McDonalds Case Study

[1] Explain how the environment has affected McDonald’s plans to discontinue offering supersized meals?

As mentioned in the case, after McDonalds started offering supersized meals, there was public concern about fattening issues which mainly focused McDonalds’ primary products which were high in calories, fat content and carbohydrates. McDonalds was sued for the physical ailments that were brought about by obesity in many people, especially the young. Besides this, a documentary was made which centered the effects of eating McDonalds’ food. Changes in public health consciousness and the fact that McDonalds’ competitors were watching these changes very closely forced it to discontinue the supersized meals.

[2] Describe how McDonald’s can use the decision to stop selling supersized meals as a competitive advantage?

The case says that McDonalds removed the supersized offerings and added healthier substitutes to its menu. This could be used as a competitive advantage if the company’s competitors hadn’t already come up with such an idea. It could use aggressive advertising to promote its ‘healthier’ products and capture the lost market share before the competitors come up with substitutes.

[3] Would you classify this action as a growth strategy, stability strategy or a retrenchment strategy?

This certainly is a stability strategy in my opinion. It cannot be a growth strategy because McDonalds had to cut down on its supersizing offers which meant a cut down in operations and revenue. Moreover, it cannot be retrenchment either because the case does not mention McDonalds considering a reduction of costs or spending. Therefore, it has to be a stability strategy because the changes in the market and pressure on healthier diets had forced McDonalds to eliminate the supersizing offers and substitute them with salads and healthier