View
214
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
What are the barriers preventing
Dimension Data South Africa from
pursuing the BOP market?
A Research Report
presented to
The Graduate School of Business
University of Cape Town
In partial fulfilment
of the requirements for the
Masters of Business Administration Degree
by
Samir Desai
December 2015
Supervised by: Dr. Nceku Nyathi
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 2 of 98
PlagiarismDeclaration
1. I know that plagiarism is wrong. Plagiarism is to use another’s work and pretend that it
is one’s own.
2. I have used a recognised convention for citation and referencing. Each significant
contribution and quotation from the works of other people has been attributed, cited
and referenced.
3. I certify that this submission is all my own work.
4. I have not allowed and will not allow anyone to copy this essay/assignment with the
intention of passing it off as his or her own work.
Samir Desai Date: 9/12/2015
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 3 of 98
Acknowledgements
In the name of Allah, the most Beneficent, the most Merciful.
I express my appreciation and gratitude to the following people:
My supervisor Dr. Nceku Nyathi for his invaluable expertise, guidance and understanding
during this challenging period of my MBA journey.
To all the Participants of this case study for sharing their insights and opinions.
Dimension Data for allowing me to pursue this research.
And most of all, to my dear wife Zakiya for her love, encouragement and motivation.
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 4 of 98
TableofContents
PlagiarismDeclaration...................................................................................................2
Acknowledgements.......................................................................................................3
TableofContents..........................................................................................................4
Abstract.........................................................................................................................6
Introduction..................................................................................................................7
Backgroundandcontext............................................................................................................................................7Researchareaandproblem......................................................................................................................................8Researchpurpose,significance,questionsandscope...................................................................................9Researchassumptions.............................................................................................................................................10Researchethics...........................................................................................................................................................10
LiteratureReview........................................................................................................12
IntroductiontotheBOPProposition.................................................................................................................12TheBOPMarketandSize........................................................................................................................................13CritiqueoftheBOPproposition...........................................................................................................................18DoestheBOPpropositionalleviatepoverty?................................................................................................20ApproachforBOPMarkets....................................................................................................................................22BOPMarketBarriers.................................................................................................................................................32Conclusion.....................................................................................................................................................................43
TheoreticalConceptualFramework.............................................................................46
ResearchMethodology................................................................................................47
ResearchApproachandStrategy........................................................................................................................47ResearchAssumptions.............................................................................................................................................47ResearchDesign,DataCollectionMethodsandResearchInstruments.............................................48Sampling.........................................................................................................................................................................52DataAnalysisMethod...............................................................................................................................................52ResearchCriteria........................................................................................................................................................54
ResearchFindings,AnalysisandDiscussion..................................................................56
ResearchFindings......................................................................................................................................................56
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 5 of 98
ResearchAnalysisandDiscussion......................................................................................................................70ResearchLimitations................................................................................................................................................81
ResearchConclusions..................................................................................................83
FutureResearchDirections..........................................................................................85
Bibliography................................................................................................................86
APPENDIXA:Interviewguideandquestionnaire.........................................................96
APPENDIXB:ConsentForm.........................................................................................97
APPENDIXC:FiveCoreElementsfortheShiftinMentalModels..................................98
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 6 of 98
Abstract
Purpose: to explore and identify the barriers preventing Dimension Data South Africa
from pursuing the bottom of the pyramid (BOP) market. The purpose of which is to
encourage a better understanding of the BOP market and provide Dimension Data an
opportunity to review its position, and reconsider its approach and product offering with
regard to the BOP market in South Africa, and perhaps the world.
Research Design: single case study on Dimension Data based on qualitative data collected
from semi-structured interviews with employees from Dimension Data.
Major findings and conclusions: the findings and analysis revealed that the following
barriers are preventing Dimension Data from pursuing the BOP market: Profitability,
Business model & Target market, Opportunistic, Capability, Product, Infrastructure, and
Strategic Alignment. While the lack infrastructure was found to be an external barrier as
well as internal cognitive barrier, the remaining barriers are internal and are either
cognitive, structural or processual. Even though these seven barriers were identified, it is
noted that the overall barrier is cognitive i.e. the mindset barrier should first be overcome
in order for any of the seven barriers to be overcome. These findings are consistent with
the literature, in particular with Olsen and Boxenbaum's (2009) findings that internal
barriers prevent organisations from entering the BOP and that these barriers may be
cognitive, structural or processual.
Keywords: Bottom of the pyramid, market entry, barriers, cognitive, structural, processual
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 7 of 98
Introduction
Backgroundandcontext
Information Communications and Technology (ICT) “…seems to lend itself to business at
the Base of the Pyramid. It unlocks opportunities in hard to reach markets, reduces
transaction costs and allows reach on a scale that used to be unthinkable.” ICT is a strong
driver of growth, potentially unlocks new opportunities with huge scale, while in some
markets ICT is essential (Ashley, Sivakumaran, & UNDP, 2014, p.54).
Dimension Data is a global leader in the provision and management of ICT solutions and
services boasting 30 years of success. Operating in over 58 countries it employs over
23,000 employees and serves more than 6,000 clients across all industries. Dimension Data
plc is a wholly owned subsidiary of Nippon Telegraph and Telephone Corporation (NTT),
one of the largest global telecommunications service providers. Year on year Dimension
Data receives numerous international and local awards, which is a testament to its technical
skills and commercial success. It made history in 2015 when it delivered real-time
analytics on the riders of the 102nd Tour de France cycling competition. Dimension Data is
headquartered in South Africa (“Dimension Data Website,” n.d.).
Simanis & Hart (2008, p.1) define the Base of the Pyramid (BOP) as “the more than four
billion people globally with per capita incomes below $1,500 (purchasing power parity).”
Prahalad and Hart (2002) claim that the BOP represents the biggest potential market
opportunity in the history of commerce. However, in their seminal article, The Fortune at
the Bottom of the Pyramid, Prahalad and Hart (2002) argue that business not only has a
primary role of seeking profit from the world’s poor, but also that business has a role to
play in alleviating poverty (through the pursuit of profit) from the world’s poor. Their BOP
proposition, and probably the most widely held one is:
• Significant profits exist at the BOP i.e. untapped purchasing power exists because of
the large population; and
• Selling to the poor (BOP) can alleviate poverty.
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 8 of 98
“The central thesis is that poverty eradication is reconcilable with a profit maximising
objective within an enterprise-based market system” (Ansari, Munir, & Gregg, 2012, p.
814).
According to the International Finance Corporation (IFC):
• “The African BOP includes 486 million people in 22 surveyed countries—95% of the
population in those countries.
• South Africa has the region’s strongest and most modern economy, yet 75% of the
population remains in the BOP.
• The South African BOP market has an aggregate income of $44 billion.
• In Africa the measured BOP market is $2.0 billion (258 million people), and the
estimated total BOP market $4.4 billion (486 million people).
[T]he African ICT market is the most rapidly growing one—and it has already generated
very profitable companies and significant wealth” (Hammond, World Resources Institute,
& International Finance Corporation, 2007, p.45).
Researchareaandproblem
There is a growing interest in emerging markets as companies seek sources of growth in
new markets (Lagace, 2010), and most emerging markets are characterised by BOP
populations. Wanasika (2013) claims that “BOP markets will play an increasingly bigger
global role in years to come” (Wanasika, 2013, p.52) and that there is enormous potential
in BOP markets, significant enough to assert that BOP markets cannot be ignored. Since a
majority of South Africa’s population remains at the BOP (Hammond et al., 2007), ICT
companies are best placed to innovate and advance populations out of poverty, thereby
fulfilling the BOP proposition (Ashley et al., 2014). Furthermore the role of ICT in the
BOP market is critical since lack of communication infrastructure is an institutional void
posing a great challenge for doing business in this market – ICT companies should be
treating this institutional void as a business opportunity with the potential to unlock other
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 9 of 98
market opportunities at the BOP on a large scale whilst advancing the poor (Munoobhai,
2015) (Dhanaraj & Khanna, 2011) (Ashley et al., 2014).
Pursuing profits while alleviating poverty is irresistible for most companies involved in
corporate social responsibility (CSR). Increasingly, multi-national corporations (MNCs)
are viewed as the drivers in facilitating economic inclusion and social empowerment of the
poor and disadvantaged for various reasons such as moral obligation to do good,
competitive advantage, global reach and resource capabilities in order to build capacity and
drive economic growth through affordable innovations (Ansari et al., 2012).
Dimension Data fits the profile described by Ansari et al. (2012) – it is a global leader in
ICT, which is evidenced by its continuous receipt of global industry awards. Dimension
Data also has a history of being innovative. Its most recent innovation had a significant
impact on the Tour de France, whereby technology applications used in cycling have been
revolutionalised. Dimension Data continues to display its enthusiasm to innovate even with
its CSR initiatives, yet it has not pursued the BOP market as a role player as envisaged by
the BOP proposition. Furthermore, its home ground in South Africa, has a BOP market
representing a relatively substantial percentage of its population (Hammond et al., 2007).
Therefore, a significant question that arises is – what are the barriers preventing Dimension
Data South Africa from pursuing the BOP market?
Researchpurpose,significance,questionsandscope
This research in the form of a case study aims to explore and identify the barriers
preventing Dimension Data South Africa from pursuing the BOP market. The purpose of
which is to encourage a better understanding of the BOP market and provide Dimension
Data an opportunity to review its position, and reconsider its approach and product offering
with regard to the BOP market in South Africa, and perhaps the world.
Dimension Data is an MNC founded in South Africa. The reason for selecting Dimension
Data as the case study object is because Dimension Data matches the business profile
suited for the BOP proposition (Ansari et al., 2012) (Prahalad & Hart, 2002). In addition, it
may be argued that Dimension Data is losing out on potential profits, the opportunity to
innovate within the BOP market, and to become a leading development actor (Ismail,
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 10 of 98
Kleyn, & Ansell, 2012) in the BOP space while setting a precedent for other ICT
businesses to embrace the BOP proposition.
The scope of this research is limited to Dimension Data South Africa and the potential
barriers to BOP market entry, within the applicable timeframe requirements. Although this
research is a single case study it may be of importance to practitioners and academia as it
increases BOP literature in general and in relation to South Africa, as some authors claim a
lack of information around BOP and emerging markets (Cheung & Belden, 2013).
Furthermore it specifically adds to BOP case study literature regarding potential
organisational barriers to BOP market entry (Olsen & Boxenbaum, 2009) (Perrot 2013)
(Reficco 2012). Lastly, it may be relevant to other businesses by bringing about awareness
and questioning their organisational position in respect of the BOP proposition.
Researchassumptions
This research was based on the assumption that Dimension Data had not pursued the BOP
market as a profit-making entity on any significant level and its current role in the BOP
space is limited to CSR initiatives. This assumption was justified based on the researcher’s
own knowledge as an employee of Dimension Data, and information on the Dimension
Data website (Simon, 2011). The assumption was confirmed during the research, however
it is noted that a subsidiary of Dimension Data is involved in the provision of public
wireless access throughout South Africa and Africa. The subsidiary provides wholesale
wireless access allowing data service providers to operate on one wireless platform, but the
BOP segment is not a target market for the subsidiary (Mzekandaba, 2015).
Researchethics
The researcher obtained ethical clearance by following the process set out by the
University of Cape Town’s Graduate School of Business Research Ethics Committee.
Throughout this research, all information obtained was kept confidential and was only used
for the purpose of the said research. If an individual participant chose to remain
anonymous, then no reference is made to the participant’s actual name or identifiable
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 11 of 98
information. A copy of the consent form signed by participants is attached to this
document as Appendix B.
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 12 of 98
LiteratureReview
IntroductiontotheBOPProposition
Breaking Through: Inclusive Business and the Business Call to Action Today, a report by
the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), defines poverty as:
“What is poverty? Absolute poverty is a condition characterized by severe
deprivation of basic human needs, including food, safe drinking water,
sanitation facilities, health, shelter, education and information. It depends
not only on income but also on access to social services. Absolute poverty is
a condition in which a significant proportion of the world’s people live (at
least 2.4 billion, as of 2010 lived on less than US$2 a day). It is also a
condition that places unique structural constraints on the markets in which
they live and work” (Ashley et al., 2014, p.8).
The UNDP report (2014) also claims that business can provide access to jobs and life-
saving healthcare, build skills and capacities of people, innovate products that make
positive contributions to ultimately strengthen economies (Ashley et al., 2014). The role of
the business sector in alleviating poverty has received much attention recently. Aligned to
Friedman’s (1970) simple view of business which asserts, “the only social responsibility of
business is to increase its profits,” Prahalad and Hart (2002) claim that the BOP represents
the biggest potential market opportunity in the history of commerce. However, in their
seminal article, The Fortune at the Bottom of the Pyramid, Prahalad and Hart (2002) argue
that business not only has a primary role of seeking profit from the world’s poor, but also
that business has a role to play in alleviating poverty (through the pursuit of profit) from
the world’s poor. As per Ansari, Munir, & Gregg (2010, p.254), “Prahalad champions the
‘marketization’ of social welfare in what is purportedly a harmonious hybridization of
strategic management and CSR, where one mutually reinforces the other in a
complementary relationship.” Karnani (2007) summarises the BOP proposition, as follows:
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 13 of 98
• “There is much untapped purchasing power at the bottom of the pyramid. Private
companies can make significant profits by selling to the poor.
• By selling to the poor, private companies can bring prosperity to the poor, and thus can
help eradicate poverty.
• Large multinational companies (MNCs) should play the leading role in this process of
selling to the poor” (Karnani, 2007, p.90).
Munoobhai (2015, p.13) identifies four key drivers for entry into the BOP market:
1. The opportunity for new growth markets.
2. The threat of existing markets maturing.
3. Doing good and uplifting the lifestyle of rural communities.
4. Creating feeder markets and growing with the consumer.
Taken together, the four key drivers are a typical characterisation of the BOP proposition.
The question of whether business ‘should’ be concerned about poverty alleviation may be
debated endlessly (Ismail et al., 2012). Two differing views on the subject are identified as
follows:
1. The only social responsibility of business is to increase its profits (Friedman, 1970).
2. Business should seek to combine social impact with commercial sustainability (Ashley et al., 2014).
The researcher emphasises and prefers the latter view due to its inclusive approach.
TheBOPMarketandSize
Prahalad’s (2002) article defines the BOP as the ‘aspiring poor’, and it segments the world
population into a four-tiered pyramid. Tier one represents the top of the pyramid (TOP),
tiers two and three represents the middle of the pyramid (MOP), and the lowest tier four,
represents the bottom of the pyramid (BOP). The article also associated the following
characteristics or conditions with the BOP:
• Accounts for 40% - 60% of economic activity in developing countries;
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 14 of 98
• Most live in rural villages, urban slums or shantytowns;
• Usually do not hold legal or title deed to their assets;
• Little or no formal education;
• Hard to reach via conventional credit, communications or distribution.
Trompenaars and Coebergh (2014) provide an updated diagram depicting 5 tiers below.
Prahalad (2012) later cited the IFC (2007) report regarding the population size and the
daily living amount in describing the BOP. However, his description provided the
following additional characteristics: multiple cultures, ethnicity, literacy, capabilities,
needs, and can be segmented in many ways.
Prahalad (2002) used the World Bank for his estimation of the number of poor people.
Karnani (2007) criticises the assumption of the size and value of the BOP opportunity and
claims that the BOP market is only US$0.3 trillion, after taking into account purchasing
power parity (PPP) and adjusting the number of poor people. In adjusting the number of
poor people Karnani (2007) cites other researchers who disagree with the World Bank
estimation of the number of poor people.
In 2005 monetary terms, The World Resources Institute (WRI) and the International
Finance Corporation (IFC) defined the BOP population segment as those that earn less
than US$3000 per capita per year and live in relative poverty. At that time, the IFC deemed
Figure 1: The Bottom of the Pyramid (Trompenaars and Coebergh, 2014) Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 15 of 98
the BOP to be a US$5 trillion consumer market and suggested that these markets represent
a significant share of the world population, are generally underserved, dominated by the
informal economy and are generally inefficient. The IFC published “The Next 4 Billion”
with a view to promote the BOP proposition i.e. for business to address the opportunities
and markets made up by the four billion people while simultaneously increasing incomes,
productivity, alleviating poverty and empowering the BOP toward formal economy
(Hammond et al., 2007).
Using US$ daily earnings, Rangan, Chu, and Petkoski (2011) identify three segments of
the BOP i.e. low income, subsistence and extreme poverty. The low income segment
typically earn between US$3 to US$5 dollars per day, while the subsistence segment
typically earn between US$1 to US$3 per day and the extreme poverty segment typically
earn less than US$1 per day (Rangan et al., 2011).
Rangan et al. (2011, p.114) thereafter identify segments which they call “value creation
roles.” The three value creation role segments are: consumers, co-producers, and clients.
Each value creation role is linked to the previously identified living standard segment. By
linking the value creation role to the living standard segment, Rangan et al. (2011)
recommend direct and indirect methods of providing value to these BOP segments
(Rangan et al., 2011). The UNDP (2014, p.29) report also highlights segmentation, and
states that segmentation should be “strongly considered” because the “needs of those
earning US$1 to US$2 per day are different than the needs of those earning US$3 to US$5
a day.” The abovementioned segments, linkages and recommendations by Rangan et al.
(2011) are tabulated below.
Living Standard (segmented by)
Population Value Per Day Characteristics
Low Income 1.4 billion $3 - $5 Little secondary education. Basic skills for jobs.
Subsistence 1.6 billion $1 - $3 Poor education. Low level of skills.
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 16 of 98
Extreme Poverty 1 billion < $1 Lack basic necessities such as food, clean water, shelter, health, and nutrition.
Table 1: Segmentation by Living Standard (Rangan et al., 2011)
Value Creation Role
(segmented by) How to provide value Indirect Method Segment
Consumers
Directly addressing their needs for services: clean water, better sanitation, education, and credit.
Introduce innovations that enable people to devote fewer resources to basic activities and more to other pursuits
Low income
Co-Producers
Earn additional income. Provide work and income. Provide skills to upgrade quality of their output. Reward with greater monetary returns.
Training, transportation, distribution i.e. bridging the last mile to the customer.
Subsistence + Low Income
Clients Need ‘agents’ to garner resources on their behalf. Extreme
Poverty
Table 2: Segmentation by Value Creation Role (Rangan et al., 2011)
Instead of reaching consensus regarding the definition of BOP by population size or
income levels, London and Hart (n.d.) as quoted by Ismail et al. (2012, p.22), “propose a
set of defining characteristics for what they called the ‘BOP Segment’, which are the
following:
• It is heterogeneous across multiple dimensions – varied and variable in many ways.
• It includes the portion of the world’s population with least amount of income.
• It contains local enterprises that are generally not well integrated into the formal
capitalist economy.
• It lives primarily in the informal economy.
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 17 of 98
• It constitutes the majority of humanity” (Ismail et al., 2012).
The South African Audience Research Foundation (SAARF) makes use of the South
African Living Standards Measures (LSM) in conjunction with further methods and
analysis to identify the South African BOP as LSM 1 – 4 (SAARF, 2014). The four-tiered
pyramid is reproduced below. The pyramid below represents the South African BOP
(fourth tier) as 23% of the population.
Similar to Rangan et al. (2011), Ismail et al. (2012) note that for many South African
businesses, the absolute base of the pyramid LSM 1 does not hold out the best immediate
potential for doing business. People in this group may need assistance through corporate
social initiatives or governmental initiatives to help them in reaching a level where they
can function effectively in business or community partnerships.
According to research by Chipp, Corder, & Kapelianis, (2013) the South African BOP
represents 35% of the South African population i.e. just over one third of the population.
Chipp et al. (2013) also suggest that black South Africans are more likely to be classified
as BOP, as a vast majority of the South African BOP are black, which is as a result of the
apartheid legacy. Furthermore, they adopt a more collectivist approach to determine BOP
Figure 2: SA Pyramid (SAARF, 2014)
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 18 of 98
classification in South Africa, and argue that collectivism is a defining feature of life at the
BOP in South Africa. Therefore business should not target the South African BOP on an
individual level, but rather business should target the South African BOP using a
collectivist approach. “Thus the role of the community and household must be elevated in
importance for this market segment” (Chipp et al., 2013, p.11). This is in line with the
view of Prahalad and Hammond (2002) who state in the context of ICT and the provision
of IT access to BOP markets, that shared access is becoming the standard model thereby
making the community the ‘customer’ and not the individual.
CritiqueoftheBOPproposition
A major problem faced by businesses wanting to pursue opportunities at the BOP is lack of
information (Cheung & Belden, 2013). Cheung & Belden (2013) find that a significant
challenge in BOP markets is the cost and difficulty in obtaining market research in respect
of BOP consumers. Many articles on emerging markets also mention the high costs and
difficulty in obtaining consumer research information (Lagace, 2010) (Atsmon, Kertesz, &
Vittal, 2011), and most BOP markets are found within emerging markets. However, a
counter argument is that companies must adopt a learning by doing approach because if
they postpone their entry into the BOP due to lack of market information they would be
overtaken by competition (Munoobhai, 2015) (Dhanaraj & Khanna, 2011).
Karnani (2007) suggests that companies should be cautious when approaching the BOP
and claims that there is no fortune for companies at the BOP, in opposition to Prahalad’s
(2002) argument. Karnani (2007) investigates the various characteristics of the BOP
markets and finds that these characteristics increase the cost of doing business and
therefore make the BOP markets less desirable for companies seeking opportunistic profits.
Some of the characteristics which potentially lead to higher costs are: geographically
dispersed, culturally heterogeneous, increases distribution and marketing costs, difficult to
exploit economies of scale, weak infrastructure, small size of each transaction.
Furthermore companies often fail because they overestimate the purchasing power of poor
people and set prices too high (Karnani, 2007).
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 19 of 98
In developing countries and in inefficient markets normally associated with the BOP, little
or no consumer protection is offered (Ansari et al., 2012) (Karnani, 2007). Therefore,
companies seeking profits may inadvertently be guilty of unethical marketing practices
(Ansari et al., 2012) where poor consumers are persuaded to purchase non-essential
products.
In targeting BOP consumers or markets, companies need to be considerate of
environmental factors. Hahn (2008), as cited by Cheung and Belden (2013), state that BOP
researchers have raised environmental concerns. Hahn (2008) argues that ecologically
sustainable packaging and products are not enough for the BOP, as the waste infrastructure
in each region also needs to be investigated. Karnani (2007) uses the example of shampoo
sold in sachets and points out these types of packaging add to the waste problem in most
villages, slums, or informal settlements with inefficient waste infrastructure.
Gunther (2014) references Milstein (n.d.) (an expert on BOP at Cornell University) who
states that while the BOP proposition is irresistible, profits at the BOP remain elusive,
largely because of the complexity of doing business with the BOP. More importantly, he
also mentions that the notion of the BOP proposition was oversold. Karamchandani,
Kubzansky and Lalwani (2011, p.2) state that “Companies sense that profits in this [BOP]
market are elusive, and the evidence backs them up.” Furthermore, Simanis and Hart
(2008, p.1) claim, “most ‘first generation’ corporate BOP strategies have, in our view,
failed to hit the mark.”
Gunther (2014) also quotes Simanis (2013) where the latter states, "We (include myself
here) got too caught up with our own beautiful theories and abstract concepts (like mutual
value creation, inclusive business) and lost sight of the pressure on managers to meet next
quarter's sales and earnings forecast. We theorised ourselves out of being relevant." Olsen
& Boxenbaum (2009) find that businesses may discover significant organisational
challenges while trying to incorporate sustainability or BOP into its daily operations.
Similar to Simanis (2013) above, Olsen & Boxenbaum (2009) found organisational
barriers that were cognitive, processual and structural. In terms of cognitive barriers,
peoples’ mindset was fixated on being profitable and successful to such an extent that it
was difficult to adapt routine and work with something which was more risky than normal
business – processual barrier. The mindset and inflexibility was reinforced by two widely
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 20 of 98
used criteria for selecting projects: net present value (NPV) and business risk, which were
the structural barriers.
Wanasika (2013) tabulates arguments for and against investing in BOP markets in the
figure below.
DoestheBOPpropositionalleviatepoverty?
London and Hart (2004) were among the first to criticise the BOP proposition for not
‘really serving’ the BOP. Companies were essentially moving down into a new segment
i.e. with existing products at lower prices and/or smaller quantities. They argued that this
Figure 3: Arguments in favour of and against investing in BOP markets (Wanasika, 2013)
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 21 of 98
approach may not be beneficial in alleviating poverty, yet alleviating poverty is a crucial
element of the BOP proposition (Kandachar & Halme, 2008).
For example, although the organisation Hershey’s recently committed to sourcing 100% of
its cocoa from sustainable sources, it is speculated that this initiative may not be enough to
raise living standards and incomes of African farmers (Gunther, 2015).
Karamchandani et al. (2011) investigate reasons for companies being unsuccessful in BOP
markets. One of the reasons companies are unsuccessful is because companies are unable
to gauge demand. Interestingly, they opine that companies gauge demand based on BOP
needs while actual demand is based on BOP wants (Karamchandani et al., 2011). This
theory implies that the BOP pursues products and services based on wants rather than
needs, thereby increasing the probability that the BOP remains in poverty with no
improvement to living standard. However, an alternative perspective based on BOP’s
needs is put forward by Munoobhai (2015) who suggests by citing Agnihotri (2013), that
companies could alleviate poverty in the BOP by providing cost-effective utilitarian goods
and services instead of luxurious goods with aesthetic appeal or emotional value. As stated
earlier, ICT is a much needed service in the BOP market and ICT companies could
therefore take up the challenge to provide cost-effective connectivity goods and services to
the BOP.
Ansari et al. (2010) criticise the BOP proposition for the little emphasis it places on
inclusion and empowerment. It is also difficult to determine whether BOP capabilities are
being strengthened or exploited. Ansari et al. (2010) cite literature (Burkey, 1993;
Narayan, Chambers, Shah, & Petesch, 2000; Banerjee & Duflot, 2007) which makes the
point that little has been done to develop a people centred perspective to understand the
BOP and listen to “voices of the poor” (Ansari et al., 2010, p.262), yet it is argued as a key
focus of BOP strategies. Ansari et al. (2012) argue the point of social capital and
capabilities further, asserting that BOP propositions must enable communities by building
social capital and capabilities i.e. for the BOP proposition to alleviate poverty (Acquaah,
Amoako-Gyampah, & Nyathi, 2014). In discussing the benefits and value of external
social capital Acquaah et al. (2014, p.9) state:
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 22 of 98
“Social capital has been shown to be an important contributor to community
development and sustainable management of natural resources. When firms are
willing and able to contribute to relationships within and beyond the firm, they
contribute to the broader stock of social capital in the communities in which
they operate and virtuous cycles of human capital and economic development.”
Acquaah et al. (2014,) also provide a framework which may assist firms in understanding,
measuring and benefitting from social capital.
Figure 4: Social Capital, Benefits and Measurement (Acquaah, Amoako-Gyampah & Nyathi, 2014)
ApproachforBOPMarkets
In discussing why business models matter, Magretta (2002) asserts that the term ‘business
model’ is one of the most distorted and misused word in business. She suggests that good
business models are in essence stories, and good business models at least answer the
following questions:
• Who is the customer?
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 23 of 98
• What does the customer value?
• How do we make money in this business?
• How can we deliver value to customers at an appropriate cost? (Magretta, 2002).
In the context of the BOP market, Magretta’s (2002) questions would require
understanding the BOP market and learning about BOP customers. Magretta (2002) also
compares the term ‘business model’ to ‘strategy’. She states that the business model
describes the system and how the pieces fit together while strategy explains how an
organisation will do better than its competitors and how an organisation will be different.
Organisations must realise that a business model is not a strategy, and that both are
required for organisations to be successful – one does not replace the other. Magretta
(2002) concludes by remarking that although ‘business model’ and ‘strategy’ are the most
carelessly or inaccurately used terms in business, both terms and their concepts have
enormous value (Magretta, 2002).
Magretta (2002) states that there are two tests to examine why business models fail i.e. the
numbers test and the narrative test. In terms of the numbers test, a business model fails
because the business math is flawed and the numbers do not add up, whereas in terms of
the narrative test one looks for faulty assumptions e.g. faulty assumptions of consumer
behaviour.
According to Simanis (2012), in its simplistic form the BOP concept is to sell high
volumes with low prices and low margins. Simanis (2012) argues that the model is flawed
because often an impractical penetration rate of 30% or more is required for success. The
simple model only works when existing infrastructure is available and can be leveraged,
and if consumers know how to buy and use the products –however both these conditions
are often not achievable (Simanis, 2012). A three-pronged approach to the BOP market is
proposed by Simanis (2012):
• Localise and bundle base products;
• Offer an enabling service;
• Cultivate customer peer groups.
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 24 of 98
Karamchandani et al. (2011) claim that profits in the BOP market are elusive. As BOP
business models have requirements that are different from a company’s core business
model, Karamchandani et al. (2011) assert that barriers to the BOP market can be
overcome by a company by adapting its own business models. Furthermore,
Karamchandani et al. (2011) state that most firms may not find it worthwhile to rethink
business models to enter the BOP market, while firms that are innovative are able to
overcome obstacles and enjoy great rewards at the BOP. Karamchandani et al. (2011, p.4)
suggest that the following questions be considered before a firm enters BOP markets:
• “Can we manage large numbers of low-margin, low-value transactions?
• Can we work with informal markets?
• Can we keep out legacy and overhead costs?
• Do our leaders have a long-range mindset?
• Will our organisational culture stifle bottom of the pyramid innovation?”
Karamchandani et al. (2011) also highlight the following risks when competing in BOP
markets: image, brand, cannibalisation and underestimating the competition.
In comparing anticipated outcomes to empirical evidence of BOP strategies Ansari et al.
(2010, p.270) recommend a typology for BOP ventures. In doing so, they also recommend
government engagement (public-private engagement) to ensure social and economic
benefit to society from BOP initiatives i.e. “government policies could be used to not only
mitigate risks for MNCs, but also provide some protection to the BOP from succumbing to
MNC interests.”
Cheung & Belden (2013) cite authors who claim that CSR needs to surpass traditional
public relations, where CSR is incorporated into the business model. Olsen and
Boxenbaum (2009) performed a case study where a company attempted to incorporate
sustainability practices including a BOP project into its organisational practice. The case
study revealed that internal organisational barriers prevented the incorporation of
sustainability driven business initiatives (including BOP) into its organisational practice.
The organisation was left with no choice but to create a centralised function to investigate
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 25 of 98
and initiate the BOP project – the centralised function was created within the CSR
department (Olsen & Boxenbaum, 2009). Similarly Ismail et al. (2012) state that
champions will find it difficult to implement guidelines relating to the relationship between
a company and a new low-income market community if the company’s internal attitudes,
structures and processes are inflexible. Therefore Ismail et al. (2012, p.96) further state
that “alongside the process of developing new business offerings runs a process of looking
inwards at how the company can strengthen such business initiatives, and what factors
might hold back progress.”
Prahalad (2012) cites earlier writings where it is claimed that the typical 4Ps of marketing
(McCarthy, 1982): product, price, place and promotion do not apply to the BOP. He claims
that using the 4Ps may result in an undifferentiated approach to BOP markets, which may
be unsuccessful when applied to BOP markets. Prahalad (2012) further asserts that BOP
markets are distinctly different in each region and therefore application of a business
model needs to consider the following:
• Awareness: BOP should know what is available and how to use it.
• Access: to remote locations.
• Affordable: quality (not luxury) at a fraction of the price in developed markets.
• Availability: consistent supply (Prahalad, 2012).
After performing action research within an MNC, Perrot (2013) found that local market
conditions dictate the choice of BOP market strategy. Therefore the strategy should be
decided upon after local market analysis and not in advance. Local market conditions may
call for a market creation strategy involving a series of efforts, or a market capture strategy
by developing an offer through existing capabilities. However, in the context of the BOP
segment an ambidextrous approach is likely to be beneficial.
Ansari et al. (2010) cite multiple authors who suggest that the BOP market is ideal for
introducing and refining disruptive innovations. Hart and Christensen (2002) motivate
companies to attempt disruptive innovation at the BOP, while implying that there are many
opportunities for technological advances and that technology is needed to address the
social and environmental challenges associated with the BOP. One reason is that business
models that are crafted in developing countries are applied to more countries than business
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 26 of 98
models from traditional first-world economies (Hart & Christensen, 2002). Prahalad (2012)
demonstrates a ‘sandbox’ approach to innovation and also claims that innovations at the
BOP have implications in developed markets. Markides (2012) compared successful and
unsuccessful innovative disruptions to identify differences, and found that the success of
low-cost innovations depends on whether the disruption is based on an innovative business
model that supports the low cost advantage, as well as how aggressively do the incumbents
respond to the threat posed by the low-cost innovation. Markides (2013) later suggested
that the success of disruptive innovations coming from the BOP depends more on how
aggressively incumbent or first-world firms respond to the disruption. Therefore the
response of incumbent firms is broadly based on three categories: awareness, motivation,
and ability (Markides, 2013).
Prahalad (2012) claims that BOP innovations will be successful if they are cognisant of the
constraints of the target market, and he calls this approach the “Innovation Sandbox.”
Within this approach, an in-depth understanding of the consumer and his or her
requirements is emphasised as crucial, and leads to product or service development criteria
and development boundaries. As an example, the process and resulting sandbox for the
Energy India project is depicted below (Prahalad, 2012).
Figure 5: Will BOP Innovations Disrupt Markets (Markides, 2013)
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 27 of 98
A prescriptive framework is the BOP Protocol by Simanis and Hart (2008) – BOP 1.0 (first
edition) approaches were criticised by many authors for ‘selling’ to the poor and viewing
the BOP as consumers. BOP 2.0 (second edition) now focuses more on community co-
creation and mutual value, long-term growth and capabilities. Differences between BOP
1.0 and 2.0 are tabulated as follows (Simanis & Hart, 2008):
The BOP Protocol provides detailed lists of activities that one may follow in order to
develop a new product, based on the unique characteristics and abilities of the targeted
Figure 6: Business Specification for Innovation Sandbox (Prahalad, 2012)
Figure 7: Innovation Sandbox for Energy in India (Prahalad, 2012)
Figure 8: BOP 1.0 VS BOP 2.0 (Simanis & Hart, 2008)
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 28 of 98
BOP population. There are three phases to the BOP Protocol which are: opening up,
building the ecosystem, enterprise creation, and what may be called a fourth step, scaling
out. The BOP Protocol is depicted below for reference (Simanis & Hart, 2008).
Building on the co-creation concepts of the BOP Protocol, Ismail et al. (2012, p.69) define
co-creation as, “working with market and local partners to transform a product or,
especially, a service in ways that make it more relevant and effective.” In underserved
markets co-creation is valuable because insights lacking by a company wanting entry into a
specific market may be obvious to partners already operating in the market as well as
customers living there; it shows that the company wants to listen and builds loyalty and
goodwill and very importantly it affords low income customers the dignity of not being
treated as objects in the company’s business process, but rather as offering community
building impacts.
A South African example of an organisation which successfully used the value co-creation
concepts of the BOP 2.0 Protocol is Nedbank. Its image was previously associated with
serving more affluent white customers and for ethical, political and commercial reasons
Nedbank wanted to become a more inclusive bank and do business with low income
Figure 9: BOP Protocol 2.0 (Simanis & Hart, 2008) Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 29 of 98
customers. By holding community consultations called ‘imbizos’ where the community
gathered to refine new products and services, Nedbank developed innovative banking
products for low-income customers with more traditional offerings and converted
Nedbank’s business vision into a practical and grounded consumer offering. During the
imbizo process, Nedbank spoke broadly “…about banking and insurance and allowed the
questions and complaints that emerged from the imbizo to select (and innovate within) a
suitable final product range” (Ismail et al., 2012, p.91). Apart from value co-creation
Nedbank met BOP market requirements by doing the following: developed a sophisticated
back-end to support a simple front-end customer interface; implemented a different
planning framework; used a phased market creation strategy with different metrics and a
longer perspective; hired people who represented the communities it was working in and
this in turn assisted in changing mindsets within the bank; created new metrics to measure
piloting progress; and launched customer education programmes to increase financial
literacy (Ismail et al., 2012).
Wanasika (2013) finds that there are unique competitive conditions in BOP markets and
develops a strategic process by identifying strategic themes that are relevant to BOP
markets. “BOP markets have unique competitive environments, competitive dynamics,
geographic and sociocultural contexts, rendering mainstream strategic frameworks
insufficient in facilitating effective strategy” (Wanasika, 2013, p.47). BOP markets are
very different to developed markets, which are characterised by “structure, homogeneous
customers, informed customers, regulation, property rights, effective infrastructure and
technology. These conditions are often absent in BOP markets” (Wanasika, 2013, p.47).
One of the key challenges within BOP markets is undeveloped infrastructure. Although
technology, infrastructure and capital resources are scarce, BOP markets generally have
plenty of natural and human resources (Wanasika, 2013).
Most literature on BOP implies that business has a responsibility to alleviate poverty when
engaging with the BOP. Contrary to this opinion, Wanasika (2013) puts forward a non-
benevolent business case – in line with Friedman's view (1970) that the only responsibility
of business is to make profit. While there is social and moral relevance to BOP markets,
Wanasika (2013) claims that social and moral rationale are inadequate for meaningful
investments. Furthermore, Wanasika (2013) cites Lumpkin and Dess (1996) and Shane and
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 30 of 98
Vankataraman (2000) who claim that an entrepreneurial mindset is crucial for BOP
markets as the firms must find new ways of competing given the unique environmental
conditions in order to identify and exploit opportunities in BOP markets. Unlike
strategising in developed markets, collaboration is a key component for strategising in
BOP markets (Wanasika, 2013).
Based on a review of extant literature on BOP markets, Wanasika (2013) identifies six
strategic themes for the BOP market which are then applied in a strategic process for an
effective BOP strategy for a big pharmaceutical: entrepreneurial mindset, innovation,
developmental pathways, marketing, collaboration. The six processes are depicted below
and briefly described thereafter.
• Entrepreneurial mindset: helps to identify opportunity in BOP markets as well as to
exploit these opportunities. A mindset shift is also required to change perception of
BOP populations – the BOP must be perceived as customers and perceptions of
benevolence should be transformed (Wanasika, 2013).
Figure 10: Strategic Process of Big Pharma in BOP Markets (Wanasika, 2013)
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 31 of 98
• Innovation: supports entrepreneurial mindset. Value chain activities such as
understanding customer needs, modes of delivery, research & development,
manufacturing and sales must be leveraged for innovation (Wanasika, 2013).
• Developmental pathways: distribution networks, building internal capabilities and
adaptive low-cost models are required to ensure a long-term strategic presence
(Wanasika, 2013).
• Marketing: as the BOP is generally limited in education and poverty stricken.
Combining the BOP characteristics with inherent limited infrastructure, marketing
strategies must therefore be creative to be successful. Co-creation and a proactive
market orientation are important strategic elements of marketing to the BOP
(Wanasika, 2013).
• Collaboration: BOP markets are characterised by institutional barriers, underfunded
sectors and undeveloped systems. These potential market failure scenarios require
collaboration and alliances with stakeholders in order for BOP initiatives to be
successful (Wanasika, 2013).
• Logistics: Organisations need to consider scalability and non-traditional methods due
to lack of infrastructure and unique issues found in BOP markets (Wanasika, 2013).
In discussing the implications of his research on BOP theory, Wanasika (2013) suggests
that strategic theories or processes being developed in the BOP should consider a more
inclusive approach. Executive strategic orientation, field of vision and perceptions on BOP
markets should be examined to determine their views and beliefs on the potential of BOP
markets. Organisations core capabilities must be adjusted in order to exploit opportunities
in BOP markets, especially by cutting costs in the value chain. Most importantly,
Wanasika (2013) asserts that organisations should include BOP markets as part of their
competitive offerings when developing strategies and furthermore, organisations should
engage and maintain presence in BOP markets to avoid future competition from smaller
companies, which may grow as a result of exploiting opportunities at the BOP.
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 32 of 98
BOPMarketBarriers
Reficco (2012, p.3) introduces the BOP proposition and suggests that the “greatest hopes
and expectations” were placed on the potential of large corporations to alleviate poverty.
Reficco (2012) claimed that the original BOP movement or proposition was based on the
premise that large corporations were best suited to serving the BOP markets. Furthermore,
he cites Lodge (2002) who claimed that the early BOP movement was initiated as a call for
large corporations to alleviate poverty. While this assumption is still alive according to
Reficco (2012), he provides examples to question whether this assumption is valid, and
then investigates barriers that hinder large corporations from getting involved with the
BOP, partly to explain why have large corporations been unenthusiastic in engaging the
BOP. Wanasika (2013) also cites Reficco (2012), when he comments on the lack of
interest in engaging with the potential market opportunities at the BOP.
Reficco (2012) provides an example from Mexico where a program, which included
government funding and other assistance, was setup to assist large corporations to launch
engage and launch projects with the BOP. Although large corporations showed initial
interest in engaging the BOP market, interest waned and over a 6 month period not a single
project was launched – the program was closed as a result. When the program was re-
launched to include Small to Medium Enterprises (SMEs) and Non-governmental
Organisations (NGOs), large corporations yet again disappointed with only 33% of
proposals being submitted by large organisations. Of the 33%, only half of these proposals
were actually implemented.
Reficco (2012) suggests that this lack of interest from large corporations has received little
attention and draws on the research of Olsen and Boxenbaum (2009) to summarise and
discuss the barriers that large corporations face when considering BOP initiatives.
Reficco's (2012) diagram depicting the result of Olsen and Boxenbaum's (2009) research is
reproduced below.
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 33 of 98
Figure 11: Barriers to implementation (Reficco, 2012)
Reficco (2012) suggests that BOP-oriented initiatives are characterised by substantial
change, which Reficco (2012) claims is a tall order for large organisations due to the
substantial sunk-costs embedded in large organisations resulting in a built-in aversion to
change. The internal barriers, as found by Olsen and Boxenbaum (2009) are: process
related barriers, structure and incentive, cognitive barriers.
Process-Related barriers:
Change must unfold both horizontally and vertically to be effective. There is generally a
disconnect within the entire organisation unless the new initiative fits in with existing
values, processes and routines. In terms of management, often there is a disconnect
between executive or senior management that push the initiative and middle management
who are required to implement the initiative and deliver results according to expectation
(Reficco, 2012).
Irregular creation of knowledge of BOP related market concepts and market intelligence
within large corporations is also a process-related barrier. Large organisations generally
make use of ad-hoc teams to engage in BOP initiatives leaving the large corporation with
pockets of average experience, whereas the large organisation may have benefited from
using unchanged resources in order to grow the large corporations learning, experience and
ability in the BOP.
A feature of large organisations is its employee value proposition and most large
corporations promote and rotate staff frequently. Reficco's (2012) research found that
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 34 of 98
leadership change on BOP projects were fatal to the projects. Although the employee value
proposition offered by large corporations is beneficial to the large organisations and its
employees it may affect a BOP project negatively (Reficco, 2012).
Structure and Incentive barriers:
When selecting business opportunities, large corporations generally face a number of
choices, and the opportunity cost of capital makes it difficult to select BOP opportunities
(Reficco, 2012).
Opportunity costs are similar to financial metrics. Resources are asked to take on high
margin low risk deals in most large corporations. Resources are also expected to spend
more time on high margin low risk projects. Therefore financial incentive structures drive
resource allocation and focus away from BOP projects (Reficco, 2012).
Reficco (2012) compares the responses of a sales manager and an operations manager to
provide an example which exhibits conflict of performance indicators or targets within a
large organisation. The operations manager embraced the BOP project since delivering
successfully on the BOP project was increasing his or her performance ratings. Conversely,
the sales manager disregarded the project as his or her sales targets were negatively
affected by the BOP project.
Cognitive barriers:
On the concept of inclusive business, the perception of a zero sum relation between
financial value created for companies and social value built for communities leads large
corporations away from exploring BOP initiatives for profitability, and almost defaulting
the initiatives to social responsibility (Reficco, 2012). Similar to Wanasika's (2013) non-
benevolent business case view, Reficco (2012, p.8) suggests “…companies should view it
[BOP] shamelessly as an opportunity to make money with the poor.”
Risk aversion is also a cognitive barrier as large corporations are resistant to change and
risk-taking (Reficco, 2012). Munoobhai (2015) states that when managers deal with low
income markets, a major transformation to their mental models is required because the
market is different to the markets they are accustomed to. Top managers develop
subjective views of their operating environment which in turn steer their strategic decisions
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 35 of 98
and actions, and affect a company’s priorities. In other words, it is not the objective
environment that drives a company’s decision making but rather top managements’
subjective cognitive representations that do so. Managers experience difficulties when
having to change their mindset or criticise or re-evaluate their own methods. However
Dhanaraj and Khanna (2011, p.690) state that “If the dynamics of institutions and markets
are not factored in the mental models, executive thinking can remain frozen in the past and
can be a major stumbling block to recognising current reality.” Dhanaraj and Khanna
(2011) suggest five tools for shifting mental models: anchor learning content on
compelling theory; exposure to variations across emerging markets; emphasise diverse
goals of business to provoke thinking that is beyond profit-making; utilise a multi-method
approach; and learn by doing. The tools would enable the following: existing mental
models to be challenged; assumptions to be exposed in a systematic way; and the provision
of an alternative compelling and coherent model (Dhanaraj & Khanna, 2011).
Apart from internal barriers inherently found in large corporations because of their general
makeup, Reficco (2012) also discusses external barriers, which are: misalignment of
opportunities and core competencies, and attractiveness of BOP market segment.
Misalignment of opportunities and core competencies:
Reficco (2012) draws from his research and emphasises the importance of the alignment
with the main value chain of an organisation to the BOP value chain of an organisation. He
further claims that “…the greater the alignment, the higher the chances for success”
(Reficco, 2012, p.9). Conversely, “the greater the leap from the established main line of
business to the BOP initiative, the higher the risks. Indeed, stronger successes seem to have
hinged on incremental innovation, supported by existing models and assets” (Reficco,
2012, p.9). Citing Porter (1996), Reficco (2012) asserts that strategy is a choice and
serving the BOP market in a commercial way is a choice which will only make sense if the
market proves attractive and organisational core competencies are aligned with the
market’s opportunities. This is in contrast with the more popular held view that radical
innovation is required to succeed at the BOP (Reficco, 2012).
Attractiveness of BOP market segment:
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 36 of 98
Reficco (2012) claims that the size of the market opportunity is generally big enough to
induce large corporations to make investments and to take on change in order to take
advantage of market opportunity. He also claims that unfortunately, the perception of
opportunity at the BOP does not seem attractive enough for large corporations as yet
(Reficco, 2012). BOP markets have an inconsistent supply of basic services, they have
limited or no access to financial support which makes it difficult for companies to transact
with them and there is a lack of infrastructure such as communication and transportation.
These characteristics are the cause of its unattractiveness for many companies (Munoobhai
2015).
Reficco (2012) relates market attractiveness to the allocation of resources, and finds that
companies often claim that there is not enough market intelligence nor is there adequate
know-how available within the large corporation to take advantage of BOP opportunities –
yet, the large corporation is prepared to invest in resourcing to obtain market intelligence
and know-how to take advantage of the attractive opportunities in other markets. Reficco
(2012) then suggests that BOP initiatives must be seen as actual opportunities rather than
inclusive business opportunities, in order to ensure that appropriate investment and
monitoring is applied by the large organisation.
In addition to the abovementioned internal and external barriers Reficco (2012) mentions
that many organisations do not track or monitor BOP initiatives as diligently as the core
business is tracked or monitored. Furthermore, the main driver for pursuing the BOP is for
public relations. Therefore, Reficco (2012) states that as long as large corporations
“are mostly attracted to the BOP to enhance their reputation or boost their public relations,
they will be more inclined to ‘show’ that they care about it than to actually take some risks.
Inclusive business ventures may end up being perceived as a defensive tool, a means to
safeguard a vulnerable reputational spot, rather than a true opportunity to seize” (Reficco,
2012, p. 10).
The above again points to a cognitive barrier since it stems from management’s perception
and would require a change in mindset (Reficco, 2012) (Olsen & Boxenbaum, 2009)
(Munoobhai, 2015).
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 37 of 98
Perrot (2013) states that organisational change can take different forms. Change can take
place at a conceptual level such as mindset, culture or strategy; or change can occur at a
more concrete level such as organisational charts or job activities. When a company is
faced with a situation in which its capabilities (meaning its capacity to deploy resources to
perform an activity efficiently) do not allow that company to perform in a market, the
company can choose to acquire new capabilities either internally through research and
development, or externally through joint ventures and company acquisitions. When
entering BOP markets a company can manage capabilities by leveraging existing
capabilities in a way where the mainstream business model is modified to deliver products
or services – this approach would be “related to a market capture strategy of existing BOP
markets” (Perrot, 2013, p.4). The second alternative is to develop new capabilities to fit
market conditions by acquiring knowledge and resources which will enable it to overcome
BOP challenges – this approach would be termed a market creation strategy. Market
creation strategies are associated with the facilitation of learning and change. Similar to the
BOP Protocol by Simanis and Hart (2008), which emphasise co-creation within a BOP
market, market creation strategies are also the preferred strategy for targeting the BOP
market (Perrot, 2013). However, Reficco (2012) suggests that the first approach of altering
the business model is the preferred approach.
In line with the above strategies, two themes have emerged on organisational change
namely, the need for a company to either exploit existing capabilities by adapting them
slightly – the focus being on core capabilities and existing resources; or the need for a
company to explore new capabilities by adapting its business model and entering a new
market – the focus being on innovative ideas, flexibility and discovery of new
competencies (Bedford, 2015). Focusing too heavily on either alternative can be
detrimental to the company since exploitation causes rigidness that hinders a company’s
ability to adapt, whilst exploration shifts a company away from its core capabilities which
can be destructive in the case of repeated failure. Perrot (2013) asserts that companies must
combine exploration and exploitation activities for successful change. Thus, companies
need to be ambidextrous in their approach (Perrot, 2013).
Perrot (2013) cites Olsen and Boxenbaum (2009) who identify conflicting mindsets and
changes to routines as organisational barriers in the implementation of BOP strategy.
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 38 of 98
Perrot (2013) analysed the changes that took place within a global cement company
Lafarge, over a period of three years with regard to its approach to the BOP market. At
first top executives doubted that the BOP market was a realistic business opportunity but at
the end of the three year period their mindset had changed and Lafarge set up a dedicated
organisation to address the BOP market in 12 countries.
Perrot (2013) used Simons' (1995, 2000) four levers of control for implementing strategy
to analyse Lafarge’s change in approach to the BOP and its triggering factors. Simons
(2000) suggests that the four levers create a tension between predictable goal achievement
and innovation and should be used in a way that they complement each other to bring
about profitable growth.
Perrot (2013) describes Simons' (1995, 2000) four levers as:
• Diagnostic control systems:
! exist to ensure that work gets done by measuring the actions which contribute
to the organisational outcome. Examples are KPIs and incentive schemes;
! are used to exploit existing capabilities.
• Interactive control systems:
! processes and decisions that afford management enough flexibility to consider a
new positioning of the company which could result in a new strategy. Examples
are budgets and reward schemes for unusual thinking;
! are used to ensure exploration of new capabilities.
• Boundary systems:
! set down the core area and focus of the company;
! describe a company’s positioning in the industry and its core business;
! are part of the cognitive framework meaning it affects mindset and culture in
the company.
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 39 of 98
• Belief systems:
! sets out core values such as integrity or innovation;
! are part of the cognitive framework meaning it affects mindset and culture in
the company (Perrot, 2013).
Using the above four levers, Perrot (2013) analysed the change in Lafarge’s approach
towards the BOP, in particular what changes in the boundary and belief systems were
needed to engage at the BOP and whether a diagnostic control system impeded the
development of BOP programs (Perrot, 2013).
Prior to 2007, Lafarge had some experience in developing programs targeted at low
income consumers but these projects did not become major opportunities. As part of its
CSR initiatives Lafarge provided housing to families living close to its production sites and
partnered with NGOs to build houses for the underprivileged in certain countries.
Lafarge’s business model focused on the production of materials which it sold to local
distributors from the door step of production sites. It did not enter the distribution chain
and for Lafarge a ‘customer’ meant a contractor or distributor who purchased in bulk.
Therefore a BOP end-user buying small quantities was not a ‘customer’ for Lafarge and
such person remained outside the scope of its marketing studies. Furthermore, Lafarge
found it challenging to contribute to a major as well as stable reduction in construction
cost, since its cement is sold through distributors who incur transportation and storage
costs prior to selling to end-users and cement represents only a 15% of the total cost of
construction (Perrot, 2013).
In 2006, Lafarge strongly emphasised its core activities of cement and concrete production.
As a result, attempts to address the BOP market as a business model that went beyond the
boundary system of the company did not receive support. In 2007, the failure of a Lafarge
housing solution in rural India reinforced the idea that the BOP segment should remain a
CSR imperative and the business should not go downstream and set up as a constructor
promoting low-income housing. Therefore, Lafarge’s belief system with regard to the BOP
segment was that the BOP segment was a constraint that was external to the company’s
business model (Perrot, 2013).
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 40 of 98
Action research was prompted by the above and was undertaken by Perrot (2013). More
importantly, the fact that Lafarge’s main competitor Cemex had launched a successful
BOP program which provided access to micro credit which low-income consumers used to
purchase materials and build their houses was also a major contributor to launching the
action research within Lafarge. At the end of the three year action research undertaken at
head-office and subsidairy level in the targeted countries, the perception of the BOP
segment had changed thereby demonstrating a change in the company’s belief system. The
BOP segment became a business issue rather than a philanthropic one and it became the
new strategic priority within the context of new business development (Perrot, 2013).
Perrot (2013) identified three phases in the change which occurred at Lafarge in relation to
perception of the opportunity at the BOP:
• Phase 1 Raising awareness –
! benchmarks of BOP initiatives carried out by competitors and peer companies
were produced to get the attention of management;
! creating management awareness of the BOP segment in order to assist
managers to understand and overcome confusion about whether the BOP
segment was a public relations matter or business opportunity, by preparation of
an article based on the analysis of external case studies; interviews with
managers at Lafarge who were responsible for its previous BOP projects; and
interrogation of BOP program managers in other companies;
! a memo setting out how a BOP pilot project that was being developed in Aceh
(Indonesia), which involved the extension of micro-credit for housing could be
implemented on a wide scale through a special financing vehicle – the memo
resulted in the launch of the BOP pilot project without any objection to the
progress of the project;
! interviews were conducted with top executives, several regional managers and
functional directors. The results indicated that the BOP segment was associated
with philanthropic activities that Lafarge had previously implemented, and
Larfarge’s failed projects in China and India. It also appeared that the
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 41 of 98
interviewees were not aware of successful approaches to the BOP market
undertaken by competitors. However, building on the experience of competition
and peer companies as a possible approach to the BOP market was welcomed
by most interviewees. Interestingly, when the interviewees were questioned
about the reasons why Lafarge should consider the reinforcement of its social
approach, answers given included the need to strengthen the loyalty and pride
of Lafarge employees, to learn from new business models and the market
opportunity at the BOP;
! a note was prepared to address how Lafarge could reinforce its societal
engagement. The note which recevied positive feedback from the CEO,
articulated how other companies managed to develop programs that embedded
a social and economic mission and how Lafarge could do the same by
addressing the housing needs of the BOP;
! in order to sensitise parties to the topic of housing, visits to slums in Paris were
undertaken and meetings with NGOs and social entrepreneurs were organised
(Perrot, 2013).
• Phase 2 Experimenting on a small scale –
! two BOP pilot projects in Aceh and Medan (Indonesia) contributed to
sensitising the top managers at Lafarge. The pilot project in Aceh was achieved
firstly through the action research since it provided time to convince Lafarge’s
managers about launching the project on a small scale and secondly through the
partnership with NGO Care France. The first results of the two BOP pilot
projects changed the perception of the BOP within Lafarge since it illustrated
the impact on the lives of the poor and profitability of the business models
albeit on a small scale. The fact that Lafarge’s cement was sold without
discount demonstrated that the BOP approach for Lafarge was not linked to
product downgrade or a reduction in price but rather a change to the business
model and the right partnerships (Perrot, 2013).
• Phase 3 Building a business case for wider engagement –
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 42 of 98
! a special team was launched to assess the size of the BOP market opportunity
and initiate projects in various countries with the goal being to identify potential
financial value and make recommendations on how to address the BOP market.
This resulted in the preparation of a more precise report in respect of market
size, business opportunity, expected volumes and internal rates of return;
! the pilot projects proved that there was opportunity for additional sales through
the development of supplementary services. A further memo was prepared
which set out the possibility to scale up the BOP pilot project in Aceh and this
memo received positive feedback from the CEO which led to further
investigation in the context of a strategic plan and subsequent consensus that
the BOP segment was then considered a significant market opportunity;
! prior to this, Lafarge was focused purely on its traditional core business. The
new mindset and realisation of market opportunity resulted in the launching of a
corporate program to develop revenues through unusual approaches. This was
also considered as testing of Lafarge’s boundary systems (Perrot, 2013).
According to Perrot (2013) the above three phases show a shift in the belief system which
constitutes a first step in organisational change towards perceiving the BOP market as a
business opportunity – these three phases display elements of the five tools for shifting
mental models as suggested by Dhanaraj and Khanna (2011).
However a company’s boundary system, diagnostic control sytems and interactive control
sytems strongly influence the type of BOP strategy that can be successfully implemented
by a company (Perrot, 2013):
• Diagnostic and interactive control systems – market capture projects can be integrated
into diagnostic management control. For example the BOP pilot project in Medan
involved the sale of cement and therefore there was limited change to Lafarge’s
business model, and it was also aligned to performance objectives such as short term
financial results. As a result, local managers found it feasible to integrate the project
since it was compliant with their performance measurement system – diagnostic
control sytem. In contrast, the BOP pilot project in Aceh was based on a market
creation strategy and involved entry into the credit market by the provision of
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 43 of 98
microfinance with a long-term pay off. This strategy was difficult to integrate since
there were no short term results that were aligned with the diagnostic control system.
Since market creation projects may be perceived as downgrading performance
indicators in the short term, they are unlikely to be developed by a business where a
predominantly diagnostic management control system exists. They are more likely to
be feasible in a flexible environment where a more interactive control system exists.
On the other hand, market capture projects are more likely to occur in a diagnostic
control system environment for example, strictly defined KPIs, managers driven by
short-term objectives, bonus schemes and business performance indicators geared
towards financial objectives (Perrot, 2013).
• Boundary system – BOP market creation projects are likely to be feasible when
boundary systems are not rigid. BOP market capture projects are more likely to occur
when boundary systems are strictly defined. Perrot (2013) explains that at the
beginning of the research period at Lafarge, the strategic focus was cement production
and cost reduction and this focus delineated the ‘boundary’ of core business. Initiated
at head-office level, the boundary system was tested during the research period. At the
end of the research period there was a change in the boundary system since there was a
strong focus on innovation in operations and the creation of new business
opportunities. Local managers were allowed to innovate with end-users and low
income consumers and not only traditional customers such as distributors and
developers (Perrot, 2013).
This is aligned to Bedford's (2015) view that diagnostic and boundary systems support
projects that are more exploitative in nature whereas interactive control systems support
projects that are more exploratory, and a balanced and combined use of diagnostic and
interactive control systems is more suited for projects requiring an ambidextrous approach.
Conclusion
The BOP proposition is irresistible for most companies with a sincere CSR focus (Gunther,
2015). While the question of whether business should be concerned about poverty
alleviation may be debated endlessly (Ismail et al., 2012) the researcher emphasises and
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 44 of 98
prefers inclusive approaches to business i.e. the combining social impact with commercial
sustainability and profit maximisation (Ashley et al., 2014). Many authors argue that the
BOP proposition is oversold (Karnani, 2007), (Karamchandani et al., 2011) and cite a
range of issues from market information (Cheung & Belden, 2013); no real fortune at the
BOP (Karnani, 2007); environmental issues (Cheung & Belden, 2013); not actually
assisting to alleviate poverty but rather just selling to the poor (Kandachar & Halme,
2008); and unethical marketing by businesses (Ansari et al., 2012). While the BOP
proposition may be questioned, there are success stories and cases, which lend hope to the
BOP cause. Many authors provide approaches for doing business at the BOP (Prahalad,
2012), (Simanis & Hart, 2008), (Simanis, 2012), (Ismail et al., 2012).
There are differing views on precise metrics to be used when calculating BOP income,
population, and market opportunities (SAARF, 2014), (Rangan et al., 2011), (Karnani,
2007), (Chipp et al., 2013). Various authors claim that an understanding of the general
characteristics and unique elements of a targeted BOP population is needed for an
organisation to develop a unique approach to the BOP (Simanis & Hart, 2008), (Prahalad,
2012), (Rangan et al., 2011), (Chipp et al., 2013). Therefore, it is argued that segmentation
is key for pursuing opportunities at the BOP (Ashley et al., 2014). However, most authors
claim that ICT presents significant opportunity for innovation and enablement of unique
business models. ICT companies are best placed to innovate and advance populations out
of poverty, thereby fulfilling the BOP proposition (Ashley et al., 2014) (Prahalad &
Hammond, 2002).
Barriers that prevent organisations from entering BOP markets could be internal and/or
external. In terms of external barriers, the main barriers are framed within market
characteristics (Karamchandani et al., 2011), lack of market information (Cheung &
Belden, 2013), institutional barriers (Wanasika, 2013) and lack of infrastructure (Prahalad
& Hammond, 2002). In terms of internal barriers to entry of BOP markets, Olsen and
Boxenbaum (2009) find cognitive, processual or structural barriers. Building on the
barriers identified by Olsen and Boxenbaum (2009), Reficco (2012) provides further
examples of these barriers through his research as well as examples of external barriers.
Similarly, Perrot (2013) builds on the original findings of Olsen and Boxenbaum (2009),
however Perrot (2013) introduces a management control systems framework i.e. the four
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 45 of 98
levers of control by Simons (2000). Many barriers are cited by many other authors such as:
Karamchandani et al. (2011), Prahalad and Hammond (2002), Wanasika (2013), Ismail et
al. (2012), Munoobhai (2015), Dhanaraj and Khanna (2011), Simanis (2012) and Ansari et
al. (2010). While these authors cite barriers, almost all internal barriers may be contained
within the cognitive, processual, structural barriers (Olsen & Boxenbaum, 2009) or within
the four levers of management control systems (Perrot, 2013) (Simons, 2000).
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 46 of 98
TheoreticalConceptualFramework
Based on the researcher’s literature review as contained in the preceding section the
researcher created a theoretical conceptual framework in relation to the research problem
which was used to guide the development of the analysis of this case study (Kohlbacher,
2006) (Tellis, 1997) (Darke, Shanks, & Broadbent, 1998):
Figure 12: Theoretical conceptual framework based on literature review.
MarketIntelligenceCognitive Structural Processual MarketCharacteristics
InteractiveSystems InfrastructureDiagnosticSystems Institutional
BoundarySystemsBeliefSystems
InternalBarriers
External
Barriers
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 47 of 98
ResearchMethodology
ResearchApproachandStrategy
This research study aims to explore barriers preventing Dimension Data South Africa from
pursuing the BOP market. The enquiry is exploratory in nature since the research seeks to
discover the barriers within the context of Dimension Data South Africa for the first time.
A qualitative research strategy was employed since qualitative methods are more suited to
real-world research projects (Hayes, 2000). In putting forth the main points of what
qualitative research is, Kohlbacher (2006) cites a list of defining characteristics for
qualitative research given by Cassell and Symon (1994, p.7):
“a focus on interpretation rather than quantification; an emphasis on
subjectivity rather than objectivity; flexibility in the process of conducting
research; an orientation towards process rather than outcome; a concern with
context – regarding behaviour and situation as inextricably linked in
forming experience; and finally, an explicit recognition of the impact of the
research process on the research situation.”
A qualitative research strategy is generally associated with an inductive approach, which is
characterised by moving from particular facts towards generalisations and theories i.e.
bottom-up approach (Trochim, 2006). Pratt (2009) argues that a qualitative approach
brings about an opportunity for creative responses and ideas, thereby giving the researcher
a rich in-depth view of the intricacies pertaining to the research question asked.
ResearchAssumptions
A general assumption of qualitative research is that multiple realities exist in any study,
therefore qualitative research is open to interpretation based on one’s view of reality.
Accordingly, the researcher guarded against “preconceived notions” during the theory
building process (Egan, 2002, p.278). The researcher also paid attention to the researcher’s
own theoretical sensitivity, as per Glacer and Strauss (1967) cited by Egan (2002).
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 48 of 98
Another assumption of qualitative research is that accuracy of the information that is
obtained may need verification. The researcher assumed that participants answered
accurately and honestly giving rise to sound findings. This assumption is justified based on
assurance of confidentiality and anonymity given to the participants by the researcher. The
researcher also informed the participants that their participation was voluntary and that
they were able to withdraw at any time (Simon, 2011). However, in order to mitigate the
risk of inaccuracy, the researcher triangulated the data by comparing the data across
participants’ responses (Munoobhai, 2015). Triangulation is where one piece of
information is verified using different sources in order to confirm the validity thereof
(“Qualitative research,” n.d.).
The researcher was cognisant of the above assumptions during the research design phase,
data collection, instrument preparation and research analysis phase.
ResearchDesign,DataCollectionMethodsandResearchInstruments
Research design specifies methods and procedures for fulfilling research objectives and
answering research questions i.e. collecting, analysing and validating information needed
for research. The key issues of research design are: generalisability, reliability and validity
(Adams, 2007).
This exploratory, qualitative research made use of single case study design (Darke et al.,
1998). Yin (1984, p.23) as cited by Soy (1997), defines the case study research as:
“an empirical inquiry that investigates a contemporary phenomenon within its
real-life context; when the boundaries between phenomenon and context are
not clearly evident; and in which multiple sources of evidence are used.”
“For the novice research a case study is an excellent opportunity to gain
tremendous insight into a case. It enables the researcher to gather data from a
variety of sources and to converge the data to illuminate the case” (Baxter &
Jack, 2008, p.556).
Furthermore, Darke et al. (1998) state that single case studies allow researchers to
investigate phenomena in an in-depth way in its natural context to bring about rich
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 49 of 98
description and understanding and is appropriate where it represents a critical case, unique
or revelatory case. Case studies are widely used in organisational studies, are well suited to
creating managerially relevant knowledge and have provided ground-breaking insights to
the strategic management field (Kohlbacher, 2006) (Gibbert, Ruigrok, & Wicki, 2008).
Accordingly, the case study method is particularly useful in business research and analysis
of organisations and was appropriately suited to explore and provide a better understanding
of what barriers prevent Dimension Data from pursuing the BOP market (Adams,2007).
Kohlbacher (2006) states that according to Yin (2003, p. 21-28) there are 5 components of
research design which are essential for a case study:
1. A study’s questions;
2. Its propositions, if any;
3. Its unit of analysis;
4. The logic linking the data to propositions;
5. Criteria for interpreting the findings.
Darke et al. (1998) state that the design and scoping of a case study research must be
preceded by a comprehensive literature analysis in order to understand the existing
literature within the research area and position the research question – the researcher
therefore embarked on a literature review of the research area prior to formulating the
research question for the study.
Darke et al. (1998) further advise that in order to gain the support of the participant
organisation the research question must be interesting and important to the organisation.
The organisation should attain some benefit out of the research, such as an overview of the
organisation’s position in relation to the research question or a rich description and
understanding of the nature of the phenomena within the organisation – the researcher
believes that the research question and this case study in general provides benefit to
Dimension Data, since it provides the entity with opportunity to review its position, and
reconsider its approach and product offering with regard to the BOP market in South
Africa, and perhaps the world .
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 50 of 98
Citing Yin (1994), the unit of analysis is explained by Darke et al. (1998) to be a unit that
identifies what constitutes a ‘case’. A complete collection of data for one study of the unit
of analysis would constitute a single case. Accordingly, the unit of analysis may be an
individual, a group, an organisation or an event or phenomena (Darke et al., 1998, p.280)
and in this case study the unit of analysis is Dimension Data South Africa.
Not all studies require a proposition, for example an exploratory study could have a stated
purpose instead of a proposition (Tellis, 1997) – this study being an exploratory case study
is not premised on any theoretical propositions, however based on the researcher’s
literature review the researcher developed a theoretical conceptual framework in relation to
the research problem which was used to guide the development of the analysis of this case
study (Tellis, 1997) (Darke et al., 1998) (Kohlbacher, 2006).
Founded on literature of well-known case study researchers Stake, Simons and Yin, Soy
(1997) proposes a 6 step technique that may be used to practically organise case study
research:
1. Research questions must be determined and defined;
2. Selection of a case and determination of data gathering and analysis to be used by the
researcher;
3. Preparation for data collection;
4. Collection of data in the field;
5. Data evaluation and analysis;
6. Report preparation (Soy, 1997).
The researcher was guided by the above technique in conducting the case study.
Interviews allow the researcher best access to participants’ views and interpretations of
actions and events. For case study research, interviews are considered essential and one of
the most important sources of data (Darke et al., 1998) (Tellis, 1997). Useful data sources
such as internal magazines and organisational bulletins which are circulated within the
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 51 of 98
organisation can be used to supplement data from other sources since they can provide a
reflection of the organisation’s culture and current issues (Darke et al., 1998). The
researcher used semi-structured interviews as the primary source of data to gather new
first-hand information for the case study, based on the assumption that Dimension Data
does not possess adequate secondary sources to investigate and answer the research
problem (Adams, 2007). The Dimension Data website was used as a secondary source of
data to gain information in relation to its market position, accolades, CSR initiatives etc.
Leacock, Warrican, & Rose (2009) advise that an interview schedule should be prepared if
data is collected using semi-structured interviews. The interview schedule contains
questions which are focused on the research question and research problem in general and
should be reliable and valid. Open-ended questions are used when the researcher wishes to
avoid suggesting a response from the interviewee and wants the interviewee to respond in
his own words, thus allowing the interviewee freedom of expression which further allows
for the collection of rich and in depth data (Leacock et al., 2009). Accordingly, as a
research instrument, an interview schedule was prepared containing open-ended questions
which were used to guide the researcher during the interview process (refer to Appendix
A). The researcher relied on the literature review to assist in targeting and formulating the
questions so that insightful questions focused on the research problem were posed.
It is important that the researcher understands the purpose of the study, is able to grasp
issues and is open to contrary findings during the data collection phase Soy (1997). The
researcher acknowledged the above and guarded against not feeling threatened by
unexpected change Soy (1997).
As soon as the data is collected it must be documented and organised. A case study data
base is used to store the case study data and must be organised in way that allows ready
access to the data during and after the research period (Darke et al., 1998). The researcher
took notes during the interviews and also voice recorded the interviews with the
participants’ permission for the sake of accuracy and completeness (Munoobhai, 2015).
Leacock et al. (2009) state that where the researcher electronically recorded the interviews
then the data should be compiled by transcribing the responses verbatim or in a way that
records the participants’ responses in a concise way which still captures the essence of the
answer Leacock et al. (2009). Therefore even though notes were taken during the
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 52 of 98
interview, the voice recorded data was transcribed. All data for this case study is stored on
an electronic database.
Sampling
The researcher employed purposive and snowball (network or chain) sampling techniques.
Leacock et al. (2009, p.213) define purposive sampling as “a non-probability sampling
technique that involves selecting participants for a study because they possess
characteristics that make them rich sources of information”. Leacock et al. (2009, p.214)
further define snowball sampling as “a non-probability sampling technique in which the
researcher locates participants through by making contact through other participants.
Snowball sampling allows reduced sample size and most importantly, targets members
who are involved in a similar network or characteristic or interest (Adams, 2007). The
sampling criteria were based on the sample’s responsibility for or ability to influence:
overall business strategy, organisational change; new business models, products, services
or CSR initiatives; and/or entry into new markets such as the BOP, for Dimension Data
South Africa. The participants were from amongst key executives, business development
managers, business unit managers, product managers, financial managers and solution
consultants operating at Dimension Data group, regional and subsidiary level.
Although the researcher would have preferred to interview every person in Dimension
Data who matched the sampling criteria, it was not possible due to time constraints. The
researcher was able to interview 13 samples and the researcher deemed this number as
adequate to draw conclusions (Munoobhai, 2015).
DataAnalysisMethod
There are a number of approaches to analyse data from interviews, observations and
written documentation. Qualitative data analysis aims to detect patterns; deviants and
oddities; detect conformance (compare to theory); classify; construct models; and to test or
validate (Adams, 2007).
According to Leacock et al. (2009), when analysing narrative data such as responses to
semi-structured interview questions the researcher may analyse the responses question by
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 53 of 98
question, looking for patterns, trends, commonalities or differences and record the findings
using codes or comments. Alternatively, instead of focusing on responses to specific
questions, the researcher may analyse the narrative data by broad themes or issues –
Leacock et al. (2009, p.138) state that this particular approach “is suitable when the data
were collected by interview, where the questions may not have been asked in exactly the
same way, but the same issues were explored.” Using this approach the researcher reads
the interview data several times looking for places where the respondent touched on or
addressed themes or issues. These themes or issues can be identified beforehand, or the
themes or issues can emerge from the narrative data itself (Leacock et al., 2009).
The purpose of coding is to methodically move to a higher conceptual level. The initial
codes can be referred to as open coding or level 1 where the codes are more literal and
closely represent the original data. To move to a higher conceptual level the researcher
then recognises categories that the level 1 concepts may fall into and accordingly the
coding proceeds to level 2 or category codes. The next level of coding involves taking the
coding to an even higher level where themes or theoretical concepts emerge – the
researcher does so by keeping the original study topic in mind and noting patterns in the
categories (Yin, 2011).
The researcher followed the approach suggested by Leacock et al. (2009) where the
researcher analyses the narrative data by broad themes or issues by looking for places
where the respondent touched on or addressed those themes or issues. This approach was
used since the open-ended interview questions were not asked in exactly the same way but
the same issue were explored – the researcher was probing for potential barriers preventing
BOP market entry. In adopting the above approach, each participant’s interview data was
read by the researcher several times to familiarise himself with the data. Thereafter, using
Yin's (2011) process in the preceding paragraph, the researcher embarked on the analysis
of the data by coding the data and developing categories of barriers using notes, keywords,
colour coding and Microsoft Excel software. The researcher was guided by the theoretical
conceptual framework (Figure 12) in the development of the analysis. The categories were
evaluated based on the number of occurrences per category (Leacock et al., 2009) (Soy,
1997) (Adams, 2007) (Darke et al., 1998) (Munoobhai, 2015) (Yin, 2011) (Kohlbacher,
2006) (Tellis, 1997).
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 54 of 98
The findings which in this case were the barriers discovered from the data analysis process
were discussed in light of the theoretical conceptual framework in relation to the research
problem and compared to the literature which emerged from the researcher’s literature
review, in order to establish the level of consistency between the findings and the literature
(Kohlbacher, 2006). Generalisation of the findings is thus made to theory – analytical
generalisation, and not populations – statistical generalisation (Tellis, 1997).
ResearchCriteria
Reliability is essentially the consistency of measures and is checked in two ways, first by
repeatability (test-retest method), and second by examining internal consistency (split-half
method) (Adams, 2007). Similarly Soy (1997) refers to reliability as the stability, accuracy
and precision of measurement. The researcher ensured that research collection and analysis
procedures were documented and the interview schedule, interview response notes, voice
recordings and transcriptions have been electronically stored on a database to ensure
transparency and the reliability of results if repeated (Gibbert et al., 2008) (Munoobhai,
2015) (Soy, 1997).
According to Adams (2007) validity is the accuracy of measurement and is concerned with
the strength of the researchers conclusions, inferences and propositions. Three types of
validity are: construct validity, internal validity, and external validity.
Internal validity refers to the causal relationship between variables and results and is more
important in causal studies rather than exploratory studies. It requires logical validity of the
conclusions. For this research internal validity was enhanced by triangulation of data
across participants’ responses and then against existing literature (Gibbert et al., 2008)
(Soy 1997) (Tellis, 1997) (Munoobhai, 2015).
Whereas internal validity refers to the data analysis phase, construct validity is considered
during the data collection phase. “Construct validity refers to the extent to which a study
investigates what it claims to investigate, i.e. to the extent to which a procedure leads to an
accurate observation of reality” (Gibbert et al., 2008, p.3). In order to enhance construct
validity the researcher has established a clear chain of evidence which allows the reader to
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 55 of 98
reconstruct the journey from research questions to research conclusions (Gibbert et al.,
2008).
External validity refers to the generalisability of the research results to other settings and
situations (Adams, 2007) (Gibbert et al.,2008). According to Eisenhardt (1989) literature
that discusses similar findings is important and tying emergent theory to existing literature
enhances validity and generalizability. It is argued that although case studies do not allow
for statistical generalisation they are not devoid of generalisation altogether, since case
studies may allow for analytical generalisation. Eisenhardt (1989) as cited by Gibbert et al.
(2008), argues that cross case analysis involving four to ten case studies may provide a
good basis for the analytical generalisation. With regard to generalisability of interpretive
case study research, Darke et al. (1998) drawing on the work of Walsham (1995) say that
explanations of phenomena that are derived from the research may be valuable in other
settings or organisation as interpretations of phenomena, even though not completely
predictive for future situations. Since this research work was based on a single case study
cross case analysis was not possible however the researcher has provided full details on the
case study context as suggested by Gibbert et al. (2008) so that other organisations may
learn from the findings and perhaps use it to reconsider their own position in relation
thereto.
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 56 of 98
ResearchFindings,AnalysisandDiscussion
ResearchFindings
The research question for this case study is: what are the barriers preventing Dimension
Data from pursuing the BOP market?
The researcher conducted thirteen semi-structured interviews with employees from
Dimension Data based on purposive and snowball sampling to gain insight and answer the
research question.
The sampling criteria were based on the sample’s responsibility for or ability to influence:
overall business strategy, organisational change; new business models, products, services
or CSR initiatives; and/or entry into new markets such as the BOP, for Dimension Data
South Africa. The participants were from amongst key executives, business development
managers, business unit managers, product managers, financial managers and solution
consultants operating at Dimension Data group, regional and subsidiary level. An
interview schedule was used as guidance by the researcher during the interview process
(refer to Appendix A).
Based on the researcher’s literature review the researcher created a theoretical conceptual
framework in relation to the research problem which was used to guide the development of
the analysis of this case study (Darke et al., 1998) (Kohlbacher, 2006) (Tellis, 1997). The
collected data was analysed by researcher using the analysis method as set out in the
Research Methodology section of this document.
The findings from the research data are set out below together with participants’ data
related to the finding:
Profitability
All 13 participants mentioned that profitability was a key aspect for any business case or
opportunity in Dimension Data - whether part of market entry criteria or measuring success
in markets. Some participants mentioned that entering the BOP would be purely for profit
purposes. Several participants mentioned the importance of high gross domestic product
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 57 of 98
(GDP) when participating in a large economic market. Many different forms of financial
terms linked to profitability were mentioned, such as: turnover, margins, operating profit,
net profit and cash flow. An element that was raised in relation to profitability was
timeframe – some participants stated that return on investment (ROI) or profitability must
be ‘quickly’ recouped.
Participant 1 – You had to get there quickly and it had to be quick.
Participant 2 – Our financial metrics do not allow this.
Especially now given the tough financial situation, how much are we prepared to shave off
margin.
Participant 3 – Operating profit and growth in operating profit.
Today, having quick turnaround of working capital cycle is what we will consider more
successful than just operating profit on its own.
Participant 4 – Relatively quickly, we tend to have a short-term mind-set with aggressive
payback ROI or NPV requirements i.e. quick results.
Participant 5 – Money. Sales driven organisation, if it is not profitable we are not going to
go there.
At the end of the day you look at the bottom line and see how profitable you are at the
moment, and then long term for profits on the horizon. Realistically, if the profits are too
far away....
Looking at the market it is long term, rewards are slow, uptake is slow....we are not good
at slow.
Participant 6 – Only financial metrics but unfortunately the truth.
ROI, Return on Capital. Another financial metric is also cash flow, we want to have a
positive cash flow...
Access to capital and ROI – we don’t have shareholders with massive appetite for this.
Participant 7 – Profit. Profit seems to be the overriding factor at the moment.
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 58 of 98
Participant 8 – The obvious one would be to atleast be financially viable, in other words
we can make a margin on whatever we are selling.
Participant 9 – Create returns for shareholders.
Participant 10 – So we want to see a sustainable business case where there is value we
can add and there is financial value thereafter.
Participant 11 – Market share, Market positioning, Total Revenue.
In Dimension Data, we are geared to a high value, high margin value proposition in
everything that we do.
Participant 12 – In D[imension] D[ata] financial lense is 90% of determining criteria.
…Invariably ability to generate turnover at a respectable margin-taking cognisance of
overheads to deliver operating profit.
… Cash flow to determine how are we funding the business.
…Balance Sheet.
Therefore there are three financial lenses that we apply.
Participant 13 – In a healthy business, are you making enough money, enough profit, and
is it strategic to be there.
In my mind there are specific levers i.e. always strategic, generate revenue or profit or
operating margin.
This is in the back of my mind on every deal and every opportunity.
BusinessModel
9 out of 13 participants spoke about or referred to business model in their responses. There
is a perception that Dimension Data’s business model is currently not suited to exploit
opportunities at the BOP - reasons cited by the participants varied: payment or collection
mechanisms, infrastructure to deal with mass number of clients, marketing, contact centres,
sales and resources.
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 59 of 98
Participant 1 – You could do it. Possibly. How do you collect the money, that is the hard
thing.
We don’t think of end consumers, not in our model and we are not innovative enough.
Participant 2 – Our limitation is that we don’t have the channel and infrastructure to deal
with mass number of clients.
To get down to a consumer level, we would have to have a different business model, more
marketing, more contact centre, less feet on the street.
Participant 3 – Definitely a role to play, I don’t think we are geared to offer consumer
services at scale, but we could offer to other companies.
We are one step away from the BOP; we service companies that may not be focused on the
BOP.
Participant 8 – The actual marketing and selling it will be a challenge because we are not
used to doing that.
We are used to having a reactive selling model, we react very much in terms of tenders,
RFPs.
Participant 9 – Unfortunately with our current business model, even if we want to serve
clients who serve these markets… the difficulty is that these markets don’t have telecoms
structures, education levels to run those are not available.
DD is not the kind of company that has the resources to do this – Dimension Data is not
designed for this.
Other companies can because they have the right business models and they are able to
invest into projects.
Participant 10 – Making money and finding different models that could work for the BOP.
Very interesting concept, I suppose one has to decide on whether they have the appetite for
that, and whether they would want to pursue this business model as opposed to business
models that exist today.
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 60 of 98
We will not break the key principles of our business model. But we can relax some of the
expectations in given markets based on risk-reward assessments.
Participant 11 – We have enabling technology, but no consumer abilities whatsoever.
We customise for many projects and solutions, we are slowly changing this to a vanilla
offering.
80% of our business is bespoke solutions, so we cannot sell at scale and at low margin.
Participant 12 – In the BOP you always compete on price, you don’t compete on value.
Dimension Data tries not to compete on price. In the BOP, price is everything.
I think that when one looks at this holistically got to have a view of what type of business is
suited to every market. Not every business is suited to every market.
So you calibrate business to your target we sell sophisticated ICT to educated wealthy
entities.
Participant 13 – [Dimension Data’s current] Engagement model, fairly intensive from
both an overhead and people perspective. Entire engagement model will need to change.
TargetMarket
8 participants out of 13 participants mentioned that end consumers were not Dimension
Data’s target market. Rather, large enterprises and multinational organisations were
Dimension Data’s target market since Dimension Data focuses on business-to-business
transactions.
Participant 1 – We don’t think of end consumers, not in our model and we are not
innovative enough.
Our challenge would be interaction with consumers, we don’t know how to interact with consumers. So we need a distribution or partnership to interact with consumer.
Are we in a consumer market - no.
For consumers, I struggle to find examples of what we could do successfully.
Participant 2 – We are not in the consumer space, if you are an MTN, your proposition is
a no brainer.
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 61 of 98
If you look at Unilever, their core business is consumed by individuals, consumers.
Our challenge is that we are not big, and we don’t service the consumer market.
Participant 3 – BP or Unilever have to be focused from a product perspective to satisfy
the consumers need or how they could access that environment.
To get down to a consumer level, we would have to have a different business model, more
marketing, more contact centre, less feet on the street.
Our culture is certainly around supporting enterprise clients. The culture of supporting
consumers, I don’t know if we have that ability.
So if we can do both, and there is something to take to market, I'm pretty sure the
shareholders will be prepared to listen. But then, I suppose everyone would say that we are
not in the consumer business.
Our business is built around enterprise clients, in private or public sector. We need those
economies of scale.
We have too much cost in our business to support smaller clients.
Participant 4 – To put some context to the start of this, both Dimension Data and Internet
Solutions are not consumer companies, and all group companies, so the challenge there, I
guess, is finding how we could support the consumer companies that concentrate on this
space.
We not a consumer company.
Participant 6 – Experience running consumer segments.
We have a strategy for marginal for consumers but it is very, very minor. Certainly not
customisation of strategy for this BOP space. This is a part of the consumer market.
Participant 8 – The actual marketing and selling it will be a challenge because we are not
used to doing that.
Participant 9 – The concept mostly easily applies to consumer goods companies that have
saturated other markets. In Dimension Data’s case, we don’t believe that our market focus
is saturated at the moment.
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 62 of 98
We target exclusively business to business, large domestic or bigger clients. So that is our
target market.
Participant 13 – Engagement model, fairly intensive from both an overhead and people
perspective. Traditional Dimension Data service/account managed view of the world is not
appropriate when dealing with revenues per user.
Dimension Data engagement would have to logically be quite different.
Opportunistic
7 out of 13 participants discussed the opportunistic nature of Dimension Data. While
Dimension Data innovates and exploits opportunities, participants view these opportunities
as readily available. Considering that most innovation was accomplished through existing
or easily found opportunities, one participant even questioned whether Dimension Data is
innovative enough.
Participant 1 – Because we were opportunistic we did stuff.
For one project, there was a brand new thing that I developed, but it did not go any
further. However, then another client called me to help with a similar project - further
reason to prove how opportunistic we are.
....because we are opportunistic, we tend to be a ‘me too’....
Inadvertently, not consciously. We are very risk averse, looking at the contracts we sign,
we take on very little risk. But we will go into Nigeria, it is a risky market, but we had/saw
an opportunity.
Participant 4 – Typically almost opportunistic, into services to support clients
expanding....where there is enough market opportunity then we grow from this base.
Participant 5 – We always went into a company on the back of a deal. Someone will come
to us and tell us we have a deal, perhaps we can handle it. We take a look, a few deals,
then assume there is a business case, and then open a mini office, and then after business
starts to pickup we start an office. We don’t really go looking, we get pulled in.
Some markets have been quite successful, we win the deal and it just grows, we need
people and can’t keep flying them.
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 63 of 98
Dimension Data has always been a big bets company, always go after the low hanging
fruits first.
We look for opportunities where it is not difficult to get into and where rewards come fast.
Participant 6 – We are very sales driven, making targeted growth and targeted return on
investment.
Only one criteria, and that is large GDP. We want the biggest economic market.
Another reason is dependant on the landscape of our clients....
Participant 8 – Therefore, if we evaluate an opportunity to sell, if it is not an existing
market, we almost discard it.
We are used to having a reactive selling model, we react very much …
This has to be actively designed a project like this, it will not come walking into your door,
this is a challenge, to get management commitment to it [BOP Initiative] is a challenge.
Participant 9 – As a business opportunity, if the business case we would go for it but one
would have to think very deeply about that business case.
One possibility is we don’t fund it ourselves, someone funds it and wants a company to
help roll it out.
Biggest single obstacle is that we think there are better opportunities elsewhere.
Participant 11 – Therefore we were able to penetrate or open new markets where we
created opportunities and new offerings to the market, giving us first mover advantage.
80% combination of existing things and 20% of what we needed to fill the gaps.
We would only do it for profit, at that scale anyway.
Capability
6 out of 13 participants explored Dimension Data’s know-how or ability to take advantage
of opportunities in BOP markets. Participants mentioned that Dimension Data did not
possess any know-how or sound experience to work in BOP markets. Two participants
suggested that due to lack of experience and capacity, Dimension Data would need to
purchase or acquire the capability from a third party if it entered the BOP market.
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 64 of 98
Participant 1 – Our challenge would be interaction with consumers, we don’t know how
to interact with consumers. MS do it through shops, whereas Apple know how to do it, MS
built company mostly on enterprise agreements.
Participant 3 – Culture is certainly around supporting enterprise clients. The culture of
supporting consumers, I don’t know if we have that ability.
There is a different type of service, people, and its own ability and agility.
Example is the sport business; we never thought we would focus on this.
It is not our core focus to alleviate poverty, but it is our core focus to bring return to
shareholders.
So if we can do both, and there is something to take to market, I'm pretty sure the
shareholders will be prepared to listen.
But then, I suppose everyone would say that we are not in the consumer business.
Look at our sport business for example.
With the Tour de France, we learnt that we have technical capabilities that improve sport.
But even this business is based on big clients who deal with consumers.
It is not our core focus to alleviate poverty, but it is our core focus to bring return to
shareholders.
So if we can do both, and there is something to take to market, I'm pretty sure the
shareholders will be prepared to listen.
But then, I suppose everyone would say that we are not in the consumer business.
Participant 5 – Manpower. If we closed a deal, it has to be structured so that the
community takes it forward, or a 3rd party company. Dimension Data doesn’t have the feet
to run a low income project.
Participant 6 – We don’t have any strengths in BOP connectivity, no experience in
delivering real solutions to people in that segment.
We could theoretically do it, but I would never say we should do it directly.
We don’t have any experience … providing services to the BOP; experience running
consumer segments.
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 65 of 98
A different kind of company provides services to them, eg mobile companies, things that
really enable people in the BOP.
Culture, we don’t have a history of being disruptive innovation. There is a big cultural
component to this.
We don’t have a history of doing that.
Instead of building capacity, we buy the capacity - They should be at scale and relatively
mature.
Participant 9 – DD is not the kind of company that has the resources to do this - DD is not
designed for this.
Participant 11 – I don’t think we have the internal structures or process to service
consumer markets.
We have enabling technology, but no consumer abilities whatsoever.
80% of our business is bespoke solutions, so we cannot sell at scale and at low margin.
Product
6 out of 13 participants’ discussion related to the issue of products. All 6 discussions
implied that Dimension Data has no existing products that would be applicable to the BOP
market. As Dimension Data targets large enterprises and focuses on the business to
business market, their products are more high-end and reliant on infrastructure that is likely
to be lacking in BOP markets. Unique products would have to be developed for the BOP
market.
Participant 1 – We would have to team up with somebody to produce something, I am
thinking more learning.
We typically take a product that is sold to enterprises and resell.
Our offerings are reliant on mobile and data infrastructure which is assumed challenging
in these markets.
Participant 4 – The type of innovation we focus on is much more on corporate products.
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 66 of 98
Participant 5 – There could be products that could do something … I think we would look
at it.
Participant 8 – If it is the right product you can alleviate living conditions and alleviate
poverty because the BOP can actually make an income out of it as well if you do it right.
We have to think when we think about new products, projects solutions, we have to think
about this as well.
Participant 9 – ....our ability to sell our own products and services, increasingly have
those offerings be platform or cloud based.
If we add a new product offering, is it one that can we take in a largely standardised way,
does it fit in with our models, sales etc.
Participant 11 – 80% combination of existing things and 20% of what we needed to fill the
gaps.
... I would like to see that we carve out offerings we do have and give more access to small
business etc. I would like to bundle this with financial institutions etc.
StrategicAlignment
5 out of 13 participants discussed Dimension Data’s strategic alignment to the Dimension
Data Group strategy. 3 of these participants represent executive and strategic management.
All 3 emphasised the current drive to standardise business models and products throughout
Dimension Data globally. Furthermore, introduction of new products or services would
only be considered if the products or services were applicable to the global business model.
2 out of the 5 participants also discussed the role of CSR within the strategy. One of these
participants mentioned that CSR initiatives sit outside of the core business and operations,
however these initiatives were meant to aid the long-term strategy. Going forward though,
the participant is hoping that some proposed changes would bring CSR closer to the core
business and operations in order to be more meaningful. The other participant believes that
the CSR initiatives are as a result of Dimension Data abilities and success, and that these
initiatives are providing benefit to the community. This participant believes that CSR
should not be linked to strategy and that CSR should not be for profit purposes.
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 67 of 98
Participant 2 – I think at the end of the day, like all companies, we have a responsibility
that there is access to information and knowledge for every South African.
The problem with a lot of the way we do business is that our CSR initiatives sit outside our
business whereas if it is part our business, it cannot be uncoupled hence Unilever etc.,
where their market is impacted by low hygiene levels and levels of health. If you look at 10
- 20 years time, then they contribute to killing their own market so maybe Dimension Data
should look at its market or its ability to reach its strategic objective will be impacted if
these objectives are not reached e.g. Saturday schools.
We have not linked our [CSR] investments towards skills development and acquisition of
skills. Now, we have developed a framework to link all 3 programmes as well as other
programmes to feed into our business.
Participant 9 – The main criteria is that is aligned with our overall strategy
We can create a differentiated offering within our target market.
We want to globally standardise our offerings. This may not be the best approach for any
given market, however, our strategy is to have a narrower scope, but to do it consistently
globally. As a consequence, we don’t pursue niche markets, that would require niche or
bespoke systems. The next phase is to have a consistent offering in all markets, making
sure we have standard back-end capabilities in all markets.
If we add a new product offering, is it one that can we take in a largely standardised way,
does it fit in with our models, sales etc.?
We are not looking for significantly new market segments.
We believe there is significant headroom in the markets we currently serve.
Our challenge is to execute better going after markets we have already chosen.
Biggest single obstacle is that we think there are better opportunities elsewhere. This is
probably the biggest obstacle because the question you will probably get is … Why try
something new if you haven’t executed properly in your main strategy? Why would you
want to do something new if there is still growth in you current strategy?
Challenge from a global perspective, we want a consistent quote, single global view on
people and global teams, and we think this is our competitive advantage, if we allow SA to
pursue other things then it might be very good for SA but it will detract from our global
business [model].
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 68 of 98
Participant 10 – We do have a CSR strategy, which encompasses the BOP, but it is not a
business model. Our view is we can leverage our core capabilities with technology to
create value, we picked education, and we believe that the things we do there make a
difference. We believe the things we do with education can make a big difference. There is
evidence where a lot of young people are now able to go on and find employment, which
has a ripple effect on families and communities. We are not doing it for profit purposes.
Because we are globalising and standardising, we are not going to have a business model
in SA, that we have no intention of taking globally. For example, we are not going to start
selling things that we don’t have globally just because for this point in time it makes sense.
I would agree with him, in SA, that we are big, I am not totally convinced that we are
saturated, being big means that we will be at the receiving end of other players, so we are
up against competition. This may force us to look at the business model and deliberately
make some changes that make sense for us to be more competitive. But the limits of this
change is something that is debateable, there is some lee way to make necessary changes if
need be.
Participant 12 – But bear in mind that Dimension Data’s future is going towards
standardisation and global scale. The group is grappling with customisation vs
standardisation, frankly, it is not part of the group strategy to micro customise the business
model.
Participant 13 – We have, for example, the way we engage with public sector, there are
certain deals we gone after where we haven’t made operating margin, there was revenue
there, but the strategic lever is more important. Additional pull through business or
positioning. Strategic in that this is a piece of the customer portfolio that must be met, and
rather it be met by us than a competitor.
Infrastructure
4 out of 13 participants mentioned infrastructure challenges. One participant explained that
Dimension Data’s CSR initiatives are frequently hampered by infrastructure issues, and
argued that major investment was required to implement the required infrastructure. In
trying to understand what products would suit the BOP market, one participant questioned
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 69 of 98
whether there is adequate infrastructure available for these products. A participant who
was very familiar with challenges faced by Dimension Data in Africa cited lack of
infrastructure as a major stumbling block to Dimension Data’s ability to sell products or
services.
Participant 2 – Fundamentally our challenge is infrastructure requirement which is too
expensive.
If we provide a service, it must be a proper service. So remote connectivity, the number of
people would need to be big enough. Then how do we make sure we provide equal access
to the entire community?
Our eLearning will have more impact if there was connectivity. But who funds this rollout,
eg fibre connectivity or wireless. Is there existing infrastructure that can be leveraged? If
we can find a way to make connectivity accessible, definitely then we need to do it.
eLearning has its limitations not because of its content made available online, the reason
is because there is no connectivity.
Participant 3 – Our limitation is that we don’t have the channel and infrastructure to deal
with mass number of clients.
By definition, emerging markets are risky. Because some factors are macro economic,
exchange rates. Other factors based on geopolitical, government institutions, terrorism,
health, and infrastructure.
Participant 8 – What infrastructure do you have available for what you are selling?
The other issue is Internet availability, do you go for full cloud or localise in a specific
school?
Participant 9 – What we found out the hard way in business in Africa. There is no base
infrastructure, which our business relies on to be successful. For example we need strong
telecommunications to be in place, because we deliver services remotely, i.e. call centres,
voice managed services.
We are not going to be the company that brings telecoms into Africa - we will have to wait
until the infrastructure reaches a level that we are able to rollout our business model into
those countries.
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 70 of 98
Internet Solutions may be another area to explore, like WiFi segments, quite a strong
argument to be made if you have the infrastructure.
ResearchAnalysisandDiscussion
The findings from the previous section are discussed in light of the theoretical conceptual
framework in relation to the research problem and compared to the literature which
emerged from the researcher’s literature review, in order to establish the level of
consistency between the findings and the literature (Kohlbacher, 2006). Generalisation of
the findings is thus made to theory – analytical generalisation, and not populations –
statistical generalisation (Tellis, 1997). The theoretical conceptual framework (Figure 12)
is reproduced hereunder for ease of reference.
Profitability
According to the reviewed literature BOP markets are associated with risk, high costs,
uncertainty, undeveloped infrastructure and require unique or innovative business models
to be successful (Karamchandani et al., 2011) (Prahalad & Hammond, 2002) (Wanasika,
2013) (Karnani, 2007). A similar view is held in respect of emerging markets and most
BOP markets are found within emerging markets (Cheung & Belden, 2013) (Lagace, 2010)
(Atsmon et al., 2011). BOP markets have an inconsistent supply of basic services, they
have limited or no access to financial support which makes it difficult for companies to
transact and there is a lack of infrastructure such as communication and transportation.
These characteristics are the cause of its unattractiveness for many companies (Munoobhai
2015).
The perception of opportunity at the BOP does not seem attractive enough for large
corporations as yet (Reficco, 2012). However, there are authors who assert that BOP
markets are profitable such as Wanasika (2013) and Prahalad (2012). Wanasika (2013)
MarketIntelligenceCognitive Structural Processual MarketCharacteristics
InteractiveSystems InfrastructureDiagnosticSystems Institutional
BoundarySystemsBeliefSystems
InternalBarriersExternal
Barriers
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 71 of 98
states that there is enormous potential in BOP markets, which is significant enough to
assert that BOP markets cannot be ignored. Furthermore, there is a growing case for
profitable BOP initiatives. As per Prahalad (2012, p.12):
“For global firms, active participation in BOP markets is not an option. Just as
Nokia, Unilever, Nestle, and others have discovered, these markets are critical
for their sustained and profitable growth. More important is the fact that
breakthrough innovations that allow them to participate in BOP markets can
often be leveraged in developed markets.”
More recently Perrot's (2013) study of Lafarge pointed out that Lafarge’s executives and
management were largely unaware of the potential opportunity and market attractiveness
of the BOP. Citing Porter (1996), Reficco (2012) asserts that strategy is a choice and
serving the BOP market in a commercial way is therefore a choice which will only make
sense if the market proves attractive.
It is evident from the participants’ responses that Dimension Data places emphasis on
profitability and financial metrics, with the important metrics to Dimension Data being
profit, cash flow and timing of returns. Based on the literature and in particular the lessons
from the Lafarge action research by Perrot (2013) – it is deduced that profitability is in fact
an internal cognitive barrier and relates to the negative perception of
profitability/opportunity at the BOP. Accordingly, this research finds that in relation to
profitability, an internal cognitive barrier exists within Dimension Data which prevents it
from pursuing the BOP market (Olsen & Boxenbaum, 2009). In terms of the four levers
(Simons, 2000), the cognitive barrier would be linked to belief systems such as core values
and the commitment to achieve company objectives (Bedford, 2015) such as making
profits. Once the cognitive barrier is overcome changes are likely to be made to the
structures and processes at Dimension Data that relate to the requirement of profitability in
order to align it to the new perception and BOP market requirement (Perrot 2013).
Even though profitability is currently a key measure for business at Dimension Data, some
participants noted that Dimension Data is prepared to sacrifice profitability for key clients
or strategic initiatives. This implies that there have been instances where structural and
processual (Olsen & Boxenbaum, 2009) barriers were overcome by amending the
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 72 of 98
management control systems to align with the strategic initiative. In terms of the four
levers (Simons, 2000), the belief systems changes result in appropriate boundary systems
and diagnostic and/or interactive systems depending on which levers need to be
emphasised.
In summary, whilst profitability is a key measure, Dimension Data has relaxed its
profitability measures for strategic initiatives or key clients where it deems these initiatives
or clients more important than its profitability requirements. This emphasises the cognitive
or belief system barrier for BOP markets. If management’s perception is altered to believe
that there is a significant opportunity at the BOP then Dimension Data may be willing to
update its belief systems, which would trigger appropriate amendments to other
management control systems i.e. if Dimension Data believes that there is a significant
opportunity at the BOP it will create a strategic initiative which would result in appropriate
updating of targets, key performance indicators, processes, targets and policies.
BusinessModelandTargetMarket
Magretta (2002) claims that business models answer the following questions: who is the
customer; what does the customer value; how do we make money; and at an appropriate
cost how can we deliver value to customers? Furthermore, in comparing the terms
‘business model’ to ‘strategy’, she asserts that business model represents a companies
value chain which describes its system and how all the pieces fit together, whereas strategy
explains how an organisation competes in a market and how it will differentiate itself from
competitors (Magretta, 2002).
Simanis (2012) claims that BOP business models require high volumes, low prices, low
margins and a penetration rate of 30% or more is often required for success.
Karamchandani et al. (2011) claim that BOP business models have requirements that are
different from a company’s core business model and that barriers to the BOP market can
be overcome by a company by adapting its own business models. Furthermore,
Karamchandani et al. (2011) state that most firms may not find it worthwhile to rethink
business models to enter the BOP market, while firms that are innovative are able to
overcome barriers and enjoy great rewards at the BOP. Karamchandani et al. (2011, p.4)
suggest the following questions be considered before a firm enters BOP markets:
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 73 of 98
• “Can we manage large numbers of low-margin, low-value transactions?
• Can we work with informal markets?
• Can we keep out legacy and overhead costs?
• Do our leaders have a long-range mindset?
• Will our organisational culture stifle bottom of the pyramid innovation?”
Prahalad (2012) takes the concept of unique business models even further by citing earlier
writings where it is claimed that the typical 4Ps of marketing (McCarthy, 1982): product,
price, place and promotion do not apply to the BOP. Instead, Prahalad (2012) suggests that
the 4As should be applied to BOP markets, as BOP markets are distinctly different in each
region and therefore application of a business model needs to consider his suggested 4As:
awareness, access, affordable and availability. Ansari et al. (2010) suggest that
organisations could participate in global value chains, in which organisations collaborate in
larger value chains and participate in BOP initiatives, thereby allowing organisations
minimal deviation from their core business models.
Whilst much of the literature focused on the need to create non-traditional business models
in order to be successful in the BOP, there is limited reference to companies that do not
deal with end consumers. However, Perrot's (2013) case study provides one such example,
as Lafarge did not deal with end consumers and only sold to contractors and bulk
distributors. Therefore, in this instance Perrot's (2013) study of Lafarge will be used as a
comparison to Dimension Data. In line with the statement by Karamchandani et al. (2011),
Lafarge enjoyed great rewards after becoming innovative and rethinking its business model
to enter the BOP (Perrot, 2013).
Perrot (2013) stated that Lafarge was fixated on its strategy of focusing on core business of
cement production and cost reduction, while its business model did not deal with end
consumers. However, once the cognitive barrier regarding the perception of the BOP
market was removed, Lafarge’s management realised that the BOP market presents
significant opportunity. Entering the BOP market also provided strategic benefit against its
global competition. After this newfound appreciation for the BOP market Lafarge
implemented changes to its strategy and business models. In some areas new capabilities
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 74 of 98
were created in order to deal with end consumers, whilst in other areas existing capabilities
were modified in order to deal with lower levels of the value chain i.e. closer to the end
consumer. Where the target market allowed, Lafarge created the new capabilities to deal
with the end consumer. Lafarge found its BOP initiatives both strategic and competitive,
and the case study ends at a point where Lafarge planned global expansion of its BOP
initiatives (Perrot, 2013).
The participants made it clear to the researcher that Dimension Data does not target end
consumers. Furthermore, according to the participants, in order for Dimension Data to
engage directly with end consumers a significant change to Dimension Data’s business
model would be required. The literature as cited in the above paragraphs suggests that
significant changes to the business model would be required for organisations to compete
in the BOP. The 4Ps of marketing (McCarthy, 1982) are arguably one of the most
prevalent and well-known concepts, yet it is claimed that even this concept does not apply
to the BOP, let alone traditional business models (Prahalad, 2012). It should be noted that
while the above suggests that a change to the business model is required for companies to
be successful in the BOP, this research also draws attention to research findings by Reficco
(2012) who emphasised the importance of aligning the organisation’s main value chain to
its BOP value chain i.e. greater alignment equals a greater chance of success and greater
divergence equals greater risk.
Therefore, Dimension Data’s current business model and target market are internal barriers
preventing it from pursuing the BOP market. In terms of strategy Dimension Data has
chosen to remain fixed on its core target market and accordingly its boundary system is
currently rigid (Perrot 2013). While the business model is not strategy (Magretta, 2002), it
spans across all elements of the internal barriers being structural, processual and cognitive
(Olsen & Boxenbaum, 2009).
Opportunistic
BOP markets are characterised the following factors: geographically dispersed, culturally
heterogeneous, increased distribution and marketing costs, difficult to exploit economies of
scale, weak infrastructure, and small size of each transaction. These BOP market
characteristics create increased costs while doing business and result in BOP markets being
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 75 of 98
less desirable for companies that seek opportunistic profits (Karnani, 2007). Furthermore,
the opportunity cost of capital makes it difficult to select BOP opportunities, where
opportunity costs are similar to financial metrics because resources are expected to spend
more time on high margin low risk projects. Therefore financial incentive structures drive
resource allocation and focus away from BOP projects (Reficco, 2012).
Findings from the data suggest that while Dimension Data is innovative, it has achieved
success through the exploitation of readily available opportunities. An example in the data
relates to an opportunity where although the market was risky in Nigeria, Dimension Data
seized the business opportunity. Although there appeared to be risk outside of the
transaction, Dimension Data was prepared to assume the risk as long as the transaction was
large enough and almost certain i.e. opportunistic.
Based on the findings that Dimension Data is opportunistic in nature, it is likely that
Dimension Data engages in market capture strategies, and not market creation strategies
which are required for BOP markets – the literature calls for disruptive innovation (Hart &
Christensen, 2002) which is associated with market creation strategies (Perrot, 2013). A
dominant interactive control system is required for explorative innovation (Bedford, 2015).
The internal barrier related to an opportunistic characteristic would therefore be processual
(Olsen & Boxenbaum, 2009) or a management control system emphasised by diagnostic
controls (Perrot, 2013).
Capability
Wanasika (2013) cites Lumpkin and Dess (1996), and, Shane and Vankataraman (2000)
who claim that an entrepreneurial mindset is crucial for BOP markets as the firms must
find new ways of competing in order to identify and exploit opportunities in BOP markets.
Unlike strategising in developed markets, collaboration is a key component for strategising
in BOP markets (Wanasika, 2013).
When an organisation attempts to perform in a market in which its capabilities do not meet
the market requirement, the organisation may create the capabilities organically by
investing in research and development or externally by acquisition and joint ventures
(Perrot, 2013).
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 76 of 98
Organisations that are serious about BOP markets must adopt a learning by doing approach
because if they postpone their entry into the BOP due to lack of market information they
would be overtaken by competition (Munoobhai, 2015) (Dhanaraj & Khanna, 2011). One
example in the reviewed literature is Nedbank, where it followed a co-creation approach to
learn, understand and develop products for a BOP market (Ismail et al., 2012).
In the case of Lafarge, employees were unaware of successful approaches to BOP markets.
The internal learning initiative provided Lafarge with information and experiences of
possible BOP approaches based on competition and peer companies in order to learn from
new business models and about market opportunities at the BOP. The learning articulated
how other companies managed to develop programs that embedded a social and economic
mission (Perrot, 2013). After the initial learning phase, the subsequent phase launched an
initiative where a special team was created to obtain market intelligence and assess the size
of potential BOP markets and opportunities. The market intelligence and projects resulted
in the preparation of more precise reporting on market size, business opportunities,
expected volumes and internal rates of return. These and other initiatives eventually led to
consensus within Lafarge that the BOP segment was a significant market opportunity.
Prior to this, Lafarge focused purely on its traditional core business. The new mindset and
realisation of market opportunity resulted in the launching of a corporate program to
develop revenues through unusual approaches. This was also considered as testing of
Lafarge’s boundary systems (Perrot, 2013).
It is a commonly held view in the literature that companies do not possess adequate market
intelligence, experience, capabilities or know-how to be successful in BOP markets. From
as early as 2002, Prahalad and Hammond (2002) raised awareness that traditional
developed world organisations contain workforces that are assembled to run high cost
operations. Furthermore, Prahalad and Hammond (2002) called for organisations to
develop workforces in order to understand the BOP. Reficco (2012) relates market
attractiveness to the allocation of resources, and finds that companies often claim that there
is not enough market intelligence nor is there adequate know-how available within the
large corporation to take advantage of BOP opportunities – however, when compared to
other attractive markets, the large corporation is prepared to invest in resourcing to obtain
market intelligence and know-how to take advantage of the attractive opportunity.
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 77 of 98
Therefore, Reficco (2012) suggests that BOP initiatives must be seen as actual business
opportunities rather than CSR opportunities, in order for an organisation to address the
opportunity with the same scrupulousness as it would address a pure business opportunity.
The findings indicate that majority of participants believe that Dimension Data does not
have experience, capabilities or know-how to exploit BOP opportunities. However,
Dimension Data has a history of acquisition and entering new markets (“Dimension Data
Website,” n.d.). As Participant 9 suggests, Dimension Data could theoretically do it, but he
would never say that Dimension Data should enter the BOP directly – thus implying that
Dimension Data should either partner or acquire the competencies it requires – “instead of
building capacity, we buy the capacity - they should be at scale and relatively mature.”
Based on Dimension Data’s know-how in acquiring competencies and the research data
confirming that Dimension Data can acquire capabilities, it is deduced that Dimension
Data does have the ability to enter into markets if it chooses.
For example, Participant 3 provided an example of Dimension Data’s recent success in
revolutionalising the sport of cycling by introducing new methods and uses of technology
during the world renowned Tour De France and Cape Epic cycling competitions. Some
comments of Participant 3 in this regard are:
Example is the sport business; we never thought we would focus on this.
Look at our sport business for example. With the Tour de France, we learnt
that we have technical capabilities that improve sport. But even this business is
based on big clients who deal with consumers.
It is not our core focus to alleviate poverty, but it is our core focus to bring
return to shareholders. So if we can do both, and there is something to take to
market, I'm pretty sure the shareholders will be prepared to listen. But then, I
suppose everyone would say that we are not in the consumer business.
The interview with Participant 3 suggests that Dimension Data entered into a new market
i.e. the sport market relatively easily. The data from the interview with Participant 6
suggests that Dimension Data is comfortable with acquiring competencies and know-how.
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 78 of 98
The example provided by Perrot (2013) where Lafarge obtained the necessary competency
only after the cognitive barrier was removed by the realisation of the potential opportunity
at the BOP lends weight to suggestions by Reficco (2012) and Wanasika (2013)
respectively – when organisations see BOP opportunities as actual business opportunities
then it would be addressed as a business opportunity with the appropriate rigor and non-
benevolent approach in order to ensure that necessary entrepreneurial initiative is applied
to BOP opportunities. Therefore with regard to the capability findings, the barrier to
Dimension Data pursuing the BOP is cognitive (Olsen & Boxenbaum, 2009) or belief
system related (Perrot, 2013).
Product
Although initial literature on BOP products asserted that organisations should create
innovative products to succeed and meet the requirement of BOP markets, contemporary
literature suggests that the least risky approach is for organisations to make small
amendments to the core offerings to succeed and meet requirements of BOP markets
(Reficco, 2012).
London and Hart (2004) criticised companies that moved into the BOP segment with
existing products at lower prices and/or smaller quantities, arguing that this approach may
not be beneficial in alleviating poverty, yet alleviating poverty is a crucial element of the
BOP proposition (Kandachar & Halme, 2008). As mentioned in previous barriers, Prahalad
(2012) cites earlier writings where it is claimed that the typical 4Ps of marketing
(McCarthy, 1982): product, price, place and promotion do not apply to the BOP. Instead,
Prahalad (2012) recommends usage of the 4As being: awareness, access, affordable and
availability. Ansari et al. (2010) cite multiple authors who suggest that the BOP market is
ideal for introducing and refining disruptive innovations. Hart and Christensen (2002)
motivate companies to attempt disruptive innovation at the BOP, while implying that there
are many opportunities for technological advances and that technology is needed to address
the social and environmental challenges associated with the BOP.
Both Nedbank (Ismail et al., 2012) and Lafarge (Perrot, 2013) created new products for
their BOP markets. However both organisations used their existing core business products
as base layers of the new product offerings. These examples imply that whilst a certain
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 79 of 98
amount of development is required, organisations are able to modify existing products in
order to market to the BOP.
In the case of Dimension Data, Participant 11 noted that previous attempts to enter or
disrupt Dimension Data target markets involved a combination of 80% of existing
offerings in order to create products that resulted in competitive advantage for Dimension
Data. In addition it could be argued that Dimension Data did not have products that were
directly suited for the sport market, yet it modified its existing products to meet this
market.
Although the above suggests that Dimension Data has the potential to create
products/offerings for the BOP market either directly or indirectly through its customers, it
presently does not have any products that are immediately applicable to the BOP markets.
Therefore, Dimension Data’s product offering is a barrier preventing Dimension Data from
pursuing the BOP market.
Infrastructure
Lack of infrastructure is frequently cited as an external organisational barrier for entering
both emerging and BOP markets (Karnani, 2007) (Simanis, 2012) (Prahalad & Hammond,
2002) (Wanasika, 2013) (Reficco, 2012). According to Simanis (2012) simple BOP
business models are only successful if existing infrastructure is available. Being an ICT
organisation, Dimension Data offerings rely on infrastructure in order to supply products
or services to its target markets. Therefore, having limited infrastructure does impede
Dimension Data’s ability to service is target market – accordingly lack of infrastructure is
an external barrier to Dimension Data pursuing the BOP market.
However, Prahalad and Hammond (2002) suggest that ICT organisations are best placed to
provide innovative solutions to overcome some of the infrastructure related barriers.
Ashley et al. (2014) suggest that ICT is essential as it is a strong driver of growth and
unlocks opportunities in hard to reach markets. The role of ICT in the BOP market is
critical since lack of communication infrastructure is an institutional void posing a great
challenge for doing business in this market – ICT companies should be treating this
institutional void as a business opportunity with the potential to unlock other market
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 80 of 98
opportunities at the BOP on a large scale whilst advancing the poor (Munoobhai, 2015)
(Dhanaraj & Khanna, 2011) (Ashley et al., 2014). Based on these views there is a need for
Dimension Data to overcome the cognitive barrier of viewing the lack of infrastructure as
an external barrier to viewing it as a business opportunity (Dhanaraj & Khanna, 2011).
StrategicAlignment
Perrot (2013) cites Olsen and Boxenbaum (2009) who identify conflicting mindsets as
organisational barriers in the implementation of BOP strategy. For example, a ‘head-
office’ mindset may conflict with the local business unit where the local business unit may
want to accept a BOP project. Similarly, according to Participant 9, Dimension Data is
bound by the strategic belief and boundary systems set out by the Dimension Data Group.
During Perrot's (2013) study of Lafarge, employees were not aware of successful
approaches to the BOP market undertaken by competitors. As stated previously and
emphasised by Perrot (2013), overcoming the mindset or cognitive barrier is the first step
in changing strategy towards including the BOP. Once the mindset shift took place at
Lafarge, the BOP was regarded as a significant opportunity (Perrot, 2013) – subsequently
the target market included the BOP and business models were amended based on the
change to strategy.
Magretta (2002) suggests that strategy is related to decisions revolving around how an
organisation will compete and how it will differentiate from competitors. Magretta's (2002)
view suggests that strategy and business models are linked yet still remain different
concepts, therefore it is strategy that influences and impacts the business model because
the business model is a reflection of a firms realised strategy (Zott, Amit, & Massa, 2011).
Therefore strategic decisions and actions will impact the internal cognitive, structural and
processual barriers (Olsen & Boxenbaum, 2009), as well as belief, boundary, diagnostic
and interactive control systems (Perrot, 2013).
The current strategy of Dimension Data emphasises focus on global standardisation of
business models and products as the Group aims to create consistency across all regions
and territories. In terms of its target market, there is a belief that there is significant
headroom, hence some of the related comments from Participant 9 are:
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 81 of 98
We are not looking for significantly new market segments.
We believe there is significant headroom in the markets we currently serve.
Our challenge is to execute better going after markets we have already chosen.
Biggest single obstacle is that we think there are better opportunities
elsewhere. This is probably the biggest obstacle because the question you will
probably get is … Why try something new if you haven’t executed properly in
your main strategy? Why would you want to do something new if there is still
growth in you current strategy?
Since Dimension Data’s Group strategy is aimed at standardising products and services
globally, Dimension Data South Africa is faced with an internal barrier in the form of its
strategy, which is preventing it from pursing the BOP market.
ResearchLimitations
A disadvantage associated with the use of case study research and which may limit the
validity of case study research is that data collection and analysis methods are subject to
the researcher’s characteristics and background and rely on the researcher’s interpretation
of events, documents and interview material (Darke et al., 1998).
The researcher is an employee of Dimension Data and therefore the risk of bias existed.
The researcher was aware of this limitation and guarded against preconceived notions and
bias during the research process (Egan, 2002) by trying to see things through the lenses of
an outsider with limited knowledge of the research context (Leacock et al., 2009).
A limitation of the case study is that there was a single researcher – a technique using
multiple researchers benefits a case study research by providing multiple perspectives
thereby increasing confidence in the findings. Furthermore, conflicting findings allow
multiple researchers to validate information. The researcher believes that the analysis
techniques that were employed provided the opportunity to corroborate the findings
thereby strengthening the conclusions – in this way, the researcher mitigated the limitation
of being a single investigator (Soy, 1997).
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 82 of 98
To address the time constraint limitation, the researcher overlapped a portion of the data
collection phase with the analysis phase. Eisenhardt (1989, p.538) states, “A striking
feature of research to build theory from case studies is the frequent overlap of data analysis
with data collection.”
Lastly, this research is based on a single case study and therefore generalisibility of the
findings to other settings is more limited than a case study involving multiple cases,
however other organisations may still learn from the finding and perhaps use it to consider
their own position in relation thereto (Gibbert et al.,2008) (Darke et al., 1998) (Eisenhardt,
1989).
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 83 of 98
ResearchConclusions
In selecting Dimension Data, a global ICT leader with South Africa as its home ground,
this case study research explored and identified barriers preventing Dimension Data South
Africa from pursuing the BOP market.
Based on the literature review the researcher found that barriers preventing organisations
from entering BOP markets could be internal and/or external. In terms of internal barriers
to entry of BOP markets, Olsen and Boxenbaum (2009) find cognitive, processual or
structural barriers. Building on the barriers identified by Olsen and Boxenbaum (2009),
Reficco (2012) provides further examples of these barriers through his research as well as
examples of external barriers. Similarly, Perrot (2013) builds on the original findings of
Olsen and Boxenbaum (2009), however Perrot (2013) introduces a management control
systems framework i.e. the four levers of control by Simons (2000) to analyse the impact
of management control systems on the barriers.
The researcher conducted thirteen semi-structured interviews with employees from
Dimension Data from amongst key executives, business development managers, business
unit managers, product managers, financial managers and solution consultants operating at
Dimension Data group, regional and subsidiary level.
The findings and analysis revealed that the following barriers are preventing Dimension
Data from pursuing the BOP market: Profitability, Business model & Target market,
Opportunistic, Capability, Product, Infrastructure, and Strategic alignment. While the lack
infrastructure was found to be an external barrier as well as internal cognitive barrier, the
remaining barriers are internal and are either cognitive, structural or processual. Even
though these seven barriers were identified, it is noted that the overall barrier is cognitive
i.e. the mindset barrier should first be overcome in order for any of the seven barriers to be
overcome. These findings are consistent with the literature, in particular with Olsen and
Boxenbaum's (2009) findings that internal barriers prevent organisations from entering the
BOP and that these barriers may be cognitive, structural or processual. The cognitive
barriers found in this research may be overcome by utilising Dhanaraj and Khanna's (2011)
five tools for shifting mental models: anchor learning content on compelling theory;
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 84 of 98
exposure to variations across emerging markets; emphasise diverse goals of business to
provoke thinking that is beyond profit-making; utilise a multi-method approach; and learn
by doing (Refer to Appendix C).
Overall, there is a growing interest in the BOP proposition and based on the findings of
this case study research, Dimension Data is likely to better understand what barriers are
preventing it from pursuing the BOP market, thereby allowing Dimension Data to review
its position and reconsider its approach and product offering.
“If the dynamics of institutions and markets are not factored in the mental
models, executive thinking can remain frozen in the past and can be a major
stumbling block to recognising current reality.” (Dhanaraj & Khanna, 2011,
p.690)
Dimension Data’s own ambition, as a global ICT leader is to challenge paradigms through
world leading innovative solutions. Dimension Data has a sincere CSR focus, however
CSR coupled with market prospects present Dimension Data with an opportunity to
innovate within a new sphere and further showcase its unique capability (“Dimension Data
Website,” n.d.). Should Dimension Data eventually deliver innovative solutions based on
the BOP proposition, this research would have contributed to the alleviation of poverty.
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 85 of 98
FutureResearchDirections
This research is based on a single case study and the research problem may benefit from a
multiple case study which would allow for cross-case analysis in relation to barriers
preventing companies from entering or pursuing the BOP market (Eisenhardt, 1989)
(Gibbert et al., 2008).
Furthermore, the researcher suggests that the multiple case study should involve companies
that do not deal directly with end consumers – in order to add to literature relating to
internal barriers faced by these types of companies when considering entry or pursuing
BOP markets (Olsen & Boxenbaum, 2009).
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 86 of 98
Bibliography
Acquaah, M., Amoako-Gyampah, K., & Nyathi, N. Q. (2014). Measuring and Valuing
Social Capital: A Guide for Executives. Network for Business Sustainability South
Africa. Retrieved from www.nbs.net/knowledge
Adams, J. (2007). Research methods for graduate business and social science students.
New Delhi; Response Books; Thousand Oaks, Calif.: SAGE Publications.
Retrieved from
http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&scope=site&db=nlebk&db=nla
bk&AN=278216
Alasuutari, P. (2010). The rise and relevance of qualitative research. International Journal
of Social Research Methodology, 13(2), 139–155.
http://doi.org/10.1080/13645570902966056
Anonymous. (2011a). Example Proposal 2: What are the factors influencing South African
food industry companies’ approaches to the BOP market, and in particular what
are the constraints to adopting socially embedded approaches?. UNIVERSITY OF
CAPE TOWN.
Anonymous. (2011b, August 31). Example Proposal 1: The Drivers and Barriers
Associated with Corporate Environmental Practices and Policies: A Comparative
Case Study of Western Cape Wine Producers. UNIVERSITY OF CAPE TOWN.
Ansari, S., Munir, K., & Gregg, T. (2010). Beyond the Hype: Taking business strategy to
the “bottom of the pyramid.” Emerald Group Publishing Limited, 27(Advances in
Strategic Management), 247–276.
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 87 of 98
Ansari, S., Munir, K., & Gregg, T. (2012). Impact at the “Bottom of the Pyramid”: The
Role of Social Capital in Capability Development and Community Empowerment.
Journal of Management Studies, 49(4), 813–842. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-
6486.2012.01042.x
Ashley, C., Sivakumaran, S., & UNDP, U. N. D. P. (2014, September). Breaking Through:
Inclusive Business and the Business Call to Action Today. United Nations
Development Programme. Retrieved from www.businesscalltoaction.org
Atsmon, Y., Kertesz, A., & Vittal, I. (2011). Is your emerging-market strategy local
enough? McKinsey Quarterly, 2, 2011.
Baxter, P., & Jack, S. (2008). Qualitative case study methodology: Study design and
implementation for novice researchers. The Qualitative Report, 13(4), 544–559.
Bedford, D. S. (2015). Management control systems across different modes of innovation:
Implications for firm performance. Management Accounting Research, 28, 12–30.
http://doi.org/10.1016/j.mar.2015.04.003
Cheung, M.-S., & Belden, M. (2013). Beyond Business Basics at the Base-of-the-Pyramid:
the Perspectives of Multinational Corporations. Business Management Dynamics,
3(6), 27–32.
Chipp, K., Corder, C., & Kapelianis, D. (2013). The role of collectivism in defining the
South African Bottom of the Pyramid. Management Dynamics: Journal of the
Southern African Institute for Management Scientists, 22(1), 2–13.
Darke, P., Shanks, G., & Broadbent, M. (1998). Successfully completing case study
research: combining rigour, relevance and pragmatism. Information Systems
Journal, 8, 273–289.
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 88 of 98
Dhanaraj, C., & Khanna, T. (2011). Transforming Mental Models on Emerging Markets.
Academy of Management Learning & Education, 10(4), 684–701.
http://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2011.0511
Dimension Data Website. (n.d.). Retrieved August 30, 2015, from
http://www.dimensiondata.com/en-ZA/Pages/HomePage.aspx
Egan, T. M. (2002). Grounded theory research and theory building. Advances in
Developing Human Resources, 4(3), 277–295.
Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building theories from case study research. Academy of
Management Review, 14(4), 532–550.
Friedman, M. (1970, September). The Social Responsibility of Business is to Increase its
Profits. Retrieved August 23, 2015, from
http://www.colorado.edu/studentgroups/libertarians/issues/friedman-soc-resp-
business.html
Gibbert, M., Ruigrok, W., & Wicki, B. (2008). Research notes and commentaries what
passes as a rigorous case study. Strategic Management Journal, 29(13), 1465–
1474.
Gunther, M. (2014, May 22). The base of the pyramid: will selling to the poor pay off? |
Guardian Sustainable Business | The Guardian. Retrieved August 23, 2015, from
http://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/prahalad-base-bottom-pyramid-
profit-poor
Gunther, M. (2015, July 6). Hershey’s uses more certified sustainable cocoa, but farmers
may not be seeing the benefits. Retrieved August 23, 2015, from
http://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/2015/jul/06/hersheys-mars-
ferrero-cocoa-farming-fair-trade-global-exchange
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 89 of 98
Hamel, G. (2007). The Future of Management (1st ed.). Harvard Business Review Press.
Hammond, A. L., World Resources Institute, & International Finance Corporation (Eds.).
(2007). The next 4 billion: market size and business strategy at the base of the
pyramid. Washington, DC: World Resources Institute, International Finance
Corporation.
Hart, S. L., & Christensen, C. M. (2002). The Great Leap: Driving innovation from the
base of the pyramid. MIT Sloan Management Review, 44(1), 51–56.
Hayes, N. (2000). Doing psychological research: gathering and analysing data.
Buckingham; Philadelphia, PA: Open University Press.
Hill, R. P. (2010). A naturological approach to marketing exchanges: Implications for the
bottom of the pyramid. Journal of Business Research, 63(6), 602–607.
http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2009.01.014
Ismail, T. (n.d.). Innovating Business at the Base Outline. Gordon Institute of Business
Science. Retrieved from
http://www.gibs.co.za/SiteResources/documents/NewDocuments2013/Kerry%20le
e/Innovating%20Business%20at%20the%20Base%20Outline.pdf
Ismail, T., Kleyn, N., & Ansell, G. (2012). New Markets, New Mindsets: Creating wealth
with South Africa’s low income communities through partnership and innovation.
Stonebridge.
Jansson, O., & Nilsson af Sillen, A. (2013, Spring). Market Barriers in the Bottom of the
Pyramid. Kristianstad University. Retrieved from http://hkr.diva-
portal.org/smash/get/diva2:641030/FULLTEXT01.pdf.
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 90 of 98
Kandachar, P., & Halme, M. (Eds.). (2008). Sustainability challenges and solutions at the
base of the pyramid: business, technology and the poor. Sheffield, UK: Greenleaf
Pub.
Karamchandani, A., Kubzansky, M., & Lalwani, N. (2011). Is the bottom of the pyramid
really for you. Harvard Business Review, 89(3), 107–111.
Karnani, A. (2007). The Mirage of Marketing to the Bottom of the Pyramid. California
Management Review, 49(4), 90–111.
Kohlbacher, F. (2006, January). The use of qualitative content analysis in case study
research. Retrieved December 6, 2015, from http://www.qualitative-
research.net/index.php/fqs/rt/printerFriendly/75/153
Lagace, M. (2010). Strategy and execution for emerging markets. Harvard Business
School Research and Ideas. Retrieved from http://hbswk.hbs.edu/pdf/item/6424.pdf
Leacock, C. J., Warrican, S. J., & Rose, G. S. C. (2009). Research methods for
inexperienced researchers. Guidelines for investigating the social world. Jamaica:
Ian Randle Publishers.
London, T., & Hart, S. L. (2004). Reinventing strategies for emerging markets: beyond the
transnational model. Journal of International Business Studies, 35(5), 350–370.
Magretta, J. (2002). Why business models matter. Retrieved from
http://repository.binus.ac.id/2009-2/content/A0154/A015481231.pdf
Markides, C. C. (2012). How Disruptive Will Innovations From Emerging Markets Be?
MIT Sloan Management Review, 54(1).
Markides, C. C. (2013). Disruptive Reality. Business Strategy Review, 24(3), 36–43.
Munoobhai, S. (2015, January 14). Alternative execution strategies to overcoming
institutional voids and institutional distance in BoP markets. University of Pretoria.
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 91 of 98
Retrieved from
http://repository.up.ac.za/bitstream/handle/2263/45034/Munoobhai_Alternative_20
14.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
Mzekandaba, S. (2015, November 11). SA’s first open access WiFi network arrives.
Retrieved December 5, 2015, from
http://www.itweb.co.za/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=147724:
SA-s-first-open-access-WiFi-network-arrives&catid=198
Nyathi, N. Q. (2015, June 5). 10 things we need to get right for Africa to thrive [Newsline].
Retrieved December 6, 2015, from
http://www.gsb.uct.ac.za/Newsrunner/Story.asp?intContentID=2690&UPRN=9314
6
Occhiocupo, N., & Campus, W. (n.d.). THE VALUE CO-CREATING PROCESS:
LESSONS LEARNED FROM THE CASE OF A LEADING MANUFACTURER.
Olsen, M., & Boxenbaum, E. (2009). Bottom-of-the-Pyramid: ORGANIZATIONAL
BARRIERS TO IMPLEMENTATION. California Management Review, 41(4).
Retrieved from http://web.a.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail/detail?sid=fb50790f-32ab-
47ea-b1f7-
a97ae342e690%40sessionmgr4005&vid=0&hid=4209&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3
QtbGl2ZSZzY29wZT1zaXRl#db=buh&AN=43677085
Perrot, F. (2013). Organizational Challenges of Multinational Corporations at the Base of
the Pyramid: An Action-research Inquiry. HAL Archives-Ouvertes, cahier de
recherche. Retrieved from https://halshs.archives-
ouvertes.fr/file/index/docid/771299/filename/2013-01.pdf
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 92 of 98
Prahalad, C. K. (2012). Bottom of the Pyramid as a Source of Breakthrough Innovations:
BOP as Source of Innovations. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 29(1),
6–12. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5885.2011.00874.x
Prahalad, C. K., & Hammond, A. (2002). What works: Serving the poor, profitably. World
Resources Institute.
Prahalad, C. K., & Hart, S. (2002). The Fortune at the Bottom of the Pyramid. Strategy and
Business, (26).
Pratt, M. G. (2009). TIPS ON WRITING UP (AND REVIEWING) QUALITATIVE
RESEARCH. The Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 52(No. 5), 856–862.
Qualitative research. (n.d.). Retrieved August 29, 2015, from
http://teachingcommons.cdl.edu/cdip/facultyresearch/Qualitativeresearch.html
Rangan, K. V., Chu, M., & Petkoski, D. (2011). Segmenting the Base of the Pyramid.
Harvard Business Review, 113–117.
Reciprocity (home page). (n.d.). Retrieved March 16, 2015, from
http://www.reciprocity.co.za/
Reficco, E. A. (2012). There is a Fortune at the BoP: Why Aren’t Large Corporations
Grabbing it? INCAE Business Review, 6(2). Retrieved from
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2185002
Reficco, E. A. (2013, April 16). 6 reasons companies fail to reach the bottom of the
pyramid | Devex. Retrieved December 6, 2015, from
https://www.devex.com/news/6-reasons-companies-fail-to-reach-the-bottom-of-
the-pyramid-80719
SAARF. (2014, June). SAARF Pyramid. Retrieved August 25, 2015, from
http://www.saarf.co.za/amps-
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 93 of 98
technicalreport/technical%20Report%20June14/data%20files/Technical/23%20-
%20Tech%202014A%20~%20Page%20102.pdf
Simanis, E. (2012). Reality check at the bottom of the pyramid. Harvard Business Review,
90(6), 120–125.
Simanis, E., & Hart, S. L. (2008). BOP Protocol, 2nd Edition. Cornell University.
Retrieved from http://www.stuartlhart.com/sites/stuartlhart.com/files/
Simon, M. (2011). Assumptions, limitations and delimitations. Dissertation and Scholarly
Research: Recipes for Success. Seattle, WA: Dissertation Success, LLC. Available
at Www. Dissertationrecipes. Com. Retrieved from
http://dissertationrecipes.com/wp-
content/uploads/2011/04/AssumptionslimitationsdelimitationsX.pdf
Simons, R. (2000). Performance Measurement and Control Systems for Implementing
Strategy: Text and Cases. Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Prentice Hall. Retrieved from
http://id.lib.harvard.edu/aleph/008173831/catalog
Soy, S. K. (1997). The Case Study as a Research Method. Unpublished Paper, University
of Texas at Austin. Retrieved from
https://www.ischool.utexas.edu/~ssoy/usesusers/l391d1b.htm
StuartHart.Com. (n.d.). Retrieved August 22, 2015, from
http://www.stuartlhart.com/sites/stuartlhart.com/files/
Sustainable Value: Stuart L. Hart. (n.d.). Retrieved August 16, 2015, from
http://www.stuartlhart.com/sustainablevalue.html
Tellis, W. (1997, July 2). Introduction to Case Study. Retrieved December 6, 2015, from
http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR3-2/tellis1.html
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 94 of 98
Thakoor, P. (2012, November 7). Business models of non-MNC firms serving the BoP in
South Africa. Gordon Institute of Business Science.
The BoP Lab (Southern Africa). (n.d.). Retrieved March 16, 2015, from
http://www.bop.org.za/BoP_Lab/Home.html
Trochim, W. M. K. (2006). Deduction & Induction. Retrieved August 28, 2015, from
http://www.socialresearchmethods.net/kb/dedind.php
Trompenaars, F., & Coebergh, P. H. (2014, June 5). Top 10 management models for your
business: #1 The bottom of the pyramid. Retrieved November 29, 2015, from
http://www.infideas.com/top-10-management-models-businesses-1-bottom-
pyramid/
Wanasika, I. (2013). Strategizing for BOP Markets. American Journal of Management,
13(3), 46–56.
Watson, B. (2014, May 30). Serving the base of the pyramid: five tips from emerging-
market experts. Retrieved August 23, 2015, from
http://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/2014/may/30/serving-the-base-
of-the-pyramid-five-tips-from-emerging-market-experts
Yin, R. K. (1981). The Case Study Crisis: Some Answers. Administrative Science
Quarterly, 26(1), 58. http://doi.org/10.2307/2392599
Yin, R. K. (2011). Qualitative Research From Start to Finish. New York: The Guildford
Press.
Yin, R. K. (2014). Case Study Research (5th ed.). SAGE Publications. Retrieved from
https://books.google.co.za/books?hl=en&lr=&id=AjV1AwAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=
PP1&dq=case+study+crisis&ots=gkR8sDOM4S&sig=6n9YgELgJ16tEzko2a4WU
ZpNFHk#v=onepage&q=case%20study%20crisis&f=false
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 95 of 98
Zott, C., Amit, R., & Massa, L. (2011). The business model: recent developments and
future research. Journal of Management Control, 37(4), 1019–1042.
Zucker, D. M. (2009). How to do case study research. Retrieved from
http://scholarworks.umass.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1001&context=nursing_
faculty_pubs
(n.d.). Retrieved from
http://www.gibs.co.za/SiteResources/Uploads/__newDocuments_007_/13596044_
BOP_MBA_Research13596044_.pdf
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 96 of 98
APPENDIXA:Interviewguideandquestionnaire
Pleasementionthefollowingtotheintervieweeatthestartofthemeeting1 MyNameisSamirDesai2 IamconductingresearchaspartofstudiesatGraduateSchoolofBusinessofUniversityofCapeTown3 Explainthepurposeofthisstudy4 Confidentiality5 Anonymity6 Participationisvoluntaryandtheintervieweemaywithdrawatanytime.Istheinterviweecomfortable?7 AmIabletorecord?
Name:
Surname
Race(Allowpersonnottodisclose)
EmployedorcontractedbyDimensionData
Position
Department
Questions
WhataretheDimensionDatacriteriaforenteringintonewmarkets
Whatarethemeasuresofsuccessforemergingmarketsormarketopportunities
Haveyoumadeadjustmentstothecorebusinessmodel,tocaterforuniqueneedsofanymarketWHY
Whatinformationdoyourequirebeforeenteringintonewmarkets
Inyourrole,orwithinyourbusinessunit,doyouinfluencewhetherDimensionDataentersorrecedesfrommarkets
DoesDimensionDataenterintoriskymarkets,projectsetc?
Doyouknowaboutwhatthebottomofthepyramidisandifsopleaseelaborate
DoyoubelievethattheBOPpropositionisprofitable,andwillalleviatepoverty
AreyouawareoftheBOPproposition
DoesDimensionDatahaveaBOPstrategy
WouldDimensionDataconsiderentryintoBOPmarkets
Ifyes,whyhasitnotyethappened/Ifno,whatarethereasonsfornotentering?
WillenteringtheBOPbedoneforCSRorforprofitobjectives
WhatdoyouperceivewillbechallengesforenteringtheBOP
WhatarethelimitationsorobstaclespreventingDimensionDataSouthAfricafromenteringtheBOPmarket,andhowcanthesebeovercome?
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 97 of 98
APPENDIXB:ConsentForm
Informed Consent
Form Principal Researcher/s: Samir Desai Project Title: What are the obstacles preventing Dimension Data South Africa from pursuing the Bottom of the Pyramid (BOP) market? Brief overview of the project and its purpose, and what is expected from the respondent: As part of the researcher’s MBA dissertation, the researcher is
conducting research in the form of a single case study on Dimension Data. The
research will investigate Dimension Data’s pursuit of the BOP market, as a
provider of products and services. In doing so, your participation is required in the
form of a one on one interview. Date of Interview: Day Month 2015
There are no known risks or dangers to you associated with this study. Unless you provide an explicit approval, the researchers will not attempt to identify you with the responses to the questionnaire, or to name you as a participant in the study, nor will they facilitate anyone else's doing so.
I acknowledge that I am participating in this study of my own free will. I
understand that I may refuse to participate or stop participating at any time
without penalty. If I wish, I will be given a copy of this consent form.
Subject’s signature:_____________________ Date:_________________
Copyright UCT
DissertationProposal
MBAModular2014/15
Student Number: DSXSAM001 Page 98 of 98
APPENDIXC:FiveCoreElementsfortheShiftinMentalModels
Figure13: Five Core Elements Needed for the Shift in Mental Models (Dhanaraj & Khanna, 2011)Copyright UCT
Recommended