacted.Environmental factor 2 (EnF2) (Sustainable farming):

If the process of farming for Pret only lasts a few years, this would be difficult for Pret to keep finding new farmers. This would once again have a direct impact on Pret as a food business. If the farms cannot sustain themselves, then in-turn, they cannot sustain Pret.



Competitive Analysis:Porter’s 5 Forces (Appendix 8) :


(195 Words)


Threat of new entrants Meaning: Impact/Urgency:Threat of new entrants 1 (ToNE1) (Pret operate in city centres with high capital costs):

Because of the high costs direct from capital, such as premises and fixed assets to start up a business in the centre of London, it could mean that the threat of an entrant in this sense would be low.

Low.

Threat of new entrants 2 (ToNE2) (Pret have economies of scale):

Any new entrants, especially those that are not an already established brand would have to create economies of scale to match Pret’s prices for the quality of product and service they provide. So once again, for this section, a threat of new entrants would be low.

Low.

Threat of new entrants 3 (ToNE3) (Pret have routine consumers with costs of developing a brand high):

For this, as switching costs are low for consumers in this market, routine customers aren’t that important, so the threat of an entrant building a consumer base is high, but as for developing a brand that is trusted by these consumers, it will cost a lot to build that. But even so, the threat of new entrants for this part is high, as they would have to start building a brand.

High.

Threat of new entrants 4 (ToNE4) (New entrants have to find a route to market):

New entrants would have to find a route to market, through either outlets or online. This may not be too difficult for a new entrant, so once again the threat is high.

High.

Bargaining power of buyers: Meaning: Impact/urgency:Bargaining power of buyers 1 (BPoB1) (Low switching cost between competitors for the consumers):

As there is low switching costs between competitors, at any day, consumers could switch between each one and have a new choice every day, so for this, the bargaining power of buyers is very high.

Very high.

Bargaining power of buyers 2 (BPoB2) (There are a large amount of competitors that consumers can choose from):

Linking in to Bargaining power of buyers 1, as there it costs nothing to switch from competitor to competitor, the power of buyers is high, plus

Extremely high.



with the fact that there are many competitors to choose from, this only increases the bargaining power of buyers to extremely high.

Bargaining power of buyers 3 (BPoB3) (There is a lot of available substitutes such as other food outlets or even cheaper option of home eating):

Linking both Bargaining power of buyers 1 & Bargaining power of buyers 2, there is a lot of cheaper substitutes, eating from home being one. So once again, this only increases the bargaining power of buyers.

High.

Threat of substitute products: Meaning: Impact/urgency:Threat of substitute products 1 (ToSP1) (Plenty of substitutes within Pret’s market):

Taking from Bargaining power of buyers 3, there are plenty of substitutes such as eating at home, so this threat of substitutes is high.

High.

Threat of substitute products 2 (ToSP2) (Low switching costs for consumers):

Taking from Bargaining power of buyers 1, there is low switching costs from consumers in the market, so once again, it increases the threat of substitutes.

High.

Threat of substitute products 3 (ToSP3) (Most importantly, many competitors have high performance-to-cost ratio):

Crucially, most of Pret’s competitors have high performance-to-cost ratio, so they can match Pret’s performance, whilst keeping their costs low to perhaps undercut Pret’s pricing, which once again, increases the threat of substitutes if their competitors had much cheaper prices.

Low.

Bargaining power of suppliers: Meaning: Impact/urgency:Bargaining power of suppliers 1 (BPoS1) (Large number of suppliers for Pret):

As Pret have a choice of a large number of suppliers, Pret could pick and choose the suppliers they want, meaning the bargaining power of suppliers is very low.

Very low.

Bargaining power of suppliers 2 (BPoS2) (Low forward integration, but as seen, Pret does have strong relationships with their farmers):

Because there is low forward integration, meaning the suppliers don’t have much say or input in any processes and operations beyond their own, it means that Pret only need

Low.



them for the raw materials. This once again means that Pret’s suppliers bargaining powers are low.

Bargaining power of suppliers 3 (BPoS3) (There is a relative abundance of the produce needed for Pret’s food):

Lastly, as there is a relative abundance of available produce needed for Pret’s product, their suppliers can’t demand high prices or clauses in the contracts. Once again, leaving the bargaining powers of suppliers being very low.

Very low.

Competitive rivalry: Meaning: Supporting reference: Competitive rivalry 1 (CR1) (High number of large firms within the market):

As there is a high number of competitors in the market, there is inevitably a high competitive rivalry.

High.

Competitive rivalry 2 (CR2) (Bearing in mind the firms in this market, they are all extremely aggressive):

Adding to this, the firms in the market are all very aggressive when targeting and acquiring their consumers, once again meaning that the competitive rivalry in this market is high.

High.

Competitive rivalry 3 (CR3) (Low switching costs within the market):

Once again, linking back to bargaining power of buyers 1 & Threat of substitute products 2, there is low switching costs within the market, meaning competitors are fighting tooth and nail to acquire and get consumers while devising plans to keep their consumers.

High.



Environmental matrix:


(34 Words)Barry Stuck - 21315816


Interpretation and analysis of the environmental matrix:From the environmental matrix, as shown, the high urgency and high impact factors are encompassed by a red border. The high urgency, high impact factors include ToNE4, SF2, CR1, EnF2, EF2, BPoB1, ToSP2, CR3, BPoB3, ToSP1, LF1, BPoB2, and CR2. This is showing that Pret should highlight ways to stop new entrants have to finding a route to market, or at least a way that overshadows and pushes on their market share. Not only this, but as Chinese people are starting to favour western food, it is a chance for Pret to push further into this market before their competitors, this is urgent because if they wait too long, then competitors will jump into the market, and overall this will have a huge impact on Pret. Moving on to CR1, and the fact that there are a high number of large firms within the market, it is an urgent matter than Pret keeps themselves and the quality of their product in front of these firms, because if competitors start taking their market share, this will have a dire impact on Pret. Pret also need to highlight sustainable farming, as shown throughout this report, consumers are becoming more and more concerned with the origins of their food, how their food is produced and the treatment of the farmers, so keeping a sustainable farming process is key. This is urgent because if it isn’t sustainable, Pret will need to find a new product soon, which once again, has a huge impact on Pret as a whole. Moving on to the fact the market is expanding and becoming dense, even though people still choose to eat at home as it’s the cheaper option, it means Pret really have to establish themselves as a different option to their competitors and substitutes. This is once again urgent because if Pret slack on this, it will have a huge impact on them. Moving on to BPoB1, ToSP2 and CR3, these all highlight the fact there is low switching costs between competitors, this is massively urgent for Pret to stop their consumers switching with effective marketing and quality service/product. If Pret fail to stop their consumers switching, then this will once again impact Pret negatively. Now for BPoB3 and ToSP1, this highlights the huge number of substitutes in the market, such as competitors and eating at home. Once again this is urgent to deal with and impactful to Pret for obvious reasons, taking the low switching costs of BPoB1, ToSP2 and CR3 and showing there is a lot of things to choose from other than Pret that could be potentially a lot cheaper. Moving on to the key 3 urgent and impactful factors of the environmental matrix that are LF1, BPoB2 and CR2. Starting with LF1, which highlights that China is employing harsh and strict regulations on food safety. This is massively urgent as Pret has only recently moved into the Chinese market, so any failure to meet these regulations could result in a public relations incident that could potentially be so impactful to Pret’s image that it may not be able to ever push back into the Chinese market. Secondly, for BPoB2 which highlights the fact there is a large amount of competitors that consumers can choose from, this is massively urgent for Pret to keep on their marketing push and their quality of their products, because if they slip at all, their consumers will switch to any number of their competitors which once again, could have a massively negative impact. Lastly, for CR2, which is considered the most important issue for Pret from the environmental matrix, which focuses in on the fact that the majority of the firms in this market are all extremely aggressive, this is a hugely important and urgent factor for Pret as is they hesitate on any of their processes and daily activities, one of their extremely aggressive competitors will have pushed in and taken market share and consumers quicker than Pret could react. This will be massively impactful on Pret in every way imaginable. These factors will be touched on and improved upon when devising the 2 strategies for Pret to advance on and proceed with.



Pret A Manger SWOT Analysis:Internal:

Strengths: Weaknesses: Pret A Manger is Britain’s leading

sandwich chain with an enviable reputation for service (Cook, S, 2015).

10th best company to work for in the UK (Cook, S, 2015).

LF2 (Regulations on calorie counts being shown on packaging).

EnF2 (Sustainable farming). ToNE1 (Pret operate in city centres

with high capital costs). ToNE2 (Pret have economies of scale). ToNE3 (Pret have routine consumers

with costs of developing a brand high). BPoS1 (Large number of suppliers for

Pret). BPoS2 (Low forward integration, but

as seen, Pret does have strong relationships with their farmers).

BPoB1 (Low switching cost between competitors for the consumers).

ToSP2 (Low switching costs for consumers).

CR3 (Low switching costs within the market).

Opportunities: Threats: SF3 (Restaurant and fast food chains

are training their employees to be ‘sellers’).

TF2 (Entrepreneurs and business alike how now started to develop 3D printed food).


BPoS1 (Large number of suppliers for Pret).


EnF1 (If the use of water continues and increases at the rate it has been, by 2050, it is reported 40% the world’s population will be living in water-stressed countries).

EnF2 (Sustainable farming). BPoB1 (Low switching cost between

competitors for the consumers). ToSP2 (Low switching costs for

consumers). CR3 (Low switching costs within the

market).External:

Strengths: Weaknesses: SF2 (Chinese people are starting to

favour western food). SF4 (Consumers are becoming more

and more aware of the origins of the food products they buy, as well as its cleanliness).


ToNE3 (Pret have routine consumers with costs of developing a brand high).


EF1 (People are not out of the ‘tightening their belt’ stage because of this price of edible commodities).

TF3 (With the World Wide Web, information is easier to get a hold of and people are becoming more responsive to information that may have been forgotten about or brushed off in the past e.g. the viral video of McDonald’s manufacturing of McNuggets which was false).

BPoB1 (Low switching cost between



BPoS3 (There is a relative abundance of the produce needed for Pret’s food).

competitors for the consumers). BPoB2 (There are a large amount of

competitors that consumers can choose from).

BPoB3 (There is a lot of available substitutes such as other food outlets or even cheaper option of home eating).

ToSP1 (Plenty of substitutes within Pret’s market).



Opportunities: Threats: PF2 (British government on cracking

down on targeting children with junk food).

SF1 (Concerns with obesity). SF2 (Chinese people are starting to

favour western food). TF1 (People turn to their smartphone

for health advice). TF2 (Entrepreneurs and business alike

how now started to develop 3D printed food).

TF3 (With the World Wide Web, information is easier to get a hold of and people are becoming more responsive to information that may have been forgotten about or brushed off in the past e.g. the viral video of McDonald’s manufacturing of McNuggets which was false).



PF1 (Pressure from environmental groups about recyclable packaging).

EF2 (The market is expanding and becoming dense, even though people still choose to eat at home as it’s the cheaper option).

TF1 (People turn to their smartphone for health advice).


TF4 (There is now lab-grown beef which is reportedly healthier than regular beef).

LF1 (China is employing harsh and strict regulations on food safety).

EnF1 (If the use of water continues and increases at the rate it has been, by 2050, it is reported 40% the world’s population will be living in water-stressed countries).

ToNE4 (New entrants have to find a route to market).

BPoB1 (Low switching cost between competitors for the consumers).

BPoB2 (There are a large amount of competitors that consumers can choose from).

BPoB3 (There is a lot of available substitutes such as other food outlets or even cheaper option of home eating).

ToSP1 (Plenty of substitutes within Pret’s market).




ToSP3 (Most importantly, many competitors have high performance-to-cost ratio).

CR1 (High number of large firms within the market).

CR2 (Bearing in mind the firms in this market, they are all extremely aggressive).


Critical analysis of SWOT: One clear point from this SWOT analysis of Pret is the number of threats they have. Not only this but the amount of external factors that influence them that they may not necessarily be able to control, things such as having a lot of competitors, substitutes and economic negativities. For the good, as shown in the internal and external SWOT’s of Pret, there is a lot of strengths and opportunities. This is good for Pret as they can work on these in new strategies, things such as calorie counts on packaging. If Pret’s products are as good as they say, then it is a massive opportunity to plaster this on their packaging as well as their stores.

Overall, taking from the SWOT analysis, they have a lot of strengths and opportunities that they can push on with, but they also have a huge amount of threats with weaknesses. These threats and weaknesses could be used in new strategies to be improved upon or removed completely. If not removed completely, a few key ones such as CR1, CR2 and CR3 need to be acted upon. Even though they are external and not always directly influenced by themselves, they can do their best to ensure their customers do not want to switch.

Strategic Planning:Porter’s Generic Competitive Strategies ( Appendix 5 ):



Application of Porter’s Generic Competitive Strategies taken from the content of Pret’s SWOT analysis:

Current position in Porter’s Generic Competitive Strategy model:Currently, Pret would be placed in differentiation on the Porter model and this is because Pret focus on quality throughout to be different and more attractive from their competitors. Pret has done this by researching their produce well, developing their products as well as their staff’s service and innovating their products to things such as their Kale crisps and incorporating cauliflower into their products.

Secondly for Pret being on the differentiation part of the model, they have focused and delivered on high-quality services and products that have pushed Pret to one of the best chains in the UK. This helps when placing Pret onto the focus differentiation because they focus on quality and then go and deliver it.

The only thing that hangs a question about their differentiation is the effective sales and marketing so that benefits of Pret are clearly shown through the market consumers. Directors of Pret have said that they are effective at marketing, even without using advertising (Hobbs, T, 2015). Strategy number one in Porter’s Generic Competitive Strategy model:For strategy number one, this involves pushing hard into China to be a first mover within the market when it comes to western food and the healthy lifestyle of Pret.

Taking from the external SWOT strength of SF2 and the external opportunity of SF2. SF2 highlights that Chinese people are now starting to favour Western food and with Pret only outlets in Hong Kong and Shanghai, around 17 altogether, there is most definitely room for them to push harder into this market. If they do push and push hard and aggressive life their competitors do, shown with CR2, they could really grab a good hold of the market as it grows to maturity and with the increasing white collar workers, wanting the Western lifestyle and Western health rage.

This strategy will also help turn the external threat of LF1, which is the harsh restrictions and penalties on failing to meet the Chinese regulations on food into a positive and a way to push Pret into the market further. If they use these restrictions, meet them and meet them with flying colours, the certificates/awards and verifications that they get from the Chinese government could be plastered all over their product packaging and shops as well as advertising if Pret decide to do that in the Chinese market.

This would keep Pret in the differentiation part of the model as they won’t be changing their values and USP too much, apart from perhaps a more Chinese culture friendly selection of food, but even that won’t be changed too much as it has been found by SF2 that Chinese people want Western food. Strategy number two in Porter’s Generic Competitive Strategy model:Now for strategy two, this involves Pret partnering with a fitness app such as FitBit, FitStar or MyFitnessPal to create a mobile application for both iOS and Android, to be available to the majority of smartphone users and push forward with external threat and external opportunity of TF1 which highlights that more and more people are turning to their smartphone for health advice.

Through this mobile app, Pret could offer incentives for thing such as number of miles run, number of calories burnt as well an incorporating a loyalty card within the app, that could be scanned in store, or a code to type online when getting an online order or delivery to the office. As well as this, they could have selective, but minimal advertising on the app for fitness products such as thermals and running shoes so that the producers of these products can target the same segment of customer that Pret has as they match.

This app might help curve CR1, CR2 & CR3 which all highlight the number of large firms in this market, that fact their all aggressive and the low switching costs for the consumers



respectively. This app could give them a reason to stay with Pret and to stop switching to another firm within the market.

This might eventually push Pret into focus differentiation on this model but most likely will stay as differentiation, as Pret have branched out further from eating out/fast-food to now mobile apps. This would show aggression and hopefully curve some interest consumers may have to switch to a competitor. It would also help push their customer segmentation to the healthy lifestyle and white collar workers who like to be health conscious and have smartphones for their daily use. An added bonus of this strategy is the fact that it could potentially add another revenue stream from the ads shown on the application itself. The key here for Pret is to not flood the users with ads, as this would put off many potential customer and user of the app.

Plotting Pret a Manger on Bowman’s Strategy Clock ( Appendix 5 ):


Key:RED = Current positioning of Pret.GREEN = Strategy number one positioning of Pret. GOLD = Strategy number two positioning of Pret.


Business Canvas Model:Pret A Manger Strategy One:


(476 Words)




Is this going to require a new or existing vision statement for Pret A Manger?

A vision statement is a description of what and where the business aspires to be, achieve and accomplish in the mid to long term future (Business Dictionary, 2016).

For strategy one, it doesn’t necessarily mean that Pret need a new vision statement, it just means they need to extend and expand their current one. Adding in the vision of seeing themselves as the number one choice for Western food when eating out would be a very good and ambitious target/vision for them within the next 5 to 10 years in that market. More realistically though, Pret can add to their vision statement by adding that their vision is to be one of the top 5 choices for Western food in the Chinese market, with a similar market share to the UK of 16%, with efficient and smooth operations to ensure profitability within the country.

What is the mission going to be with Strategy One for Pret A Manger?

A mission statement is an organisations core purpose and largely remains unchanged for long periods of time and is there to filter out what is important and what is not, to clearly state what markets will be served and to create a sense of direction for the organisation as a whole (Business Dictionary, 2016 A). A mission statement is different from the vision and as the mission statement is the cause and the vision is the effect (Business Dictionary, 2016 A). A mission is something that is there to be accomplished and a vision is there to be pursed to gain that accomplishment (Business Dictionary, 2016 A).

The mission really sets out what Pret want to and will aim to achieve. So for Pret with Strategy One, this will link in the end of the improved vision statements where they will achieve profitability within the Chinese market using efficient and smooth operations to do so. Pret will also be setting their mission to achieve a high market share in the Chinese market, so the brand awareness increases, consumers choose them and in turn, if the overheads are covered, creating profitability. Within the first couple of years Pret should understand that even though their mission is to be profitable in the Chinese market, that due to the high capital costs of setting up outlets in city centres as well as finding the best distribution in routes to their stores, it is almost certain they will not gain a profit for now, but that’s not to say with the aggressive stance of their competitors in this market, they cannot turn a profit in a few years within this market.

Another thing Pret may want to include in their mission statement is the idea and aim to ensure sustainable farming, both in their PretFarmer and FarmerPret relationships as well as the produce being farmed. Because without these being shown in the statements of Pret, the lines could be blurred between them and their competition by the Chinese people, something that could have a negative impact on Pret.

How are Pret going to do all this (explaining the strategy in more detail):

A strategy statement is a succinct description of

Currently, Pret has opened roughly 17 stores in China. Now, if Pret adopted the aggressive stance like their competitors and aimed to double outlets year on year, they could have 136 outlets in the next 3 years. This would take a massive amount of capital that could be gained from reinvesting their reported profits of £76m or could float on the stock market like that have been teasing with in the last



what the organisations core strategy is and what opportunities they will be exploiting and what risks they aim to avoid (Business Dictionary, 2016 B).

couple of years. They would clearly need more than £76m, but with the profits for the next two years, as well as perhaps a loan to gain more capital funds, this idea of doubling year on year is not out of reach for Pret.

As for their farming and distribution in to their stores for produce, Pret will have to do hands on research about the best couriers as well as the best routes for the produce to be delivered in their stores. An estimated guess would say that either way, it would be cheaper than say delivering in London on New York but nevertheless, it will be expensive, so finding the best routes and creating good relationships would be something Pret would need to do when aggressively pushing into major cities in China.

Lastly, as shown in the canvas model, both the original and for Strategy One, Pret haven’t used regular advertising and instead opt for using social media to attract its consumers and the segment of the market they choose to target whilst using in store ads on things such as free Wi-Fi. So if they do want to adopt the aggressive stance of attacking the Chinese market with meaning, they may want to invest in some heaving TV advertising and music streaming services to really access the market.

If all three of these segments of Strategy One is done well and efficiently, it could really be a profitable venture for Pret, but one thing still remains, they would definitely need to invest funds into R&D to research the Chinese culture as well as developing their brand to be in line with this culture. Once done, and all is set to go, Pret need to push aggressively and it could well be extremely efficient and profitable for Pret.



Pret A Manger Strategy Two:


(618 Words)


Is this going to require a new or existing vision statement for Pret A Manger?

Once again, it is more evolution not revolution with Strategy Two for Pret A Manger. Pret could quite easily keep their existing vision statement and just evolve it to add in the added technological factor of the mobile application. To do this, throughout their vision statement, Pret would have to clarify that is now aims to be the number one stop for the health conscious and the active among their consumers. Not only this, but they would aim to incorporate all existing loyalty activities into this application through either an eLoyaltyCard or through incentives such as a free hot drink per X amount of miles ran.

What is the mission going to be with Strategy One for Pret A Manger?

Now, for Pret’s mission statement, it will be to create the number one choice in health and fitness applications throughout its consumer base whilst maintaining a strong partnership with a company who really understands that market such as FitBit. This will once again be extended onto their current mission statement.

Their mission will also be to provide an accurate and efficient mobile application and not just one used for novelty and purely for incentives given my Pret. This could increase the potential purchasing (whether free or not) from consumers that are outside of Pret and the people who are just in general, quite active and healthy, which in turn could attract even more consumers to Pret as they really understand and get a feel for what Pret are trying to push.

Lastly, Pret should include in their mission statement that they will create an ad platform that isn’t intrusive with data and doesn’t put people off but can add another stream of revenue to the business. The key, as mentioned is for Pret to create an ad platform where fitness companies and health conscious companies can advertised on and access their target market directly but without making the advertising overwhelming to the consumer which may put some people off. It will be difficult, but if Pret put forces behind it and the aggressive stance to excel and be successful as shown by their competitors as well as Strategy Two, then it can be done.

How are Pret going to do all this (explaining the strategy in more detail):

Currently, Pret isn’t in the health and fitness mobile application market at all so all of this Strategy Two will be completely new and unique to each person involved with development of this. That market is becoming more and denser, but if Pret choose the right partner, such as FitBit, they have both their own brand and FitBit’s to be straight at the forefront of the consumers eye, which is a massive added bonus.

As for the partner, FitBit is a well-known player in that market so is being used an example, but there is a range of applications that do the same job as FitBit and are just as good, if not better so it will really be a challenge for Pret to find the best partner for them, but it is something that needs to be done to the highest of quality as to make sure the application itself doesn’t just turn into a novelty, and something that isn’t useful to the consumer, because this could be negatively impactful on Pret’s image and products.

The application itself will have to be of use to the consumer, giving them a reason to use it for the health and fitness tracking and not just for the incentives. So linking back into the partner, it is key that they find a partner who knows exactly what they’re doing and have the skills, knowledge and technology to create a ‘PretFit’ or ‘Fit A Manger’ mobile health and fitness advice and tracking that can track their progress as well



as incorporate calorie counting technology so the consumers can really track themselves how many they’re eating if this is something that is important to them.

Now for the incentives on the application, Pret could potentially offer a reason to use the application that is beyond just the health and fitness advice and this could potentially turn into taking consumers from their competitors and as an added bonus to the consumer, can add a slight amount of motivation as they will working towards something such as a free coffee/sandwich/meal. This is something that no of their competitors are doing and it’s something that many of their competitors cannot do as they don’t offer the healthy, fresh produce that Pret do. Add the eLoyaltyCard idea in for regular customers who don’t always do the fitness incentives to get free drinks means that Pret won’t be excluding one side of or the other of their consumers, incorporating the health conscious and the white collar workers both at the same time.

Altogether, this application could make people talk, and if people talk well of Pret with the health bonuses and incentives, then it could massively pay off for Pret. It is well known that word-of-mouth is one of the strongest marketing tools so if Pret really crack this mobile application through having a quality application that offers all what is needed such as progress reporting and calorie counting, for the health and fitness consumers in the market, then Pret could really push high up into the market, adding more consumers from their rivals and creating a new platform for people to integrated into the Pret lifestyle. This app could be worldwide if it is in line with regulations so it could potentially link into the Strategy One where Pret is aiming to push aggressively into the Chinese market.

Critical discussion of the relation between Strategy One & Two with Pret’s current SWOT analysis & strategic capabilities:Strategy One:Strategy One which is pushing aggressively into China, relates back to Pret’s SWOT as it derives straight from SF2 which highlights that Chinese people are starting to favour Western food, so straight away, pushing aggressively into China makes sense. Strategy One also adopts traits shown in CR2 which states that competitors in Pret’s market act aggressively and it is something that Pret will definitely have to do in the Chinese market. Lastly for Strategy One and it’s relation to Pret’s SWOT, it will hopefully help turn LF1 which is the Chinese regulations on food into a positive. If Pret pass regulations with flying colours, there would be the opportunity to show this to the public.

As for the strategic capabilities, Pret in Strategy One would have to keep the capability/resources of the expectation of good selection of food, clean restaurants and consistency along with keeping the convenience to break the Chinese market, and keep the Western feel the Chinese want. They will also have to keep the competitive advantage/resource of monetary resources to set up in China, staff able to handle the Chinese peak times, the décor matching Pret’s Western feel and the quality, fresh food. As for the threshold capabilities/competences, Pret will have made the difference from in-home options for the Chinese people, they’ll keep the service at a high quality and pricing to be in line with the Chinese market. For the competitive advantage/competences, Pret will once again keep the differences from in-home options and will be passionate in doing so, creating once again the Western. Strategy Two:As for Strategy Two and Pret’s current SWOT analysis, it takes TF1, that shows that more and more people are turning to their smartphones for health advice, and turns it into an idea of creating at app



to handle the increase in people doing this. This mobile application is also hoping to curve the negatives of CR1 which shows that there is a large number of large firms in this market, CR2 which states they are all very aggressive and CR3 which shows there are low switching costs within the market. If this app can attract consumers from their aggressive competitors, then it will curve all three of these SWOT factors, even if it was a minimal amount.

Now for Strategy Two and Pret’s strategic capabilities, for the threshold/resources, they will keep everything from the selection of foods to their consistency and this consistency and quality will need to transfer over in the mobile application. As for their competitive advantage/resources, once again Pret will keep everything as add the app resource to the list as it will be a competitive advantage as their competitors do nothing like this. For threshold capabilities/competences, for the third time, they will keep all to keep the differences from in-home options as well as the convenience and once again, these strategy capability traits will be transferred into the mobile application. Lastly for the competitive advantage/competences, all we be kept with the addition of the quality mobile application to ensure the experience on this application will match that of their in store experience, which is quality all round.

SAFe Analysis:Strategy One:

Suitability: Does the proposed strategy address the key opportunities and threats that Pret faces? Does it support the purpose and objectives? Is it suitable for competitive position and lifecycle? Does it make the best use of their competitive advantage? As mentioned, Strategy One addresses the external SWOT threat and external SWOT opportunity of SF2, as well as the external SWOT threats CR2 & LF1. It also supports the purpose and objectives of Pret which are to create an experience with great food, great services and great locations. As for the competitive position and lifecycle, this will massively strengthen their competitive position in China if they push aggressively and will aim to expand their lifecycle as well as push them high up through growth. Lastly, as Chinese people are now favouring Western food, it definitely holds well with Pret’s competitive advantage.

Acceptability: Does a proposed strategy meet the expectations of stakeholders? Is the level of risk acceptable? Is the likely return acceptable? Will stakeholders accept the strategy? This strategy would meet the expectations of stakeholders, from governments wanting businesses founded in their country to expand overseas to increase the reputation of the country, staff would be excited to see the company they work for is expanding with perhaps some opportunities to people to bring the Western feel in the new Chinese stores. The level of risk for this strategy would be massive, with huge amounts of capital expenditure if they really do push aggressively into the Chinese market, so the acceptability would be difficult to overcome but moving on to the acceptability of return, this would definitely be accepted. The level of return may outweigh the risk as the size of the Chinese market is massive and if Pret manage to get a solid foothold on the market, the profits could be huge.

Overall I think the stakeholders would accept the strategy as it would meet expectations and the level of return will outweigh the level of risk that would be incurred should Pret go ahead with the strategy.

Feasibility: Would the proposed strategy work in practice? Can the strategy be financed? Do people and their skills exist and can they be obtained? Can



the required resources be obtained and integrated? The proposed strategy would work in practice as it takes all of what Pret knows, adding what they research about the Chinese culture and placing it in the Chinese market, and with the knowledge that Chinese people are now favouring Western food it all points to working. As for the financing, Pret would need a lot more than just their underlying profits of £76m to expand aggressively into the Chinese market when considering shop locations, PPE (plant, property & equipment) and setting out distribution links to and from farmers in the region. They also would need the money to advertise heavily which is suggested for Pret when moving into the Chinese market. The skills are all set in place from their current business activities and the resources can be obtained and integrated as they are doing this strategy, but on a smaller scale, whereas this strategy is to scrap that and push aggressively into the Chinese market.

Strategy Two: Suitability: Does the proposed strategy address the key opportunities and threats

that Pret faces? Does it support the purpose and objectives? Is it suitable for competitive position and lifecycle? Does it make the best use of their competitive advantage? Strategy Two take into account the external SWOT threat and external SWOT opportunity of TF1 as well as all the external threats of competitive rivalry CR1, CR2 & CR3. It also supports the purpose and objectives of Pret with quality all round by making a quality mobile health application that caters for the health conscious consumers that are actively targeted by Pret. As for the competitive position, it would position them massively in front of their competitors, especially in terms of customer interaction and for Pret’s lifecycle, it could only extend it. This strategy wouldn’t shorten Pret’s lifecycle because if it fails, as it’s separate from their core business, it won’t impact in store sales. It definitely makes use of their competitive advantage as their current competitive advantage is quality, fresh, healthy food and to transfer this into a mobile application to have incentives to go to Pret and to be fit as well as counting the calories on food could only have a positive impact. If a customer used this on a competitor product such as McDonalds or Greggs and physically saw the difference on their smartphone in terms of calories, they could turn to Pret instead. So this application could massively further Pret’s competitive advantage.

Acceptability: Does a proposed strategy meet the expectations of stakeholders? Is the level of risk acceptable? Is the likely return acceptable? Will stakeholders accept the strategy? The proposed strategy may not meet the expectations of their stakeholder as it is moving significantly away from their core business activities but stakeholders may find some comfort in the fact that failure in this venture won’t cost millions of pounds and failure in this venture won’t harm in store purchases. As for the level of risk and asking the question of if it is acceptable, it definitely is. For a high quality application, it is between £100,000 - £200,000 to create and to create one of the level of Instagram and Facebook so this would be the only real capital investment needed from Pret which is significantly less than what would be needed to head aggressively into China. After the capital investment, all Pret would need to pay for is a maintenance team as well as expanding their customer



service team and as this is all salary or per hour based with many probably on 0 hour contracts, even this isn’t too much a problem to remove if the worse happens and the mobile application fails. As for the return, this would also be acceptable as Pret can take consumers away from competitors as it can attract them for the health benefits as well as the incentives side of things can attract consumers or keep consumers who may consider switching to a competitor. In the face of it, stakeholders would accept it because although it ventures away from their core business activities, the risk is low and the return is high, so there is no reason as to why the stakeholders wouldn’t accept Pret for giving it a go.

Feasibility: Would the proposed strategy work in practice? Can the strategy be financed? Do people and their skills exist and can they be obtained? Can the required resources be obtained and integrated? The proposed strategy would work in practise as Pret would gain a partnership with a company that has the skills and knowledge as well as the technology to be able to make this venture work. As for the financing of this venture, that could definitely be achieved through the underlying profits made from last of £76m. When looking at a high quality mobile application costing roughly £200,000, it looks a very small amount. As mentioned, as Pret will be creating a partnership with a company such as FitBit, they will have the skills and knowledge available which will be transferred when the partnership is set in stone. Lastly, for the resources and whether or not they can be obtained, all the resources can be obtained purely from the underlying profits of £76m. So the financing is done and all the skills and knowledge can be obtained through the partnership that will be created from the partner who knows their market.

Critical comparison of Strategy One & Two using SAFe:Starting with suitability, Strategy Two covers more of the SWOT opportunities and threats than Strategy One covers and supports Pret’s purpose and objectives. Strategy One would take this section as this strategy sticks more to the core objectives of Pret than Strategy Two is and its more about expanding aggressively at what they already do. Once again for the competitive position and lifecycle, Strategy One takes it as they are using what they already know to push themselves into a foreign market and to expand their brand lifecycle. Strategy Two also does this, but as they are moving into a completely new market, it makes it a little less suitable to their core values. Lastly, Strategy Two makes best use of Pret’s competitive advantage as it is taking the advantage of healthy, low calorie food into a new market and pushing it further into a mobile application for people to track their calories and health activities. So overall, the two strategies are tied for suitability for Pret to take on.

As for meeting the expectations of stakeholders, once again, Strategy one pushes out Strategy Two purely because of Pret are sticking to their core business activities. As for the level of risk that is acceptable, Strategy Two massively outweighs from Strategy One from the significantly less capital expenditure. Now for the likely return and what is acceptable, Strategy One offers high revenues from a massive Chinese market, but Strategy Two hopes to curve the competitive rivalry forces so for this part, they are both tied. Finally for acceptance from the stakeholders, both would be tied again. This is due to Strategy One sticking to their core business activities and could earn them a lot of high revenues, but Strategy Two has a sizable difference in risk and can also turn heads away from their competitors. More than likely, Strategy Two would take the acceptability due to the massive reduction in risk.

For the strategies working in practice, Strategy One would as its taking what they already know and placing it in China whereas Strategy Two would also work due to having a partner with the skills, knowledge and technology to develop an app and track fitness. Now for financing, Strategy



Two definitely takes this one as it would only cost a sliver of their underlying £76m profits whereas Strategy One would cost a considerable much more than their underlying profits and this could be something that may hinge on choosing between the strategies. For the skills existing and whether or not they can be obtained, this is even for Strategy One and Two as Strategy One its taking what Pret already knows and Strategy Two is taking from skills available from a potential partner of theirs. Finally, for the resources and whether or not they can be obtained and integrated, Strategy Two once again overcomes Strategy One because the financial resources are there and the rest of the skills and knowledge can be taken from a partner, hence partnering with them. But for Strategy Two, Pret really has to find a significant amount of financial injection as well as ensuring the culture and services remain Western but also account for the Chinese culture as to not offend or disturb any potential consumers which could end up creating a negative brand image for Pret in China.

Overall, Strategy Two pushes out Strategy one when comparing the SAFe analysis, because Strategy Two is tied for suitability, takes the advantage in acceptability due to the significant smaller capital expenditure and pushes our feasibility due to it being able to be financed more than anything.

Strategy Pret should choose and the reason why: It’s difficult choice, as Pret can go for either Strategy One or Two and could fail or succeed at polar opposites. Failing expensively but succeeding massively for Strategy One and failing minimally but succeeding at a hugely smaller scale for Strategy Two, although there is potential for the app to help growth elsewhere in the world and that is why Pret should choose to go with and push Strategy Two.

Strategy Two aims to cover more important factors of the SWOT analysis than Strategy One does and also aims to curve some of the massively impactful CR1, CR2 & CR3, whereas Strategy One covers three also, but three that can be seen as less impactful. If Strategy Two could at even the smallest of scales turn the CR1, CR2 & CR3 factors on their side, it could be massively beneficial when attracting consumers from their large competitors and also keeping consumers there is zero switching cost to the consumer.

Strategy Two also incorporates all of what Pret already knows, carries on their market push in China, albeit at a more organic growth which is Pret’s current strategy rather than aggressive as suggested by Strategy One and puts it all into a mobile application where current consumers can track their health and fitness progress, count calories and for the less active people, still gain loyalty bonuses from an eLoyaltyCard. For the reason that Pret is already in China, is another strike again Strategy One, as it is doing what they are currently doing. Strategy Two really branches Pret out and accesses more people in their current markets which they have cracked so far successfully so it is a massive risk to push into another foreign market so aggressively, especially when taking into consideration the way Pret failed when entering the American market.

Overall, the mobile application of Strategy Two has massive potential to become a massive success for consumer numbers as well as ad-revenue and in-turn attract consumers away from competitors which will help lower the urgency and impact of the competitive rivalry factors in Porter’s 5 Forces Model. If Pret unfortunately fail with this venture, they would love a maximum of a couple million pounds, whereas the aggressive push in China is a considerable amount more, one in which Pret will need financing externally as they do not have the cash available to do. This is another reasoning behind choosing Strategy Two for Pret. Strategy Two does depend on gaining a partner with the right skills, knowledge and technology but there are a lot of players in the health and fitness market with mobile applications that Pret can pitch to and with a well-known brand image, Pret shouldn’t find it too difficult to find a partner and once found, with two well-known brands behind a quality mobile application, all signs point to an extremely successful mobile fitness and health application that people with not just an interest or stake in Pret, but fitness as a whole could enjoy and use.

References:



(Baojie, L, Yao, z & Li, Y, 2014). China pledges harsh measures on food safety. Available: http://en.people.cn/90882/8556374.html. Last accessed 04/01/16.

(Barney, 1991). VRIN Framework. Available: http://www.createadvantage.com/glossary/vrin-framework. Last accessed 15th Jan 2016

(Beaudoin, R, 2014). New Restaurant Staff Training Program Turns 'Order Takers' Into 'Sales Stars'. Available: http://www.prweb.com/releases/sales-stars-training/restaurant-rockstars/prweb11524690.htm. Last accessed 05/01/16

(Bowman, C, 1997). Corporate Competitive Strategy. N/A: McGraw Hill Companies Inc. N/A

(Business Dictionary, 2016). Vision Statement. Available: http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/vision-statement.html. Last accessed 15th Jan 2016

(Business Dictionary, 2016 A). Mission Statement. Available: http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/mission-statement.html. Last accessed 15th Jan 2016

(Business Dictionary, 2016 B). Strategic Statement. Available: http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/strategic-statement.html. Last accessed 15th Jan 2016

(Butler, S, 2015). Pret a Manger to expand in France and US after 14% profit rise. Available: http://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/apr/21/pret-a-manger-expand-france-us-profit-rise. Last accessed 03/01/16.

(Childe, H, 2013). Sandwiches and Lunchtime Foods - UK - November 2013. Available: http://academic.mintel.com/display/687824/. Last accessed 02/01/16

(Childe, H, 2015). Attitudes Towards Lunchtime Foods - UK - October 2015. Available: http://academic.mintel.com/display/752920/. Last accessed 05/01/16.

(Childe, H, 2015 A). Menu Flavours - UK - February 2015. Available: http://academic.mintel.com/display/731224/#hit1. Last accessed 03/01/16

(Childe, H, 2015 B). Menu Flavours - UK - February 2015. Available: http://academic.mintel.com/display/731225/#hit1. Last accessed 03/01/16

(Childe, H, 2015 C). Eating Out: The Decision Making Process - UK - July 2015. Available: http://academic.mintel.com/display/744477/. Last accessed 03/01/16

(Cook, S, 2015). Leading the Customer Experience: Inspirational Service Leadership. London: Ashgate Publishing, Ltd. 67.

(Diana, A, 2014). Mobile Health Apps Reshape Food Industry.Available: http://www.informationweek.com/healthcare/mobile-and-wireless/mobile-health-apps-reshape-food-industry/d/d-id/1127852. Last accessed 05/01/16

(Dudovskiy, J, 2014). Pret A Manger Value Chain Analysis. Available: http://research-methodology.net/pret-a-manger-value-chain-analysis/. Last accessed 05/01/16.



(Environmental Protection Department, 2010). Waste. Available: http://www.epd.gov.hk/epd/english/environmentinhk/waste/eco_responsibility/gts_packaging.html. Last accessed 04/01/16

(Ford, R, 2015). Pub Catering - UK - May 2015. Available: http://academic.mintel.com/display/738634/#hit1. Last accessed 02/01/16.

(Ford, R, 2015 A). Pub Catering - UK - May 2015. Available: http://academic.mintel.com/display/738631/#hit1. Last accessed 02/01/16.

(Gregory, L, 2015). McDonald’s Five Forces Analysis (Porter’s Model).Available: http://panmore.com/mcdonalds-five-forces-analysis-porters-model. Last accessed 06/1/15

(Hobbs, T, 2015). Pret A Manger’s marketing boss on succeeding without advertising. Available: https://www.marketingweek.com/2015/04/17/pret-a-mangers-marketing-boss-on-succeeding-without-advertising/. Last accessed 05/01/16.

(Hsu, J, 2013). Effective Sustainability Strategies - Case Study #1: Pret a Manger. Available: http://www.sustainablebrands.com/news_and_views/communications/john-m-hsu/effective-sustainability-strategies-1-pret-manger. Last accessed 02/01/16.

(Kader, B, 2014). Lab-grown beef burger can avoid cholesterol and related heart diseases. Available: http://gulfnews.com/news/uae/environment/lab-grown-beef-burger-can-avoid-cholesterol-and-related-heart-diseases-1.1286457. Last accessed 02/01/16

(Kollewe, J, 2012). From M&S to whisky – China's middle class snap up western goods. Available: http://www.theguardian.com/business/2012/may/20/chinese-middle-class-snap-up-western-goods. Last accessed 05/01/16.

(Mack, S, 2014). Entry Barriers for Restaurants. Available: http://smallbusiness.chron.com/entry-barriers-restaurants-36947.html. Last accessed 06/1/15

(Malhotra, A, 2014). Big Food is in wilful denial about the harm sugar does to our children. Available: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/mar/16/big-food-in-denial-about-harm-of-sugar. Last accessed 05/01/16

(Michelle, 2014). PEST Factors. Available: http://pretamangerupdates.blogspot.co.uk/p/pest-factors.html. Last accessed 03/01/16.

(Moreira, D, 2013). Copy of Pret A Manger case. Available: https://prezi.com/mewi7y9rovkx/copy-of-pret-a-manger-case/. Last accessed 05/01/16

(Morley, M, 2015). The Top-Five Basic Services a Customer Needs at a Restaurant. Available: http://smallbusiness.chron.com/topfive-basic-services-customer-needs-restaurant-24669.html. Last accessed 04/01/16.

(PAM Group Limited, 2015). Financial Statements Year Ended 1 January 2015. Available: https://odcdn2.zenedge.com/pretamanger-uk/documents/2014-PAM-Group-Limited-Annual-Accounts.pdf. Last accessed 05/01/16



(Pearson, E, 2014). Operations. Available: http://www.pearsoned.co.uk/media/onlinepreview/slack_9780273731603/assets/pdf/9780273731603_c01.pdf. Last accessed 05/01/16.

(Popken, B, 2014). McDonald's Shows How Its McNuggets Are Made: No 'Pink Slime'. Available: http://www.nbcnews.com/business/consumer/mcdonalds-shows-how-its-mcnuggets-are-made-no-pink-slime-n23706. Last accessed 03/01/16

(Porter, E, 1985). Competitive Advantage. New York: The Free Press. p11-15

(Pret A Manger, 2016). Animal Welfare. Available: https://www.pret.co.uk/en-gb/animal-welfare. Last accessed 05/01/16.

(Pret A Manger, 2016 A). Pret Coffee Story. Available: https://www.pret.co.uk/en-gb/coffee-story. Last accessed 05/01/16.

(Sillitoe, B, 2015). RBTE 2015: Social media is key marketing channel for Pret A Manger. Available: http://www.essentialretail.com/news/article/55117a15ed32b-rbte-2015-social-media-is-key-marketing-channel-for-pret-a-manger. Last accessed 05/01/16.

(South China Morning Post, 2013). China online food retailing booms after safety scares. Available: http://www.scmp.com/business/companies/article/1296100/cashing-health-scares-china-online-food-sales-boom. Last accessed 05/01/16.

(The Economist, 2008). Tightening belts. Available: http://www.economist.com/node/11021146. Last accessed 04/01/16

(Turchetti, C, 2012). How the Weak Economy Is Changing the Food Industry. Available: https://www.americanexpress.com/us/small-business/openforum/articles/how-the-weak-economy-is-changing-the-food-industry/. Last accessed 05/01/16

(UNEP, 2008). Increased Global Water Stress. Available: http://www.unep.org/dewa/vitalwater/article141.html. Last accessed 02/01/16.

(Williams, J, 2014). Labour government would slash sugar in kids' food, says Andy Burnham. Available: http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/andy-burnham-vows-cap-sugar-6683839. Last accessed 04/01/16

(Wong, V, 2014). A Guide to All the Food That's Fit to 3D Print (So Far). Available: http://www.bloomberg.com/bw/articles/2014-01-28/all-the-food-thats-fit-to-3d-print-from-chocolates-to-pizza. Last accessed 04/01/16

(Work 911, 2013). A Guide To Customer Expectations Regarding Customer Service and Customer Experience In Various Industries and Niches. Available: http://work911.com/articles/niche-expectations.htm. Last accessed 04/01/16

(Zajac, A, 2011). FDA proposes calorie labels for fast food chains, restaurants nationwide. Available: http://articles.latimes.com/2011/apr/02/news/sc-dc-0402-fda-nutrition-labels-20110402. Last accessed 04/01/16



(Zen Entrepreneurship, 2013). 5 Forces. Available: https://zentrepreneurship.files.wordpress.com/2013/04/5-forces.jpg. Last accessed 06/1/15

Appendices:Appendix 1:



(Hsu, J, 2013)Appendix 2:(Ford, R, 2015 A)

Appendix 3:(Childe, H, 2013)Appendix 4:

Pret A Manger has introduced a ‘pick me up’ range that are juices which are bottled in easier to carry and easier to pick up, smaller compact bottles (Childe, H, 2015 A).

Following on from their ‘pick me up’ ranger, Pret have tapped into it further by introducing miniature Protein Pots which can be brought as a part of one of their meals or just a small snack (Childe, H, 2015 A).

Due to coconut water having gained recent attention as a fashionable, ready-to-drink product that has health benefit (with clean eating/drinking becoming a recent buzzword), Pret have now introduced coconut water in its new five-grain porridge that was launched early 2015 (Childe, H, 2015 A).

Following Pret’s introduction of coconut water, they launched a dairy-free coconut yoghurt (Childe, H, 2015 A).

Pret now offers almond shakes in 2 different variants which are banana and cashew and cacao and date (Childe, H, 2015 A).

A number of lunch operators have started to use different grains in an attempt to differentiate from in-home products and Pret has been at the forefront of this by launching a



quinoa rice pot range at the start or 2015 which included sweet potato and cauliflower curry quinoa rice pot (Childe, H, 2015 A).

Since the breakout of Kale, Pret has started stocking kale crisps and have recently added a kale and cauliflower macaroni cheese flavour (Childe, H, 2015 B) and these are also featured in their new hot dishes.

Lastly, to once again differentiate from the competition and grow, Pret introduced beetroot and horseradish soup to their hot food menu (Childe, H, 2015 B).

Appendix 5:

(Porter, E, 1985)Appendix 6:



(Bowman, C, 1997)

Appendix 7:

(Barney, 1991)

Appendix 8:



(Zen Entrepreneurship, 2013)

Appendix 9:Figure 11: Selected lunch foodservice brands, by number of outlets, 2011-15

April-11

Oct-12

Nov-13

Sept-14

Sept-15 % change in number of outlets 2011-15

% change in number of outlets 2014-15

Subway 1,420 1,423 1,650 1,800 2,070 (est)

+48.5 +15.0

Greggs 1,487 1,604 1,690 1,660 1,664 +11.9 +0.2

Pret A Manger

236 244 264 274 288 +22.0 +5.1

EAT 103 117 113 113 123 (est)

+19.4 +8.8

(Childe, H, 2015)


Documents

CW1 - Pret A Manger