Fast Food Restaurant Essays and Research Papers

Instructions for Fast Food Restaurant College Essay Examples

Title: Sociology Observation Paper

  • Total Pages: 4
  • Words: 1547
  • Sources:1
  • Citation Style: APA
  • Document Type: Essay
Essay Instructions: There are two parts for this paper. I want one page for part one, and three pages for part two.

These are the directions:

PART ONE:
Your first step is to actually observe. Follow the directions listed.

1. Go to a public place (like McDonalds/Burger King, park, concert, sporting event, mall) and sit down for a minimum of one hour. Make sure to pick a place that you have either never been or is a version of a place you frequent but is in a different geographic area than you usually frequent. (If you want to observe munity college students, don’t do your observation at Citrus College. You can go to Mt. San Antonio College, or a different college, and observe the quad areas during lunch time, for example.). You can be adventurous with this; go somewhere really different from where you would normally go (please note, however, safety is an issue. Do not go somewhere that either obviously puts you in danger or even makes you feel like you are in danger).

2. As you sit there for at least an hour, observe what the people around you are doing (so obviously you must pick a spot that has a lot of people).

3. Take notes. I expect you to be constantly scribbling while you are there. You can take a few minutes to orient yourself in the beginning, but otherwise you should be always writing something down. Notice I’m not telling you what to write, just write what you observe. You should have at least 2 full written pages of notes. If you have less than 2 pages I would say that you did not gather enough information from your observation to write part 2.

4. Rewrite your notes when you e back home (it’s best to do this immediately; otherwise cryptic notes that you wrote yourself may bee inprehensible when it es time to write your paper).

5. Type your notes up into a sequence form. The form is your choice; it can be either chronological (i.e., at 12:04 pm this happened) or sectional (all of this kind of behavior, then a section about another kind of behavior). Once you have it all nicely typed up MAKE SURE your name is on it at the top. Post by clicking on Turn in assignments link under the Observation Part One heading. This part is worth 10 of the 60 points.

PART TWO:
Here is where the sociology es in. Now you are actually going to label what you observed with actual sociological terms.

1. Reread your original observation notes and your original observation part one.

2. You are now going to retype your original assignment, but this time you are going to apply your sociological knowledge that you have been learning. This part must be written in plete sentences, in paragraph form (not in bullet points), and you will expand on course ideas as they apply to what you observed.

3. I expect you to use SPECIFIC sociological terms and theoretical concepts. By the time this assignment is due you will have read many chapters and have had lectures on them. I expect that you will be able to section out specific examples of different sociological phenomena and label it appropriately.

4. At the end of the paper do a couple of paragraphs paring and contrasting your first draft with this draft. What are the differences (besides the obvious I didn’t know sociology in the beginning) between the two? Do you think your attitude is different? If you had done part one after all of your sociology lessons instead of before, do you think it would have turned out differently, or the same? Why?

5. This part of the assignment is worth 50 points.

Completed papers (not including part 1) should be 3-4 pages, typed, double-spaced, 12-point (Times New Roman font in black ink) with 1” margins.

· Grammar, spelling, and format are important. Be sure to use your spell/grammar check and proof read your work. Proper spelling & grammar are important indicators of a well-prepared paper. Excessive errors will result in a reduction of points.

This is an academic paper, therefore the explanations must be written in formal language (no slang, limit contractions, such as can’t, don’t, won’t).
Late papers will not be accepted. No exceptions.


You can find all the sociological terms in this book "Essentials of Sociology A Down to Earth Approach by James M. Henslin 7th Edition". However, I have an online version one if you want to use. Go to [ http://www.ablongman./mysoclab/ ] and then click the button "MySocLab" under Returning Users. Type in the account " " and the passwords is " w "


OBSERVATION SUGGESTIONS

Fast food restaurant
Coffee house
Bar
Concert
Sporting event
College
Public library
Grocery store
Shopping mall
Cafeteria or food court
Bus station
Church service
Tattoo parlor
Hospital
Airport
A gym
Restaurant
Night club
Casino (bicycle club)
Beach
Santa Monica peer
Venice Beach

[ Order Custom Essay ]

[ View Full Essay ]

Excerpt From Essay:
Sources:

Reference List

Henslin, J.M., (DATE), Essentials of Sociology a Down to Earth Approach by. Henslin 7th Edition, (PUBLISHER).

Cohen, R. And Kennedy, P. 2000, Global Sociology, MacMillan, London.

WWLTV.com, 2008, found online at: http://www.wwltv.com/local/stories/wwl010208tpbuffetfight__.1c12476.html, retrieved 29 January 2008.

Order Custom Essay On This Topic

Title: Explain the causes for the popularity of fast food restaurants

  • Total Pages: 3
  • Words: 1101
  • References:3
  • Citation Style: APA
  • Document Type: Research Paper
Essay Instructions: Explain the causes for the popularity of fast food restaurants.

Write a cause and effect essay, 750 - 1,000 words.

[ Order Custom Essay ]

[ View Full Essay ]

Excerpt From Essay:
References:

Works Cited

Barboza, David. (5 Aug 2003). "Fast Food Industry Zeroes in on Children

International Herald Tribune. Retrieved 3 Apr 2007 at http://www.rense.com/general39/fast.htm

Schlosser, Eric. (3 Sept 1998). "Fast-Food Nation: The True Cost of America's Diet."

Rolling Stone. Issue 794. Retrieved 3 Apr 2007 at http://www.mcspotlight.org/media/press/rollingstone1.html

Supersize Me." (2005). Directed by Morgan Spurlock.

White, Sarah. (2006). "Fast Food: is Bigger Better? Retrieved 3 Apr 2007 at http://googolplex.cuna.org/21373/ajsmall/story.html?doc_id=691

Order Custom Essay On This Topic

Title: Prepare a paper 800 words discussing case incorporating answers questions It important address questions presented Please APA format The paper references include text book internet sources books professional journals resources

  • Total Pages: 3
  • Words: 1230
  • Works Cited:5
  • Citation Style: APA
  • Document Type: Essay
Essay Instructions: Prepare a paper (800 words) discussing the case and incorporating answers to the questions below. It is important to address each of the questions presented. Please use APA format. The paper must contain at least five references, which may include your course text book, internet sources, books and professional journals or other appropriate resources.
Read the case study ?Burger King Beefs Up Global Operations? at the end of Chapter 12 of your course textbook. Incorporate your analysis responses to the following questions.
1. What is Burger King?s core competency? How does it relate to its chosen strategy?
2. How would you explain how Burger King has decided to configure and coordinate its value chain? Which of Burger King?s value chain activities create the most value for the company?
3. Burger King Globally expanded later than its main fast food competitor. What advantages and disadvantages has this created?
4. When entering another country, discuss the advantages and disadvantages that an international restaurant company, specifically Burger King, would have in comparison with a local company in that market.
5. About two-thirds of Burger King?s restaurants and revenues are in its American region(United States and Canada) and one-third elsewhere. Should this relationship change? If so, why and how?
6. The case mentions that Burger King prefers to enter countries with large numbers of youth and shopping centers. Why do you think these conditions would be advantageous?
7. How has Burger King?s headquarters location influenced its international expansion? Has this location strengthened or weakened its global competitive position?
8. As CEO of Burger King, what tools and strategies would you use when deciding on possible future locations for the company.
9. What do the implications of the challenges identified in the case have for Burger King?s strategy today and in the future?


Textbook reference: Daniels, J. Radebaugh, L., & Sullivan, D. (2011). International business, environment & operations (13th ed). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Case Study:
Burger King Beefs Up Global Operations
Burger King is the world?s largest flame-broiled fast food restaurant chain. As of mid-2009, it operated about 12,000 restaurants in all 50 states and in 74 countries and U.S. territories worldwide through a combination of company-owned and franchised operations, which together employed nearly 400,000 people worldwide. Only Yum Brands (A&W, KFC, Long John Silver, Pizza Hut, and Taco Bell), McDonald?s, and Subway with 36,000, 32,000, and 28,000 restaurants, respectively, were larger. Given that Yum Brands has no hamburger units, Burger King is second in the fast food hamburger restaurant segment/market. Burger King plans to increase the number of net operating units by 3 to 4 percent per year in the near future, with most of that increase coming in international operations.
Two major ways in which Burger King differentiates itself from competitors are the way it cooks hamburgers-by its flame-broiled method as opposed to grills that fry-and the options it offers customers as to how they want their burgers. This latter distinction has been popularized with the ?have it your way? theme. About two-thirds of Burger King?s restaurants are in the United States, and its U.S. and Canadian operations accounted for 69 percent of its $2.54 billion revenue in fiscal 2009. The geographic distribution of Burger King?s restaurants is shown on Map 12.2. Although the company begin in 1954 by offering just burgers, fries, milk shakes, and sodas, the menu has expanded to include breakfast as well as various chicken, fish, and salad offerings. Nevertheless, burgers remain the mainstay of the company, and 2007 marked the 50th anniversary of the Whopper sandwich, which is considered Burger King?s signature product.
Burger King has also differentiated itself with some innovative advertising campaigns through the years, such as its use of a figure man who is the Burger ?King.? Recently, the company ran a ?Whopper Virgins? campaign in which it assembled people who had never tasted a burger-such as from remote parts of Greenland, Thailand, and Transylvania-to participate in a comparative taste test between Whopper sandwiches and Big Macs. The Burger King logo has changed slightly through the years; for example, going from two buns separating a burger to two buns separating the company?s name. Yet it has always been displayed and recognized globally, as illustrated in the photo of a restaurant in Taiwan and Mandarin lettering.
A Bit of History
Burger King can trace its roots to 1954, when it started as InstaBurger King. In 2006, the company went public, and since then the company has operated independently. During its first five years, the private company grew to five restaurants, all in the Miami, Florida area. In 1959, the name was changed to Burger King, and it began domestic franchising. In 1967, Pillsbury, which had several other retail food groups-such as Bennigan?s, Steak and Ale, and Godfather?s Pizza-bought Burger King, which by then had 274 restaurants. During the first few years of Pillsbury?s ownership, franchising increased substantially. Then in 1989 Pillsbury got out of the restaurant business and sold Burger King to the British company Grand Metropolitan, which then converted most of its Wimpy restaurants in the United Kingdom to Burger King restaurants. Grand Metropolitan merged with Guinness in 1997 to form Diageo, and Diageo divested itself of restaurant operations in 2002 when it sold Burger King to a consortium of private equity firms controlled by TPG Capital, Bain Capital partners, and the Goldman Sachs Funds. In May 2006, Burger King consummated its initial public offering, becoming a publicly traded company listed on the New York Stock Exchange. The years of transformed ownership took a toll on Burger King as emphases changed and the company?s interests were sometimes made secondary to those of its parent company. For instance, in the period leading into the twenty-first century, some of Burger King?s franchisees experienced financial problems. Despite Burger King?s evolving ownership, the company did expand internationally. In the early 1960s, it entered the Bahamas and Puerto Rico. In the 1970s, it entered markets in Europe, Asia, and Latin America. While some of these moves turned out to be highly successful, a few were not. It entered and then retreated from operations in such countries as Columbia, France, Japan, and Oman. (We will see later in the discussion that Burger King has reentered some of these markets.) Much of Burger King?s early international forays came about either because someone in another country approached Burger King or because someone in the company was familiar with a particular country and thought it would offer opportunities. Two reasons have been prevalent in the decision to leave a market: (1) the franchisee does not perform adequately, such as not investing sufficiently in the business or not making royalty payments; and (2) the market turned out to be too small to develop slaughterhouse and beef grinding facilities. Over time, especially since the company went public, Burger King has taken more systematic approach toward restaurant expansion. While it still sees substantial growth opportunities within the United States, it sees the United States as a mature market for fast food, especially for hamburgers, in comparison with many foreign countries. In looking for new countries to enter, Burger King looks most favorably at those with large populations (especially for young people), high consumption of beef, availability of capital to franchisees for growth, a safe pro-business environment, growth in shopping centers, and availability of a potential franchisee with experience and resources.
Overall, Burger King has expanded internationally later than its primary rival competitor McDonald?s. This has resulted in both advantages and disadvantages. On the other hand, later entry is a disadvantage in very small markets because there may be few adequate suppliers. For instance, there may be only one slaughterhouse, and the owners may be unwilling to work with more than one customer. On the other hand, in larger markets, such as in the BRICs, being a later entrant may be advantageous because the earlier entrants have built demand for fast food and have created a supply infrastructure. In some later-entry markets, Burger King has been able to concentrate almost entirely on emphasizing its product (have it your way, good taste of flame-broiled burgers), without incurring the early developmental cost. For instance, in Latin America and the Caribbean, McDonald?s and Burger King compete in 27 country markets, with Burger King currently leading McDonald?s in the number of restaurants in 15 of those markets. However keep in mind that local companies also learn from the successes of foreign fast food companies, and they sometime alter their menus and flavorings to appeal to local tastes. Some notable examples are Bembos in Peru, Mr. Bigg?s in Nigeria, Pollo Campero in Guatemala, and Quick in France.
Outside of Burger King?s American group (United States and Canada), 37.0 percent of the countries and 24.6 percent of the restaurants are in the Latin American and Caribbean group, yet these countries accounted for only 13.5 percent of the non-American group revenue in fiscal 2009. This is largely because many of these countries have very small populations, such as the Cayman Islands, Aruba, and Saint Lucia. So why did Burger King develop a presence in these markets, even though at this writing it is not in countries with much bigger populations, such as India, Pakistan, Nigeria, Russia and South Africa? The answer is largely due to a location factor. Burger King remains headquartered in Miami, which is often called the capital of Latin America. Because so many people from Latin America and the Caribbean come to or through Miami, Burger King?s reputation spilled over to that area early on. This simplified gaining brand recognition and acceptance. Further, the nearness of the Latin American and Caribbean countries to Miami enhances the ability of Burger King?s management to visit these countries and for franchisees to visit Burger King?s headquarters. In 2008, Burger King opened its thousandth restaurant in the Latin American and Caribbean region. Although Burger King prefers to operate in markets through franchising, doing so is sometimes initially difficult because suppliers and prospective franchisees do not know the company well enough. If such a market looks sufficiently attractive, Burger King will enter with its own operations. (Overall, Burger King owns 12 percent of its restaurants and franchises the rest.) By owning, Burger King demonstrates market commitment. For instance, there may only be one meat-processing plant, and the owners may otherwise be reluctant to invest in added capacity or the processing of ground beef. Further, if the country turns out to be as attractive as anticipated, then the owned operations may be more profitable for Burger King than royalties received from franchisees.
Throughout its long history, the company has consistently focused on expanding its global portfolio into new and existing markets. Since becoming a publicly traded company, it has entered a number of markets for the first time, including Indonesia, Egypt, Hong Kong, Suriname, and the Czech Republic. It has also re-entered several markets that it had earlier abandoned, including Japan, Curacao, Uruguay, and Columbia. Let?s take a look at the decision to re-enter Columbia.
Re-Entering Columbia
Burger King entered the Columbian market in the early 1980s but pulled out after several years of operating in the market because it was not allowed to expatriate royalty payments. In addition to the problem of expatriation of royalty payments, Columbia was going through a prolonged period of economic and political turmoil. Also, at the turn of the century, the beef industry suffered from foot-and-mouth disease outbreaks and cattle rushing by guerilla groups. These conditions combined to make Columbia a less attractive market for fast food restaurants.
Burger King re-entered Columbia in 2008. By this time, Colombian cities were considered safe for people to go out to eat. The beef health and rustling problems were largely under control. (Currently, Colombian accounts for about 2 percent of global beef production.) With about 44 million people, Columbia is the third most populated country in Latin America, after Brazil and Mexico. The Colombian peso was strong and, when coupled with a rise in two-income families, there was more disposable income to spend on eating out. In 2005, about 77 percent of the population was classified as urban, and Colombia boasted some large cities such as Barranquilla, Bogota, Cali, and Medellin-all with large and recently built shopping centers. About 31 percent of the population was under 15 years of age. Although incomes were very unevenly distributed, the richest 20 percent of the population (almost 9 million people) had a per capita expenditure in 2007 of over U.S. $17,000.
While all the above factors were favorable, there were some negative things to consider. From a political standpoint, there were potential problems with leftist-leaning governments in the neighboring countries of Ecuador and Venezuela, which could support a resurgence of political unrest. Economic problems in the United States from the global recession and in Venezuela from fluctuating oil prices could cause Colombians to sales because those two countries comprise half of the country?s export earnings. Further, about 2 percent of Colombian GDP in 2007 came from remittances of Colombians working abroad, mainly in Spain. These were at risk because Spain was hard hit by the global recession. In effect, economic downturns could hit sales of fast foods. Burger King learned this lesson in Mexico and Germany, Which in response caused the company to tactically develop a more relevant value proposition, including value meals.
Overall, though, the Colombian situation looked bright. Burger King signed an agreement with KINCO for franchise rights to Medellin, Cali, and northern Colombia. KINCO is a well-established Colombian company with restaurant experience. Burger King signed a second franchise agreement with Alsea, a Mexican company, for rights to Bogota. Alsea owns 75 percent of the Colombian operations of Domino?s Pizza and operates Burger King restaurants in Mexico. Thus both of these companies seem very compatible with Burger King?s criteria for selecting franchise operators with capital and restaurant experience. Although Burger King?s operations in Colombia are still in the early stages of development at the time of this writing, Burger King?s management is optimistic about the future of Colombia and its own future therein.
Brazil as Model for Entry into Russia
In our ?Meet the BRICs? case in Chapter 4, we explored why so many companies have been putting emphasis on Brazil, Russia, India, and China. Burger King is no exception. The possibilities in these four countries are simply too great to ignore. Burger King opened its first restaurants in two of BRICs, Brazil and China, almost simultaneously, in November and June 2004 respectively. By then, many foreign fast food franchisors had entered the markets, many without success. For the most part, failure occurred because of underestimating what it would take to succeed in such a large country. However, Burger King?s success in Brazil has led it to use the Brazilian experience as a model for entry into Russia, which is expected in the near future.
On the one hand, Burger King?s had a recognition advantage in Brazil because thousands of Brazilians fly into Florida, where Burger King restaurants abound. In addition there are about 300,000 Brazilians living in the South Florida area, most of whom have relatives back in Brazil. On the other hand, the failure of many prior fast food entrants into Brazil made potential suppliers apprehensive.
By observing the mistakes of other fast food chains, Burger King forged a strategy that has proved successful. In fact, for the last few years, Brazil has been one of Burger King?s fastest growing markets. By mid-2009, it had 68 restaurants in Brazil. This strategy can be summarized in five parts: (1) develop an infrastructure before putting in restaurants, (2) develop a local management team, (3) focus development in major cities and adjacent geographies with established shopping mall location, prevalent in Brazil?s largest cities, instead of the whole country, (4) establish a local office, and (5) support continuous development and the use of local suppliers that meet Burger King?s global specifications.
For smaller markets or those where all the restaurants are franchised, Burger King does not set up a regional restaurant support center or local headquarters. However, management deemed a Brazilian office necessary because of Brazil?s size (in both area and population), its language barrier (Portuguese), and the magnitude of investment that suppliers and franchisees would eventually need to make. At first, the office served to demonstrate the company?s market commitment and to handle early supply-chain procurement and management. The result was that Burger King was able to initially secure about 80 percent of its supplies within Brazil and has since upped that figure to over 90 percent. By focusing initially on Sao Paulo, Brazil?s largest city, Burger King was able to develop economies in its marketing and distribution. Its subsequent expansion has focused on cities and states near Sao Paulo. Finally, by building a staff of Portuguese-speaking Brazilians, the company showed its commitment to the country and developed a competency to deal with external stakeholders.
Burger King?s success in Brazil has led its management to follow the same strategy for expansion into Russia. It has offices in Moscow, where initial penetration is planned. In fact, duplication of the successful Brazilian strategy may be even more important for Russia because Burger King lacks the same pre-entry brand recognition that it had in Brazil.
The Future
At this point, Burger King has many opportunities for expansion, such as moving into new countries and growing operations within markets where it is already operating. Despite its international growth, it is still in less that 40 percent of the world?s countries. Thus, it faces the challenge of deciding where the best locations are for placing its future emphasis.

[ Order Custom Essay ]

[ View Full Essay ]

Excerpt From Essay:
Works Cited:

References

Brock, Tod. (2012). Fast food French fry fray: McDonald's vs. Burger King vs. Wendy's.

Serious Eats. Retrieved at: http://aht.seriouseats.com/archives/2012/02/fast-food-french-fries-taste-test-mcdonalds-burger-king-wendys.html

Brown, Abram. (2012). Burger King is going public again. Forbes. Retrieved at:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/abrambrown/2012/04/04/burger-king-going-public-again-through-1-4b-deal-involving-activitist-investor-bill-ackman/

Jennings, Lisa. (2012). Burger King eager to take on McDonald's. Nation's Restaurant News.

Retrieved at: http://nrn.com/article/burger-king-eager-take-mcdonald%E2%80%99s

Russell, Mallory. (2012). How Burger King went from McDonald's greatest rival to total train wreck. Business Insider. Retrieved at: http://www.businessinsider.com/how-burger-king-went-from-mcdonalds-greatest-rival-to-total-train-wreck-2012-4?op=1#ixzz2BIrWka3f

Walker, Elaine. (2012). Burger King announces plans to open 1,000 restaurants in China.

Miami Herald. Retrieved at: http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/06/15/2851528/burger-king-announces-plans-to.html#storylink=cpy

Order Custom Essay On This Topic

Title: Burger King Case Study

  • Total Pages: 5
  • Words: 1905
  • Bibliography:5
  • Citation Style: MLA
  • Document Type: Research Paper
Essay Instructions: Prepare a paper (700 to 1,050 words) discussing the case and incorporating answers to the questions below. It is important to address each of the questions presented. Therefore, the APA rules for formatting, quoting, paraphrasing, citing, and listing of sources are to be followed. The Reference List is not included in the required paper length. Your paper must contain at least five references, which may include your course textbook, internet sources, books, and professional journals or other appropriate resources. Please do not copy or plagiarize others materials. All papers are electronically scanned by SafeAssign. Significant deduction of points may result when copying and plagiarism is evident.
Read the case study “Burger King Beefs Up Global Operations”:
Burger King Beefs Up Global Operations
Burger King is the world’s largest flame- broiled fast food restaurant chain. 65 As of mid- 2009, it operated about 12,000 restaurants in all 50 states and in 74 countries and U. S. territories worldwide through a combination of company- owned and franchised operations, which together employed nearly 400,000 people worldwide. Only Yum Brands ( A& W, KFC, Long John Silver, Pizza Hut, and Taco Bell), McDonald’s, and Subway, with 36,000, 32,000, and 28,000 restaurants, respectively, were larger. Given that Yum Brands has no hamburger units, Burger King is second in the fast food hamburger restaurant segment/ market. Burger King plans to increase the number of net operating units by 3 to 4 percent per year in the near future, with most of that increase coming in international operations. Two major ways in which Burger King differentiates itself from competitors are the way it cooks hamburgers??" by its flame- broiled method as opposed to grills that fry??" and the options it offers customers as to how they want their burgers. This latter distinction has been popularized with the “ have it your way” theme. About two- thirds of Burger King’s restaurants are in the United States, and its U. S. and Canadian operations accounted for 69 percent of its $ 2.54 billion revenue in fiscal 2009. The geographic distribution of Burger King’s restaurants is shown on Map 12.2. Although the company began in 1954 by offering just burgers, fries, milk shakes, and sodas, the menu has expanded to include breakfast as well as various chicken, fish, and salad offerings. Nevertheless, burgers remain the mainstay of the company, and 2007 marked the 50th anniversary of the Whopper sandwich, which is considered Burger King’s signature product. Burger King has also differentiated itself with some innovative advertising campaigns through the years, such as its use of a figure of a man who is the Burger “ King.” Recently, the company ran a “ Whopper Virgins” campaign in which it assembled people who had never tasted a burger??" such as from remote parts of Greenland, Thailand, and Transylvania??" to participate in a comparative taste test between Whopper sandwiches and Big Macs. The Burger King logo has changed slightly through the years; for example, going from two buns separating a burger to two buns separating the company’s name. Yet it has always been displayed and recognizable globally, as illustrated in the photo of a restaurant in Taiwan with Mandarin lettering. A Bit of History Burger King can trace its roots to 1954, when it started as InstaBurger King. In 2006, the company went public, and since then the company has operated independently. During its first five years, the private company grew to five restaurants, all in the Miami, Florida, area. In 1959, the name was changed to Burger King, and it began domestic franchising. In 1967, Pillsbury, which had several other retail food groups??" such as Bennigan’s, Steak and Ale, and Godfather’s Pizza??" bought Burger King, which by then had 274 restaurants. During the first few years of Pillsbury’s ownership, franchising increased substantially. Then in 1989 Pillsbury got out of the restaurant business and sold Burger King to the British company Grand Metropolitan, which then converted most of its Wimpy restaurants in the United Kingdom to Burger King restaurants. Grand Metropolitan merged with Guinness in 1997 to form Diageo, and Diageo divested itself of restaurant operations in 2002 when it sold Burger King to a consortium of private equity firms controlled by TPG Capital, Bain Capital Partners, and the Goldman Sachs Funds. In May 2006, Burger King consummated its initial public offering, becoming a publicly traded company listed on the New York Stock Exchange. The years of transformed ownership took a toll on Burger King as emphases changed and the company’s interests were sometimes made secondary to those of its parent company. For instance, in the period leading into the twenty- first century, some of Burger King’s franchisees experienced financial problems. Despite Burger King’s evolving ownership, the company did expand internationally. In the early 1960s, it entered the Bahamas and Puerto Rico. In the 1970s, it entered markets in Europe, Asia, and Latin America. While some of these moves turned out to be highly successful, a few were not. It entered and then retreated from operations in such countries as Colombia, France, Japan, and Oman. ( We will see in later discussion that Burger King has re-entered some of these markets.) Much of Burger King’s early international forays came about either because someone in another country approached Burger King or because someone in the company was familiar with a particular country and thought it would offer opportunities. Two reasons have been prevalent in the decision to leave a market: ( 1) the franchisee does not perform adequately, such as not investing sufficiently in the business or not making royalty payments; and ( 2) the market turned out to be too small to support the necessary infra-structure, such as being too small to develop slaughterhouse and beef grinding facilities. Over time, especially since the company went public, Burger King has taken a more systematic approach toward restaurant expansion. While it still sees substantial growth opportunities within the United States, it sees the United States as a mature market for fast food, especially for hamburgers, in comparison with many foreign countries. In looking for new countries to enter, Burger King looks most favorably at those with large populations ( especially of young people), high consumption of beef, availability of capital to franchisees for growth, a safe pro- business environment, growth in shopping centers, and availability of a potential franchisee with experience and resources. Overall, Burger King has expanded internationally later than its primary rival competitor, McDonald’s. This has resulted in both advantages and disadvantages. On the one hand, later entry is a disadvantage in very small markets because there may be few adequate suppliers. For instance, there may be only one slaughterhouse, and the owners may be unwilling to work with more than one customer. On the other hand, in larger markets, such as in the BRICs, being a later entrant may be advantageous because the earlier entrants have built demand for fast food and have created a supply infrastructure. In some later- entry markets, Burger King has been able to concentrate almost entirely on emphasizing its product ( have it your way, good taste of flame- broiled burgers), without incurring the early developmental costs. For instance, in Latin America and the Caribbean, McDonald’s and Burger King compete in 27 country markets, with Burger King currently leading McDonald’s in the number of restaurants in 15 of those markets. However, keep in mind that local companies also learn from the successes of foreign fast food companies, and they sometimes alter their menus and flavorings to appeal to local tastes. Some notable examples are Bembos in Peru, Mr. Bigg’s in Nigeria, Pollo Campero in Guatemala, and Quick in France. Outside of Burger King’s Americas group ( United States and Canada), 37.0 percent of the countries and 24.6 percent of the restaurants are in the Latin American and Caribbean group, yet these countries accounted for only 13.5 percent of the non- Americas group revenue in fiscal 2009. This is largely because many of these countries have very small populations, such as the Cayman Islands, Aruba, and Saint Lucia. So why did Burger King develop a presence in these markets, even though at this writing it is not in countries with much bigger populations, such as India, Pakistan, Nigeria, Russia, and South Africa? The answer is largely due to a location factor. Burger King remains headquartered in Miami, which is often called the capital of Latin America. Because so many people from Latin America and the Caribbean come to or through Miami, Burger King’s reputation spilled over to that area early on. This simplified gaining brand recognition and acceptance. Further, the nearness of the Latin American and Caribbean countries to Miami enhances the ability of Burger King’s management to visit these countries and for franchisees to visit Burger King’s headquarters. In 2008, Burger King opened its thousandth restaurant in the Latin American and Caribbean region. Although Burger King prefers to operate in markets through franchising, doing so is sometimes initially difficult because suppliers and prospective franchisees do not know the company well enough. If such a market looks sufficiently attractive, Burger King will enter with its owned operations. ( Overall, Burger King owns 12 percent of its restaurants and franchises the rest.) By owning, Burger King demonstrates market commitment. For instance, there may only be one meat- processing plant, and the owners may otherwise be reluctant to invest in added capacity or the processing of ground beef. Further, if the country turns out to be as attractive as anticipated, then the owned operations may be more profitable for Burger King than royalties received from franchisees. Throughout its long history, the company has consistently focused on expanding its global portfolio into new and existing markets. Since becoming a publicly traded company, it has entered a number of markets for the first time, including Indonesia, Egypt, Hong Kong, Suriname, and the Czech Republic. It has also re- entered several markets that it had earlier abandoned, including Japan, Curacao, Uruguay, and Colombia. Let’s take a look at the decision to re- enter Colombia. Re- Entering Colombia Burger King entered the Colombian market in the early 1980s but pulled out after several years of operating in the market because it was not allowed to expatriate royalty payments. In addition to the problem of expatriation of royalty payments, Colombia was going through a prolonged period of economic and political turmoil. Also, at the turn of the century, the beef industry suf-fered from foot- and- mouth disease outbreaks and cattle rustling by guerilla groups. These con-ditions combined to make Colombia a less attractive market for fast food restaurants. Burger King re- entered Colombia in 2008. By this time, Colombian cities were considered safe for people to go out to eat. The beef health and rustling problems were largely under control. ( Currently, Colombia accounts for about 2 percent of global beef production.) With about 44 million people, Colombia is the third most populated country in Latin America, after Brazil and Mexico. The Colombian peso was strong and, when coupled with a rise in two-income families, there was more disposable income to spend on eating out. In 2005, about 77 percent of the population was classified as urban, and Colombia boasted some large cities such as Barranquilla, Bogotá, Cali, and Medellin??" all with large and recently built shop-ping centers. About 31 percent of the population was under 15 years of age. Although incomes were very unevenly distributed, the richest 20 percent of the population ( almost 9 million people) had a per capita expenditure in 2007 of over U. S. $ 17,000. While all the above factors were favorable, there were some negative things to consider. From a political standpoint, there were potential problems with leftist- leaning governments in the neighboring countries of Ecuador and Venezuela, which could support a resurgence of political unrest. Economic problems in the United States from the global recession and in Venezuela from fluctuating oil prices could cause Colombia to lose sales because those two countries comprise half of the country’s export earnings. Further, about 2 percent of Colombian GDP in 2007 came from remittances of Colombians working abroad, mainly in Spain. These were at risk because Spain was hard hit by the global recession. In effect, economic downturns could hit sales of fast foods. Burger King learned this lesson in Mexico and Germany, which in response caused the company to tactically develop a more relevant value proposition, including value meals. Overall, though, the Colombian situation looked bright. Burger King signed an agreement with KINCO for franchise rights to Medellin, Cali, and northern Colombia. KINCO is a well- established Colombian company with restaurant experience. Burger King signed a second franchise agreement with Alsea, a Mexican company, for rights to Bogotá. Alsea owns 75 percent of the Colombian operation of Domino’s Pizza and operates Burger King restaurants in Mexico. Thus both of these companies seem very compatible with Burger King’s criteria for selecting franchise operators with capital and restaurant experience. Although Burger King’s operations in Colombia are still in the early stages of development at the time of this writing, Burger King’s management is optimistic about the future of Colombia and its own future therein. Brazil as Model for Entry into Russia In our “ Meet the BRICs” case in Chapter 4, we explored why so many companies have been putting emphasis on Brazil, Russia, India, and China. Burger King is no exception. The possibilities in these four countries are simply too great to ignore. Burger King opened its first restaurants in two of the BRICs, Brazil and China, almost simultaneously, in November and June 2004 respectively. By then, many foreign fast food franchisors had entered the markets, many without success. For the most part, failure occurred because of underestimating what it would take to succeed in such a large country. However, Burger King’s success in Brazil has led it to use the Brazilian experience as a model for entry into Russia, which is expected in the near future. On the one hand, Burger King had a recognition advantage in Brazil because thousands of Brazilians fly into Florida, where Burger King restaurants abound. In addition there are about 300,000 Brazilians living in the South Florida area, most of whom have relatives back in Brazil. On the other hand, the failure of many prior fast food entrants into Brazil made potential suppliers apprehensive. By observing the mistakes of other fast food chains, Burger King forged a strategy that has proved successful. In fact, for the last few years, Brazil has been one of Burger King’s fastest growing markets. By mid- 2009, it had 68 restaurants in Brazil. This strategy can be summarized in five parts: ( 1) develop an infrastructure before putting in restaurants, ( 2) develop a local management team, ( 3) focus development on major cities and adjacent geographies with established shopping mall location, prevalent in Brazil’s largest cities, instead of the whole country, ( 4) establish a local office, and ( 5) support continuous development and the use of local suppliers that meet Burger King’s global specifications. For smaller markets or those where all the restaurants are franchised, Burger King does not set up a regional restaurant support center or local headquarters. However, management deemed a Brazilian office necessary because of Brazil’s size ( in both area and population), its language barrier ( Portuguese), and the magnitude of investment that suppliers and franchisees would eventually need to make. At first, the office served to demonstrate the company’s market commitment and to handle early supply- chain procurement and management. The result was that Burger King was able to initially secure about 80 percent of its supplies within Brazil and has since upped that figure to over 90 percent. By focusing initially on São Paulo, Brazil’s largest city, Burger King was able to develop economies in its marketing and distribution. Its subsequent expansion has focused on cities and states near São Paulo. Finally, by building a staff of Portuguese- speaking Brazilians, the company showed its commitment to the country and developed a competency to deal with external stakeholders. Burger King’s success in Brazil has led its management to follow the same strategy for expansion into Russia. It has offices in Moscow, where initial penetration is planned. In fact, duplication of the successful Brazilian strategy may be even more important for Russia because Burger King lacks the same pre- entry brand recognition that it had in Brazil. The Future At this point, Burger King has many opportunities for expansion, such as moving into new countries and growing operations within markets where it is already operating. Despite its international growth, it is still in less than 40 percent of the world’s countries. Thus, it faces the challenge of deciding where the best locations are for placing its future emphasis.

Incorporate into your analysis responses to the following questions. You should make sure to incorporate core concepts from your reading assignment.
1. What is Burger King’s core competency? How does it relate to its chosen strategy?
2. How would you explain how Burger King has decided to configure and coordinate its value chain? Which of Burger King’s value chain activities create the most value for the company?
3. Burger King globally expanded later than its main fast food competitor. What advantages and disadvantages has this created?
4. When entering another country, discuss the advantages and disadvantages that an international restaurant company, specifically Burger King, would have in comparison with a local company in that market.
5. About two-thirds of Burger King’s restaurants and revenues are in its Americas region ( United States and Canada) and one-third elsewhere. Should this relationship change? If so, why and how?
6. The case mentions that Burger King prefers to enter countries with large numbers of youth and shopping centers. Why do you think these conditions would be advantageous?
7. How has Burger King’s headquarters location influenced its international expansion? Has this location strengthened or weakened its global competitive position?
8. As CEO of Burger King, what tools and strategies would you use when deciding on possible future locations for the company.
9. What do the implications of the challenges identified in the case have for Burger King’s strategy today and in the future?
Please use this reference as one of the five
References
Daniels, J., Radebaugh, L., & Sullivan, D. (2011). International business, environment &
operations (13th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall., 465-470.

There are faxes for this order.

[ Order Custom Essay ]

[ View Full Essay ]

Excerpt From Essay:
Bibliography:

References

Daniels, J., Radebaugh, L., & Sullivan, D. (2011). International business, environment & operations (13th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall., 465-470.

Geert Hofstede, & Robert R. McCrae. (2004). Personality and Culture Revisited: Linking Traits and Dimensions of Culture. Cross - Cultural Research, 38(1), 52-88.

Guerrero, A.. (2010, October). Brazil. Global Finance, 24(9), 18.

Parasuraman, A., Berry, Leonard L., & Zeithaml, Valarie A.. (1991). Refinement and Reassessment of the SERVQUAL Scale. Journal of Retailing, 67(4), 420.

Inbar Pizanti, & Miri Lerner. (2003). Examining control and autonomy in the franchisor-franchisee relationship. International Small Business Journal, 21(2), 131.

Hong Qin, Victor R. Prybutok, & Qilan Zhao. (2010). Perceived service quality in fast-food restaurants: empirical evidence from China. The International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 27(4), 424-437.

Taylor, S., & Lyon, P. (1995). Paradigm lost: The rise and fall of McDonaldization. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 7(2), 64-64.

Terry, A., & Forrest, H.. (2008). Where's the Beef? Why Burger King Is Hungry Jack's in Australia and Other Complications in Building a Global Franchise Brand. Northwestern Journal of International Law & Business, 28(2), 171-213.

Thomadsen, R.. (2007). Product Positioning and Competition: The Role of Location in the Fast Food Industry. Marketing Science, 26(6), 792-804.

Order Custom Essay On This Topic
Request A Custom Essay On This Topic Request A Custom Essay
Testimonials:
“I really do appreciate HelpMyEssay.com. I'm not a good writer and the service really gets me going in the right direction. The staff gets back to me quickly with any concerns that I might have and they are always on time.’’ Tiffany R
“I have had all positive experiences with HelpMyEssay.com. I will recommend your service to everyone I know. Thank you!’’ Charlotte H
“I am finished with school thanks to HelpMyEssay.com. They really did help me graduate college.’’ Bill K