Hotel Chocolat: an internationalisation strategy

        

Hotel Chocolat (HC) was founded over 15 years ago with one goal: to make a better type of chocolate available to UK consumers bored by the “mediocrity of that available…” (Hotel Chocolat, 2009). HC started as a catalogue business. Following the success of this business, the company set up an award winning website with the first of many HC stores appearing on the high street in 2004. Since its success in the UK, HC has applied an export strategy to the US via an online ordering site. This strategy enabled the company to minimise risk before fully committing to foreign direct investment (FDI). Once adequate demand for the product was assured, HC opened its first American store in Boston and now has plans to further expand throughout North America. There are currently 43 stores located in the UK with an additional 23 operating inside John Lewis’ stores. It is likely that the company has expanded as far as it can domestically and should now focus its attention on international markets.

In order to assess HC’s ability to internationalise the following should be considered. HC is ‘Britain’s fastest-growing private company with 225% sales growth per year (Fasttrack100, 2008) and sales equating to £18 million in 2008. From this, one may infer that HC does indeed have sufficient resources for internationalization. However, it is questionable whether the company is prepared to undertake large-scale investments, due to the self-funding expansion strategy pursued so far.

This essay will now present an internationalisation strategy for HC by applying theory and drawing upon personal contact with the Japanese External Trade Organisation (JETRO), the UK Trade and Investment team (UKTI) and HC representatives, as well as quantitative data from secondary research.

Global figures for chocolate sales provide compelling incentives to further internationalise. In 2008 global chocolate sales were $62.16 billion (Datamonitor, 2009a).  Contrasting these figures with the UK shows enormous sales potential.  Currently the UK confectionary market is valued at $13.4 billion, with chocolate sales accounting for 67.5%. More tellingly, however, are the records for annual growth of market value between the years 2004-08 (Datamonitor, 2009b) which show a decided slow-down in the rate of growth. Although the economic down turn will have played its role in the calculation of these figures, we can be confident that the UK chocolate industry is operating within the mature stage of the product life cycle. This is problematic for HC as Kotler (2008 p.575) argues: “A slowdown in sales growth results in an overcapacity of competition, which can ultimately lead to a decrease in profits.” Furthermore, the domestic chocolate industry is dominated by Cadbury, Mars and Nestle who collectively hold a 59.8% market share (Datamonitor, 2009c). Expanding internationally into previously untapped markets may be the best solution to leverage any potential losses felt domestically as Hill (2009, p.426) states; “Expanding globally allows firms to increase their profitability and rate of profit growth in ways not available to purely domestic enterprises”.

An essential part of any internationalisation strategy is the country screening process in which hundreds of possible countries must be systematically eliminated. There are numerous ways to do this and, when done professionally, a vast amount of research will be undertaken before any decisions are made. HC, as previously stated, have already begun expansion into North America and have made plans to expand into the Middle East (Retail week, 2009; Walker, 2009). For these reasons, we will not be considering either region. Europe will also be ruled out as the European luxury chocolate market is already highly saturated with rival brands from Belgium, France and Switzerland (RTS, 2009). The next mass filtration stage was to view the political stability scores (CIFP, 2007) of the remaining regions and leave only those scoring highest. This stage virtually eliminated Africa and Latin America, leaving predominantly the Asia Pacific region. Finally, the remaining countries were ranked in order of GDP per capita (CIA World Factbook, 2008) and all but the top eight were eliminated.  This left: Hong Kong, Japan, China, Australia, New Zealand, South Korea, Malaysia and Singapore. Scrutinising these eight countries and drawing upon a variety of unequally weighted factors a country attractiveness index was formulated for each. Ultimately Japan was found to be the optimal host country with the greatest index score.

Table 1: Index table.

Haak recently published that: “no company can afford to neglect the dynamic Asian economic region” (Haak, 2008 p.1). Within this region, Japan in particular “assumes a key position” (Haak, 2008 p.1) due to its sheer size and its ‘wealthy and sophisticated’ consumers (JETRO, 2008). In order to formally evaluate Japan’s attractiveness as a host country, certain aspects of Dunning’s eclectic paradigm have been applied. Focusing on ownership and location factors; the decision to fully invest in Japan can be justified (Dunning, 1988). Furthermore, location factors can be broken down into three advantages: economic, political and social. Japan is considered a major world financial hotspot with the 2nd highest number of millionaires residing there and household consumption expenditure figures exceeding those of most nations. This goes hand in hand with high consumer purchasing power and a demand for high quality produce. Perhaps one of the strongest reasons for investment in Japan is its potential as a gateway to the Asian-Pacific markets. As these markets grow rapidly, the economic integration between countries in the region continues to strengthen. This links to an ownership advantage that HC can achieve.  Entering the Japanese market will allow access to other Asian markets over time and provide economies in both scale and scope. In recent years government policies have become an increasingly important factor affecting FDI (Brewer, 1993). The Japanese government have various foreign investment policies which incentivise investment. Japan, once restrictive of trade, has now shed this image and is attracting increasing levels of FDI. Whereas most national governments focus on financial incentives, the Japanese government follows a 3-step model which provides support for potential investors (Watanabe, 2003). As discussed later in this essay, this type of incentive reduces the need for foreign firms to access local knowledge by means of joint venture (JV) or merger.

Join now!

Knowledge of national cultures is commonly seen as “a prerequisite to the effective entry into new markets” (Chinta, Capar, 2007p.213), and is stated as such in the Scandinavian process model. However, various studies have found no support for this hypothesis (Barkema et al, 1996). It could also be argued that Japan is culturally equidistant between all nations, thus rendering the Scandinavian model redundant in this unique case. Ronen and Shenkar (1985) identified eight culturally homogenous blocks of countries, suggesting that firms benefit more from experiences in other countries within the same block. Japan, on the other hand, was not ...

This is a preview of the whole essay