Presentation Loading … Please wait

Please Press “Enter” to continue the presentation

Creativity BY US

Loaded 100 %

status : standby for execution

GROUP MEMBERS

Rizwan Ashraf

Shahid Iqbal

Mushtaq Hassan

Zeeshan Anwar

Case Analysis Of Chevron

ChevronCompany profile

Rizwan Ashraf

Chevron’s history

1879: CHEVRON began with an oil discovery in north of LOS ANGELES.

1900: Bought by standard oil corporation.

1906: Merged name become SOCAL.

1948: Entered into petrochemical industry.

1984: Merger between standard oil company and gulf oil. As a part of

merger SOCAL changed its name to chevron corporation.

2001: Bought TEXACO for $37.5 billion.

2005: Acquisition of UNOCAL made chevron world’s largest producer of

geothermal energy.

5

A World Class Global Energy CompanyChevron Corporation is an American multinational

energy corporation There business oil, gas, and geothermal energy industries It including

66,000 employees

18 refineries

5 popular consumer brands:

Chevron, Unocal,Texaco ,standard and Caltex

25,000+ service stations

Chevron Corporation is an American multinational

energy corporation There business oil, gas, and geothermal energy industries It including

66,000 employees

18 refineries

5 popular consumer brands:

Chevron, Unocal,Texaco ,standard and Caltex

25,000+ service stations

exploration and production; refining, marketing and transport; chemicals manufacturing and sales power generation

“At the heart of the chevron way is our vision ... to be the global environmental friendly energy company most admired for its people,

partnership and performance”

Proposed Vision

Marketing brands

Chevron Standard Oil Texaco Caltex Unocal

Fuel

Star Mart Extra Mile Redwood Market Town Pantry

Convenience stores

Delo Havoline Revtex Ursa

Lubricants

Techron- Chevron

Clean System

Fuel additives

Major Competitors

Royal Dutch ShellExxonMobilBPConocoPhillips

Input Stage

Shahid Iqbal

Opportunities Weight Rating Weighted Score

1 Increase usage for energy 0.15 4 0.60

2 Increasing price of energy 0.12 3 0.36

3 Increasing propensity of people to spend 0.10 3 0.30

4 Increasing mobility of labor, capital and technology 0.09 2 0.18

5 Demand shifts for renewable energy 0.10 3 0.30

Threats6 Depletion of natural energy resources 0.11 2 0.22

7 Royal Dutch Shell and Exxon is rivalry in the industry 0.08 2 0.16

8 Regulations restricted excessive emission of CO2 0.07 2 0.14

9 The credit crisis and volatile commodity prices of2008

0.10 3 0.30

10 OPEC restrictions, civil wars and hurricanes. 0.08 2 0.16

Total 1.00 2.72

External FACTOR EVALUATION MATRIX

Sr.No Strengths Weight Rating W.Score

1 Spending on alternative energy 3.2 billion since 2002.

0.07 3 0.21

2 Continuous investment in high profile projects to increase oil production.

0.08 3 0.24

3 Outstanding earning $23.9 billion in 2008 0.11 3 0.33

4 Achieve HART energy publishing refiner of the year award in 2009

0.08 4 0.32

5 Investment in 13 power generation projects in Asia and us

0.10 3 0.30

6 4th largest integrated energy company in the world. 0.08 3 0.24

7 Operating in more than 100 countries and with around 25,000 service stations worldwide

0.10 3 0.30

8 Had global refining capacity of more than 2 mm barrel per day.

0.08 3 0.24

Internal FACTOR EVALUATION MATRIX

Weaknesses Weight Rating W.Score

71 % drop in income second quarter of 2009. 0.08 2 0.16

Marketing operations lost $95 million in second quarter of 2009.

0.05 2 0.10

stop drilling new gas wells in US continent. 0.05 2 0.10

51 % decrease in revenue. 0.07 1 0.07

Chemicals – significantly lower margins, lower income from equity.

0.05 2 0.10

Total 1.00 2.71

Internal FACTOR EVALUATION MATRIXInternal FACTOR EVALUATION MATRIX

Critical success factors weight Rating Score Rating Score rating score

Advertising 0.20 3 0.60 3 0.60 3 0.60

Product quality 0.10 3 0.30 4 0.40 2 0.20

Management 0.07 4 0.28 3 0.21 3 0.21

Financial position 0.10 3 0.30 2 0.20 3 0.30

Customer loyalty 0.05 2 0.10 3 0.15 3 0.15

Global expansion 0.20 3 0.60 4 0.80 4 0.80

Market share 0.09 3 0.27 3 0.27 4 0.36

Logistics 0.15 3 0.45 3 0.45 3 0.45

Production capacity 0.04 3 0.12 3 0.12 4 0.16

Total 1.00 3.02 3.20 3.23

SHELLEXXON MOBILCHEVRON

Competitive Profile Matrix

Matching Stage

Zeeshan Anwar

Space Matrix

Financial position Rating Stability position rating

Spending on alternative energy 3.2 billion since 2002.

5 The economic environment is unstable especially in under developing countries.

-5

51 % decrease in revenue. 4 The risk of expanding the business is greater due to natural disasters.

-4

Outstanding earning $23.9 billion in 2008 6 The fluctuation of oil price affects business environment.

-5

Marketing operations lost $95 million in second quarter of 2009.

3

18\4=4.5 -14\3=-4.67

Industry position Competitive position

The demand of energy usage is increasing tremendously.

6 Achieve HART energy publishing refiner of the year award in 2009

-4

High capital investment and the use of technology have created the barriers of entry.

5 Investment in 13 power generation projects in Asia and us

-4

The company has investing for alternative energies.

5 4th largest integrated energy company in the world.

-5

Operating in more than 100 countries and with around 25,000 service stations worldwide

-5

16/3=5.33 -18/4=-4.5

Space Matrix

The External-Internal Matrix

DIVISION REVENUES MILLION $

Revenue %

Profit million $

Profit % Mkt share %

Growth rate %

1.Upstream and gas

1,28,747 47 % 18,187 76 24% 45 %

2.Downstream 1,33,594 49 % 6,222 26 27% 30 %

3.Chemicals 2,617 1 % (239) (1) 20% 5.96 %

4.Power 8,047 3% 239.31 1 30% 32 %

Total 2,73,005 100 23,931 100

Boston Consulting Group (BCG) Matrix

Boston Consulting Group (BCG) Matrix

12

3

4

Decision Stage

Mushtaq Hassan

Opportunities Weight AS TAS AS TAS

Increase usage for energy 0.15 2 0.30 4 0.60

Increasing price of energy 0.12 2 0.24 4 0.48

Increasing propensity of people to spend 0.10 2 0.20 3 0.30

Increasing mobility of labor, capital and technology 0.09 2 0.18 3 0.27

Demand shifts for renewable energy 0.10 4 0.40 3 0.30

ThreatsDepletion of natural energy resources 0.11 2 0.22 3 0.33

Royal Dutch Shell and Exxon is rivalry in the industry 0.08 - - - -

Regulations restricted excessive emission of CO2 0.07 3 0.21 1 0.07

The credit crisis and volatile commodity prices of2008

0.10 - - - -

OPEC restrictions, civil wars and hurricanes. 0.08 2 0.16 1 0.08

Quantitative strategic planning matrix Invest in

solar and wind energy

Invest in biofuel energy

Strengths Weight As TAS AS TAS

1 Spending on alternative energy 3.2 billion since 2002.

0.07 3 0.21 3 0.21

2 Continuous investment in high profile projects to increase oil production.

0.08 - - - -

3 Outstanding earning $23.9 billion in 2008 0.11 2 0.22 4 0.44

4 Achieve HART energy publishing refiner of the year award in 2009

0.08 2 0.16 3 0.24

5 Investment in 13 power generation projects in Asia and us

0.10 - - - -

6 4th largest integrated energy company in the world. 0.08 2 0.16 3 0.24

7 Operating in more than 100 countries and with around 25,000 service stations worldwide

0.10 1 0.10 4 0.40

8 Had global refining capacity of more than 2 mm barrel per day.

0.08 1 0.08 3 0.24

weaknesses

71 % drop in income second quarter of 2009. 0.08 - - - -

Marketing operations lost $95 million in second quarter of 2009.

0.05 - - - -

stop drilling new gas wells in us continent.

0.05 - - - -

51 % decrease in revenue. 0.07 - - - -

Chemicals – significantly lower margins, lower income from equity.

0.05 - - -- -

Total 1.00 2.84 4.20

S # 1= invest in solar and wind energy = 2.84

S# 2= invest in biofuels = 4.20

Recommendations

• Should have to sale its chemical business because it becomes

dog.

• Should invest in wind and solar energy.

•Start exploration of gas wells

•Get help from technology

•Should invest in bio-fuel energy sources.

•Should have to improve ethical operating standards

Thank you……….