B120 TMA01
Dear Patricia Lodge,
I have conducted my report on the Lodge Bistro chain from the information provided using several analysis techniques and you will see my findings/recommendations below.
The first technique I used was something we call SWOT, which basically stands for strength’s, weaknesses, opportunities and threats internally/externally within a business (see fig 1.1). I have included two tables below for your comparison, one based on the company in early 2000’s and the other 2010 onwards.
Fig 1.1 (ref; http://businesscasestudies.co.uk/ikea/swot-analysis-and-sustainable-business-planning/swot-analysis.html#axzz2jKkA3pdH [accessed 31/10/2013]
Early 2000
Strength’s
Weaknesses
Good Brand Name
Good Business Model
Strong Customer Base
Extensive Audits
Monthly Financial Reports
Top Achiever Awards
Opportunities
Threats
Good Continuous Growth
Greasy Spoons
2010 Onwards
Strength’s
Weaknesses
Strong Brand Name
Computerised Financial Reports
High Staff Turnover
Too Much Freedom for Managers
Ageing Customer Base
Failure To Evolve
Opportunities
Threats
Mystery Diners
Fast Food Chains
Cafe Rouge
As you can see from the two tables there are vast differences, let’s take a look at these tables and I can expand on some of the points. In early 2000 the business was thriving, building a good reputable brand and growing comfortably proving that the business model was a success. This was down to a number of reasons which include a strong customer base, award for over achieving staff and the lack of competition in the market.
After the economic downturn there were some changes that made the table swing in the wrong direction and I will now discuss some of those issues. I I would like to address the change in the business model I.e. allowing managers more freedom. I believe that these were parts of the business needed to remain as they give structure and consistency to the business, by giving the managers more
I have conducted my report on the Lodge Bistro chain from the information provided using several analysis techniques and you will see my findings/recommendations below.
The first technique I used was something we call SWOT, which basically stands for strength’s, weaknesses, opportunities and threats internally/externally within a business (see fig 1.1). I have included two tables below for your comparison, one based on the company in early 2000’s and the other 2010 onwards.
Fig 1.1 (ref; http://businesscasestudies.co.uk/ikea/swot-analysis-and-sustainable-business-planning/swot-analysis.html#axzz2jKkA3pdH [accessed 31/10/2013]
Early 2000
Strength’s
Weaknesses
Good Brand Name
Good Business Model
Strong Customer Base
Extensive Audits
Monthly Financial Reports
Top Achiever Awards
Opportunities
Threats
Good Continuous Growth
Greasy Spoons
2010 Onwards
Strength’s
Weaknesses
Strong Brand Name
Computerised Financial Reports
High Staff Turnover
Too Much Freedom for Managers
Ageing Customer Base
Failure To Evolve
Opportunities
Threats
Mystery Diners
Fast Food Chains
Cafe Rouge
As you can see from the two tables there are vast differences, let’s take a look at these tables and I can expand on some of the points. In early 2000 the business was thriving, building a good reputable brand and growing comfortably proving that the business model was a success. This was down to a number of reasons which include a strong customer base, award for over achieving staff and the lack of competition in the market.
After the economic downturn there were some changes that made the table swing in the wrong direction and I will now discuss some of those issues. I I would like to address the change in the business model I.e. allowing managers more freedom. I believe that these were parts of the business needed to remain as they give structure and consistency to the business, by giving the managers more