kfc_thailand

*Views expressed in this report are those of the authorsInternational Management III KFC Thailand Group Assignment Nandini Bhatia Salome (Man Wing Ma) Alice Jordan Chani Van Der Merwe Word Count: 4 397 1 Contents Page Executive Summary Page 3 Introduction Page 5 Similarities and Differences Page 6 Competitors and Current Industry Trends Page 12 Internal and External Analysis Page 15 Strengths and Weaknesses Page 16 Opportunities and Threats Page 20 Realistic Solutions Page 25 Conclusion Page 27 Appendix Page 29 Reference List Page 30 2 Executive Summary This following report analyses the KFC subsidiary in Thailand. KFC is based in the US with more than 300 franchises in Thailand. While assessing the similarities and differences in the two cultures, we found that Thailand and the US have very little in common. KFC is the third largest fast-food restaurant in the world but it does face a substantial and growing number of competitors. At present, its main competitors in the fast food industry are McDonalds and Domino’s Pizza. However, in the future, KFC will face more competition from full-service restaurants as they are starting to increase in popularity. Nevertheless, KFC is still a market leader in terms of chicken and has reputed itself as being one of the most desired places to work in Thailand. KFC adopts a decentralized regional structure division where managers run operations according to the country’s culture, political and economic situation. Doing so enables KFC Thailand more flexibility while still staying within the global guidance of the parent company. A drawback of this structure is the possibility that communication flow is not as efficient and ensuring control and consistency of all foreign and local operations may cause additional expenditures. KFC Thailand has many opportunities in terms of expansion and penetration into other target groups not yet exploited. Marketing campaigns that publicizes its corporate and social responsibility could improve its brand image. 3 offer financial evidence to support investment decisions in Thailand. KFC Thailand does face certain threats such as the bird flu condition. the political instability. the food crisis and potential new competitors.Nonetheless. 4 . and use reminder advertising to ensure that their business will continue to grow. we have recommended that KFC takes corrective actions such as expanding its menu. To this. taking corrective actions towards current problems and proactive actions towards potential threats. owning more than 11. U. with a view to maximizing KFC Thailand’s competitive advantages.S. KFC is the world’s largest chicken restaurant chain. Pizza Hut. opportunities and threats will be discussed. implements a multibranding strategy which brings KFC. is run by PepsiCo. Taco Bell and A&W. By maintaining high quality food and customer service. KFC is the leader in the quick-service restaurant industry in Thailand The aim of this report is to analyse KFC Thailand. Finally. Currently. called Yum! Restaurants. and Thailand. according to KFC Thailand’s internal capabilities and external environment. Inc.S. their cultural similarities and differences will be discussed. 5 . KFC operates 305 franchises in Bangkok and 56 upcountry provinces across the nation.. In order to understand the cultures of the U. weaknesses. Thirdly. Next. some recommendations will be made.Introduction KFC Corporation. PepsiCo. All-American Food together under one corporate roof. Long John Silver’s.A. its strengths. KFC’s competitors and the current trends will be explored so as to understand its position in the market. based in Kentucky.000 restaurants in more than 80 countries. The US operates under common law hence contracts are longer as it needs to encompass all aspects of the business. 2008 The religious make-up of the country is: Religious Groups in the US in 2007 12. APEC.0% 4.Similarities and Differences between the US and Thailand The United States of America (US) The US is the world’s most powerful nation state with a stable economy and plays an active part in many trading blocks such as NAFTA.2% 1.2% 12. 2008) and the ethnic groups are as follows: Ethnic Groups in the US in 2003 0.7% Source: World Factbook.7% 1.6% 0.646 (World Factbook.9% black Asian Amerindian & Alaska Native native Hawaiian & Other Pacific Islander white 81.7% 1. and ASEAN.7% 51.5% 0.3% 23.824.6% 1. The country’s population was estimated at 303.0% Protestant Roman Catholic Mormon Other Christian Jewsih Buddhist Muslim Other of Unspecified Unaffiliated None 6 .9% 4.1% 2. Thailand operates under a civil law meaning contracts would be shorter.Thailand Located in South-East Asia. the country’s population was estimated at 65.493. 2008). The country only has three main ethnic groups and the distribution is shown below: Ethic Groups in Thailand in 2000 11% 14% Thai Chinese Other 75% The religious make-up for Thailand is also less diverse compared to the US with the main groups being: Religious Groups in Thailand in 2000 0. Unlike the US. Thailand is in fewer trading blocks but it is in the APEC and ASEAN like the US.7% 4.6% 7 .1% Buddhist Muslim Christian Other 94.6% 0.298 (World Factbook. troy.htm Uncertainty Masculinity Individualism Long-term Avoidance 46 64 43 62 20 50 91 34 64 Orientation 29 56 45 40 64 55 Hofstede's Cultural Dimensions for the US and Thailand 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Rating US Thailand World Average U er Di nc st an er ce ta in ty Av oi da nc e M as cu li n it y In di vi Lo du ng al -te is m rm O rie nt at io n Hofstede's Cultural Dimension Po w 8 .Comparisons in cultures of the home country (the US) and the host country (Thailand) are outlined using Hofstede’s dimension. Power Distance US Thailand World Average Source: http://spectrum.edu/~vorism/hofstede. and pay little attention to body language. the extent to which the US is threatened by ambiguous situations and tries to avoid it is lower compared to Thailand where people like feeling secured. This implies that they are loyal to their jobs and companies. Furthermore. and indirect cues. Thailand would have a contextualized communicating style where titles and positions are given great importance as supposed to the US who would focus on personal communicating style. Due to this. It is therefore expected that Thailand employees work better with a formal procedure where they are dictated what to do and how to do it. a culture with higher 9 .Power distance The US is a low power-distance culture whereas Thailand is a high power distance culture. Managers in Thailand would avoid making risky decisions. without upward communication. Uncertainty Avoidance Both Thailand and the US have a high uncertainty avoidance score meaning that they are risk averse. Thailand. On the other hand. The US may find that its employees work better with an informal procedure with less written rules and guidance. Moreover. However. Thailand’s high power distant culture reflects its monarchy system while the low score for the US reflects its democratic system. The US (low uncertainty avoidance). In comparison. the KFC subsidiary in Thailand has a bureaucratic system and there is little communication between top managers and the subordinates. The decisionmaking process would be top-down. this dimension can reflect the communication style used in the two cultures. would communicate directly. The US therefore favours a decentralized organizational structure where authority could be questioned and challenged while Thailand respects their authority and prefers a centralized organizational structure. The organizational culture in the US is therefore an incubator as they are fulfilment oriented. Also Thai employees would communicate using affective style where emphasis is placed on non-verbal cues such as tone while the US culture is one that has an instrumental communicating style where the encoder ensures that the message sent is clear to the receiver. wealth and challenge. Individualism/Collectivism The cultures of Thailand and the US differ most in this dimension. is one that focuses more on group work and prefers rewards to be based on the group’s performance or seniority. succinct words and rely on silence to convey meaning (Zhao. Masculinity The US has a masculine culture where people strive for achievement. however. 2000). Thailand’s organizational culture is that of a family where an authority is respected like a parent figure. however. Long-term/Short-term Orientation The US Buddhist and Chinese community is less than that of Thailand hence making Thailand one of the Confucius cultured country that gives importance to long-term 10 . They prefer individual rewards based on their performance. has a very low masculinity culture that treasures cooperation within the workforce. The US favours individualism where people care for themselves and immediate friends and family. making them very competitive in the workplace. Thailand. a quality life and a friendly atmosphere.uncertainty avoidance might use body language. the reward and motivation system in the two countries will be different. Due to this. Thailand’s culture. Thai’s are usually more neutral and hold their emotions in while people from the US express their emotions more freely and openly. the US culture is a specific one where work and private life is separated while in Thailand. despite it being a franchise. Due to this.orientation (Spring. they differ in the environment dimension as the US adopts an innerdirect belief where they think they control outcomes while in Thailand. people believe there is an outer force that shapes their future. In terms of displaying their emotion. On the other hand. Individualism is popular in the US whereas in Thailand. 2000). 11 . motivations. it is important for the KFC subsidiary in Thailand to operate differently from the one in the US. However. Furthermore. long-term relationships are built by diffusing work and personal life. Moreover. Trompenaars’ cultural dimension could also be used to assess the similarities and differences in the two cultures. Due to the differences in both cultures. One dimension that is shared by both cultures is the sequential approach where businesses operate according to set plans within a time frame. belonging to a group or a community is more important. the US is well below the world average signifying its culture as one that is short-term oriented. training and policy development would be different in both countries as Thailand would be looking for long-term promotion while the US employees would focus on quick bonuses. status in the two cultures is accorded differently: in the US based on achievement and in Thailand on ascription or connections. The US believes in the idea of a universal way of doing business whereas Thailand is a particularistic culture that relies on networks and personal relationships. This has been a very successful model because it overcomes barriers such as language. The industry is however still experiencing a growth of 5. 2008) Over the years. Of the worldwide chicken chain shares.2% market share.7%. KFC which is now owned by PepsiCo and has 55. KFC has established itself as one of the market leaders. with approximately 55% of its restaurants in the United States and the remainder in the international market. law and culture. They have therefore adopted a multi-domestic strategy of choice. The chicken chain market comes in fifth in sales within the fast food industry. In addition to KFC follows a franchise model meaning that restaurants are owned by local entrepreneurs. Not being as established as companies such as KFC. KFC has had a decline in its market share over the last 10 years of 15%. Firstly KFC has developed a unique culture. However. showing a reversal of trends that were observed in the mid-1990s. centred around its origins and the eleven secret herbs and spices used in the recipe creating a unique and attractive concept. Fast food is still a growing industry however has slowed recently because fast food markets. and this success can be attributed to a variety of factors. (Hoover. KFC is the third largest fast food chain in the world. (CSG. followed by Popeye’s with a market share of 12. It is also extremely difficult for competitors to now enter the market as it nearly reached full saturation levels. such as the United States market is becoming saturated. 2008) 12 .4% however this has been overshadowed by the full service dining industry which is growing at a rate of 7% in the same period. in the highly competitive market of fast foods.Competitors and Current Industry Trends. new competitors strive to tap into the price sensitive fast food market however lacks the bargaining power needed to reduce costs which lead many to exit or even declare bankruptcy. However the market share of each of these three competitors is quite different in the host country (Thailand) which we have chosen to focus on. incorporating the local culture. Kentucky Fried Chicken officially changed its name to KFC in the late 90’s however their menu has changed little. chicken is the preferable dish and therefore KFC has gained a larger market share over its competitors such as McDonalds whose food primarily consists of beef. KFC followed with a chicken sandwich however this proved not to be successful and was quickly removed from the menu. One of its main criticisms was the amount of fat that is used in KFC’s food. In addition to this. because the restaurants are locally owned. (Thailand Life. McDonalds has been quick to respond to new social expectations and public pressures. redeveloping their menu completely to offer choice to their customers. KFC uses Genetically Modified chicken and this has caused many ethical concerns around the world. language and politics. It is not known for its radical changes in menu and is slow to develop new products to suit the ever changing fast food market. For this reason. In this culture. (Hoover. KFC has been able to adapt and create dishes unique to Thailand to suit its residents taste. McDonalds in juxtaposition has been undertaking advertising to promote the locality and health of the meat it uses and its social responsibility to the environment. 2008) One of its main competitors. particularly in the United States. As mentioned before these would include competitors Domino’s pizza and also McDonalds who poses the bigger threat.However KFC has also experiences its share of weaknesses and threats. 2008) The main competitors of KFC are those companies that have been well established and have been proven successful. In addition. This has been the key to their success in the 13 . (Hoover.international market and of all their restaurants 69% is now part of a franchise model. 2008) 14 . 1993).Internal and External Analysis An internal and external factor analysis is crucial in determining a company’s international competitiveness and strategies. 15 . 1993 Figure 1: .Porter’s SWOT-positioning of competitiveness determinants shows that KFC Thailand is placed in Cell 2. internal factors depend on company’s internal capabilities (strengths and weaknesses). This means KFC Thailand has to improve its structure or create new strategies to withstand external threats while maintaining existing strengths. According to Porter’s SWOT-positioning framework. and external factors depend on the attractiveness of external environment (opportunities and threats) (Rugman and Verbeke. Source: Rugman and Verbeke. 1996) hence. Different countries are under the four regions. responding to changes is faster because KFC 16 . marketing. As shown in the diagram below. and reporting to their CEO at headquarters directly (Rodrigues.Stregthes and Weaknesses Structure KFC uses a regional structure. European. KFC CEO Production Finance Americas Europe Marketing HRM Management Asia Australia Thailand Production Finance Marketing HRM Strengths By using a regional structure. The purpose of this structure is that regional heads need to account for specific regions in terms of production and marketing. 1996). American. Each of these countries has separate departments such as production. authority and responsibility can be decentralized to the regional office (Rodrigues. Asian and Australian subsidiaries report to the headquarters in the US. 2007). KFC Thailand even customizes their own slogan—‘The Spice in your Life’ which implies happiness is not only from food but also from the overall service experience (Mulchand. and consider cultural changes and political climates simultaneously (O'Keefe. 2001) and spicier chicken (Tanzer. law. KFC found that customers have negative comments on ambience and service area. 2002). culture. 2002). For example. and marketing characteristics (eCheat. Moreover. 1993). 2008). KFC took a three-year repositioning approach including wide refurbishment to its 300 outlets (Mulchand.management has the knowledge about local conditions. SASIN Institute and Bangkok Post. therefore. Yum! believed that basing the Thai subsidiary on the US model is not a superior strategy to become a successful global firm. 2001). In response to a 12-month market survey conducted by Nielsen Media Research in 2002. and awards (KFC. Being a single management unit under this structure. Yum Restaurants Thailand was awarded Number One Best Employer in Thailand and Outstanding in Asia as a result of strong commitment to personnel development like training. fresh rice (O'Keefe. courses. instead. Pertinent to a study conducted in 2005 by Hewitt Associates. regional managers can concentrate on developing local expertise (Rodrigues. customs. Moreover. this structure allows KFC Thailand to adopt a multi-domestic strategy. Weaknesses 17 . they hold an understanding of local language. Operated by local entrepreneurs. they should adapt to local tastes. 1996). 1994). the parent company should also consider the factors of host country’s relative sales other than the impact of geographical diversification when evaluating host country’s profit performance (Rugman and Verbeke. This competitive advantage allows KFC Thailand to occupy 49% market share (KFC. 2008). Carroll’s suggests that there is a relationship among the social issues involved. is much cheaper and more widely available in Asia's developing countries than beef (Tanzer. their labour cost can be lower than their principal competitors. Millett and WatersMarsh. To ensure that the structure does operate efficiently. Furthermore. Additionally. the categories of social 18 . In other words. (Datamonitor. 2004). KFC Thailand fulfils the corporate social responsibility by applying the idea of Carroll’s three-dimensional model (Appendix). 2003). 2004). For this reason. 1993). the profit performance of subsidiaries may well be distorted. Operations Strengths By achieving economies of scale. some corporate executives of PepsiCo possess financial or marketing backgrounds but have no restaurant operations experience (Van Warner. Yet. Chicken. This is due to favourable working conditions leading to employee retention. KFC’s main ingredient. KFC Thailand can keep the production cost low. misunderstanding may be a problem.Given the fact that KFC Thailand and KFC America have geographical distance and dissimilar environments. 2007) (Robbins. communication costs will be high and additional expenditures will arise such as high volume of accounting and control information (Rugman and Verbeke. all chicken that KFC Thailand uses are from domestic suppliers adopting animal welfare standards based on those set by the EU (KFC. KFC Thailand is currently facing the danger of the growing trend of full-service dining industry. focusing only on chicken have not been able to exploit the meat eating consumer market to its full potential. KFC Thailand. 2008). Provided KFC Thailand continues to operate by this model. its competitive advantage will be weakened due to competition from full-service restaurants. Weaknesses In Thailand. 2002). Consequently. with an accommodation philosophy towards the social issue of consumerism. meets its ethical responsibilities. In fact. The chicken is cooked ina manner approved by the Ministry of Health and the World Health Organization (KFC.responsibilities. 2008). 19 . in accordance with Carroll’s model. all meats are consumed but KFC. and the four levels of the philosophy of responsiveness (Deresky. Pizza Hut. keeping the jobs local and the business locally oriented.36mil at the end of 2003. KFC announced the plan to shift their image from takeaway to fast casual dine in restaurant (Suwanprakarn. increasing KFC franchises from 313 to 600 (Rungfapaisarn. In 2001 (Bangkok Post. 25% of this population is under the age of 15years (Thailand Investor Service Centre. It is important that KFC continues to expand. 20 . Taco Bell. In 2002. It would be greatly beneficial to increase customers from the age group of 13-20 such as high school and university students to increase sales. making the most of the market. During this expansion Yum Restaurants has begun to group their restaurants including KFC. 2002). Long John Silver’s and A&W All-American Food (Jobsdp) This will allow customers a greater choice from the one location while generating a greater customer pool. 2007). KFC can also expand the services offered by their franchises. 2001). Presently KFC Thailand is targeted more towards young children.Opportunities and Threats Opportunities Even after six years of expansion in Thailand KFC can still do more. intending to double the size of its business in Thailand over the next five years. This is attractive for both families and teens with differing preferences. KFC’s target market of youth has a lot of potential in Thailand but can still be improved. Thailand’s population reached 63. 2001) and 2007 Yum announced room for expansion. In March this year. Television advertisements showing how the chicken is cooked and the ingredients used would inspire confidence in the product and help consumers feel that they have made informed decisions. Thai people’s demand for healthy food options is increasing.In a fast changing world dominated by technology. It is important for KFC to make this move to healthier options successful or they will lose health conscious customers to other fast food chains with a healthier image. Introducing healthy options to the menu at KFC would not only help keep mothers bringing their young children but also attract health conscious teens and adults. Showing its consumers how the product is being made would emphasise these healthy changes. Being seen as socially aware and responsible will improve KFC’s public image and help to differentiate them from competition. This could be an opportunity for KFC to capture consumers who use internet frequently. consumers demand more for less. McDonalds has taken the stance of environmental care (McDonalds in-store pamphlet. 2002). KFC is yet to really highlight to the public in Thailand and the rest of the world its concern for the welfare of animals. 2008) while KFC has taken the care of animals under its wing (KFC Animal Welfare Program. 2008). Another current social responsibility issue is the environment. KFC Thailand has a home delivery service but does not have an online order system. KFC launched a non-fried chicken menu in Thailand (Retailnu. 2008). As in Australia. 21 . Traditional Thai fast food is much healthier than western fast food such as KFC (Babcock. Being such a popular and widespread brand name. the source and quality of the food is consistently being questioned. One critic claimed that KFC was genetically modifying its chicken resulting in beakless and feetless chickens (Hsu. fast 22 . (Franchise Chat. They are more likely to save and less likely to invest. Like other fast food restaurants. In this situation. With a coup as recent as September 2006 there is a split between the people of Thailand. A pandemic that has caused so much social and political interest is not easily forgotten. not to mention dangerous. The political situation in Thailand has been and continues to be very unstable. KFC probably will always face some public criticism. The American Centre for Disease Control and Prevention stated that not only is the bird flu not likely to diminish in the near future it has also infected one Thai person (Centre for Disease Control and Prevention.Threats The bird flu that infected Asian countries is still an issue in Thailand particularly for a restaurant like KFC. 2007). This may not seem much but it does prove that the virus can be transmitted to humans and thus most of the population is likely to avoid chicken if another outbreak is to occur. 2004) the statement seems unrealistically hopeful. Such instability affects peoples’ confidence and feeling of security in their country. those for and those against former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra (Economist. Although Yum Restaurants has stated that they believe sales will not decline in the event of another outbreak. Such reports can make consumers think twice about purchasing the product or even choose another brand. 2008). 2000). food is likely to become a luxury. menu and cooking method. The most recent of KFC’s threats and probably the most concerning is the food crisis in Asia. Being the world’s biggest rice exporter. On May 7th the Sydney Morning Herald (2008) reported that because of the food crisis and the dramatic increase in food prices. the drastic drops in rice prices are likely to cause economic uncertainty in Thailand. Thailand had to drop its exporting prices for rice and forget plans to impose a rice cartel. Again fast food will begin to be seen as a luxury. People will start to save more money and consume local Thai food that is half the price of a burger meal at KFC. For example. Given the rise in health conscious consumers this may take customers away from KFC. Subway sandwich bar is already well established in Thailand and is perceived as a healthier eating option than KFC. One particular competitive advantage that another brand may have over KFC is a healthier image. which would fix the price. Political instability may also decrease the tourists visiting Thailand. particularly concerning rice. KFC is a popular choice with tourists due to its familiarity and in this situation KFC will lose these customers. 23 . The fast food industry has an increasing number of players. 24 . KFC loses none of its customers based on political opinion. Currently KFC uses Thai chicken from domestic suppliers. This may mean KFC has nothing to worry about but it is important they be aware of the political environment. It would help to import chickens from countries where bird flu is not an issue and in a way that the chickens will not be contaminated. Informing the Thai public as to where the chickens come from. Political instability The effects of political instability on KFC can be minimised by remaining politically neutral. KFC needs to be aware of their threats and deal with them accordingly. Introducing new menu items including beef. pork and vegetarian options would allow customers to avoid chicken altogether. 2008). economic projections remain positive with expected increase in private consumption and investment (Economist Intelligence Unit.Realistic Solutions In order to make the most of their opportunities and the best of their business. In order to keep profits high it would be necessary to keep chicken dishes on the menu and ensure sales. Bird flu If the bird flu was to return to Thailand. Despite the political instability. By doing this. how they are prepared and how they are cooked would encourage confidence in the product. Emphasising the fact that the franchises are owned and run by Thai people will keep a feeling of familiarity and togetherness between customers and the business. KFC needs to keep its consumers feeling confident about the product. Potential new competition In order to keep new and existing competition at bay. It is important that KFC reassures investors with financial reports and managerial reports that emphasises the stability and success of the business. This advertising would need to emphasise the competitive advantage of KFC. Due to this Total Quality Management is advisable. It would be beneficial to undertake a Reminding Strategy for advertising.As the economy may suffer. Along with consumption. It would help to ensure that all customers’ experiences at KFC are positive and meet expectations. Generating good word of mouth about both the brand and the product will help keep a positive brand image in the minds of consumers. in response. This will help to assure that the quality of the product and level of service is at its level best and that there is a good communication flow both within the business and externally to its consumers. This involves KFC allowing customers to evaluate their experiences during and after their visit to KFC by portraying that experience in an advertisement. investment is likely to decrease. 25 . However. could spend more money on marketing that gives a positive image of the company. it is important that KFC maintain their prominence in the minds of consumers. concentrating on any current issues the brand is having. keeping KFC affordable is an important part of keeping customers. Bad Publicity Bad publicity is a problem for many brands that are so prominent in the public eye and cannot be eliminated. Food Crisis Thailand has already reacted to the food crisis by dropping rice exporting prices which will help reduce the global effect. It may become impossible for KFC to serve rice and this may mean they need to introduce an alternative carbohydrate component of their meals. remain politically neutral and keep a careful eye on their costs. At some point in time KFC may need to import rice. KFC can only keep their prices fair.Sponsorship of events or teams that are popular with the youth target market will aid this strategy. 26 . It is important that KFC always be locally responsive1 in order to meet the needs of their target market. while there is room for expansion and differentiation in Thailand. change its image from quick-service restaurants to fast casual dine in restaurants. encountered by unstable political situation and food crisis. However. KFC can augment its social responsibility regarding animal welfare and generate a positive brand image. By adopting regional structure. growing demand for full-service dining restaurants and increasing health consciousness. these lead to enhance communication costs and inaccurately evaluate subsidiaries’ profit performance. Although being the leader in the fast food chain in the world becomes a strength for KFC. geographical distance and corporate executives without restaurant operations experience. and Thailand. In case bird flu outbreaks again.S. provided KFC can introduce more healthy options to the menu by promoting through television and sponsorship. decentralized authority allows KFC Thailand to be more flexible and adaptative.Conclusion KFC is sustaining its leadership position in the chicken restaurant chain. remaining 27 . continue to expand by franchising. Moreover. KFC should deal with these carefully. KFC can diversify its menu by the use of beef and pork. this will not only enlarge its target audiences but also increase its growth potential. weaknesses still exist due to lack of diversification on the menu choice. Yet. Given that some uncontrollable factors influence KFC’s image or performance. When facing bad publicity. due to cultural differences between the U. With continuous improvement and maintaining the competitive advantages. 28 . KFC can endure its strong position in the fast food chain in spite of keen competitors.politically neutral and keeping an eye on production cost and price respectively are beneficial for KFC. APPENDIX Carroll’s Model 29 . com/TH/EN/Job. K.th/about/ 30 .gov/flu/avian/outbreaks/current. 4th edn. Inc. [Online accessed 26 April 2008] URL: http://www.http://www. 2002 Eating out in Thailand [Online accessed April 26th 2008] URL:. The Boston Globe.html Bangkok Post 2001 Tricon Plans To Spend On Pizza Hut.csgstrategies.hoovers.com/kfc/--ID__56325 Hsu. KFC Expansion In Thailand [Online accessed April 24th 2008] URL: http://www.echeat.http://www.com/content Datamonitor 2007.com Department of Health and Human Services. Centers For Disease Control and Prevention 2007 Avian Influenza: Current H5N1 Situation [Online accessed April 26th 2008] URL:.com/essay/ Franchise Chat 2004 KFC st undeterred by threat of recurrence of avian flu.http://www.encyclopedia.Reference List Babcock.com/features/eatout.kfc.com/doc/1P2-8581016. Marketing Analysis : KFC.htm Deresky.www.cdc. eCheat 2007. Prentice Hall. [Online accessed April 30th 2008] URL:.datamonitor.jobsdb.asp?R=JDBT069213512 There is no further information available for this website. [Online accessed 22 April 2008] URL: http://www. Yum! Brands. New Jersey.entrepreneur.franchisechat. M. About us. International Management: Managing Across Borders and Cultures. [Online accessed April 19th 2008] KFC 2008.thaifoodandtravel. H.htm Hoover Research Journals 2008 The Hoovers KFC Business Intelligence [Online accessed 1st May 2008] URL:-http://www.com/news_archive/thailand_franchise_news_6.co. [Online accessed May 1 2008] URL:. Feetless KFC Birds High Beam Encyclopaedia.html CSG 2008 Five Force Analysis of KFC [Online accessed 1st May 2008] URL:. [Online accessed 30 April 2008] URL: http://www.com/franchises/franchisezone/thisjustin/article37702.http://www.html http://th. 2000 Chicken Hoax Takes Flight UNH Denies Report of Beakless. 2002. 1. A. 4th edn. 2007 KFC and Pizza Hut operator plans expansion. Fortune. 1993. O'Keefe. S. 35. U. pp.. 1996.nationmultimedia. no. 2003. Journal of International Business Studies. Rugman.kfc.com/p/articles/mi_hb5553/is_200208/ai_n21665472 31 . 2. & Waters-Marsh.125-137. Rugman. vol. 144. 3-18.http://findarticles.com/about/animalwelfare. no.KFC 2008 KFC Animal Welfare Program [Online accessed April 26th 2008] URL:. & Verbeke. T. & Verbeke. Bangkok Post [Online accessed May 3rd 2008] URL:. Media: Asia's Media & Marketing Newspaper. no. C. & Verbeke. Rugman.entrepreneur. Retailnu 2008 KFC to launch healthy product range in Thailand [Online accessed April 29th 2008] URL:.A. Rungfapaisarn.http://www. 283-299. Journal of Managerial Issues.com/tradejournals/article/61558897. 11. 1st edn. A. ‘Extending the theory of the multinational enterprise: internalization and strategic management perspectives’. 35. Journal of International Business Studies. [Online accessed 8 May 2008] URL: . A. West. 4. pp. S. Prentice Hall. ‘KFC changes tack in Thai food battle’. How Different Are We? An Investigation of Confucian Values in the United States.http://retailnu. Organisational Behaviour. vol. A. A.com/2007/11/23/business/business_30057108. K.wordpress. B.asp McDonalds 2008 Pamphlete from Adelaide store. 1. ‘Global Brands’. International Management: A Cultural Approach. 2002 Kentucky Fried Chicken Seeks New Image in Thailand as Dine-In Restaurant. ‘How to operationalize Porter’s Diamond of International Competitiveness’. 2002. pp. pp.S. ‘A perspective on regional and global strategies of multinational enterprises’. signed by Guy Russo (Managing Director and CEO) See Appendices/attached Mulchand. Journal of International Business Studies. Rodrigues.http://www. New South Wales.102-110. 2000. vol. B. vol. The Nation [Online accessed April 27th 2008] URL: http://www.html Suwanprakorn.com/2008/03/29/kfc-to-launch-healthy-productrange-in-thailand/ Robbins. p. Produced by McDonalds Australia Ltd. no. 34.php Spring. 2004. 2001. N. 2004. Millett. 20 September. A. p.smh. 32.cia.economist.thailandlife.http://www.104/search?q=cache:F6SXeJLsKR0J:webuser. 28. Nation's Restaurant News.thailandoutlook.au/greed-behind-world-food-price-rises/200805072bqd.com/fastfood. 2. 1994.edu/jeffrys b/Conversing%2520Across.173.bus. [Online accessed 6 May 2008] URL: http://209.cfm?folder=ProfileForecast World Factbook 2008 [Online accessed 8 May 2008] URL: .pdf+communication+style+US+Thailand&hl=en&ct=cln k&cd=2&gl=au 32 .Sydney Morning Herald 2008 ‘Greed’ Behind World Food Price Rises [Online accessed May 7th 2008] URL:. 2000.http://www. Communication Style.https://www.com/thailandoutlook1/about+thailand/population/ Thailand Life 2008 Thailand Life [Online accessed 5th May 2008] URL:.http://news.com/countries/Thailand/profile.http://www. R. vol.com.com/investors/ Zhao. vol.74 Van Warner. no.com/research/backgrounders/displaybackgrounder.html The Economist 2008 Thailand’s Politics [Online accessed May 7th 2008] URL:http://www. Thailand Investor Service Centre 2004 About Population [Online accessed May 3rd 2008] URL:. Forbes.economist. pp. Investors. ‘PepsiCo Challenge Accentuates need to keep concepts current’.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/th.yum. A.umich. [Online accessed 27 April 2008] URL: http://www. 151. 1993.html Yum 2008.85. ‘Hot Wings take off’.html Tanzer.cfm?bg=10 21326 The Economist Intelligence Unit 2008 Country Breifing: Thailand Forecast [Online accessed May 7th 2008] URL:. Conversing Across Cultures: East-West Communication Style in Work and Nonwork Contexts. S.39. no.