Business Definition

Business Definition

Metadata

• Name: business-definition
• Description: Framework for defining unified vs separated businesses
• Triggers: business definition, unified vs separated, portfolio structure, business units

Instructions

Apply business definition framework to determine organizational structure for strategic analysis.

Framework

The Definition Test

Unified Business IF:

1. Share customers?
2. Share brand?
3. Share assets/resources?
4. Share supply chain?
5. Share channels/distribution?

AND:

6. Economies of scale or scope apply?
7. Common management/leadership?
8. Integrated planning across business?

THEN → SAME BUSINESS

IF ANY 'NO' → SEPARATE BUSINESSES

Business Unit Categories

| Category | Description | When Unified | |-----------|-------------|------------| | Product Leadership | Same products across units | ✅ Yes | | Market Leadership | Same geographic focus | ✅ Yes | | Operations | Shared manufacturing, logistics | ✅ Yes | | Sales & Marketing | Shared channels, brand | ✅ Yes | | Innovation/R&D | Centralized development | ✅ Yes | | Finance/Support | Shared treasury, HR | ✅ Yes |

Organizational Structures

| Structure | Advantages | Disadvantages | |----------|----------------|------------------| | Unified | Synergy, efficiency, coordinated strategy | Complexity, slow decisions, potential conflicts | | Holding Company | Portfolio management, capital allocation, focused leadership | Agency costs, bureaucracy | | Strategic Alliance | Flexibility, shared expertise, reduced investment | Coordination costs, partner conflicts | | Joint Venture | Risk sharing, resource sharing | Profit sharing, governance complexity | | Federated/Independent | Agility, accountability, clear focus | Duplication, lack of synergy |

Output Process

1. Analyze current state - What's the structure?
2. Apply definition test - Should we unify or separate?
3. Identify synergies - What value in integration?
4. Define new structure - Target organizational design
5. Evaluate feasibility - Culture, systems, capabilities
6. Develop transition plan - Timeline, steps, governance
7. Assess value capture - Benefits vs costs

Output Format

## Business Definition Analysis: [Company/Portfolio]

### Current Structure

**Structure Type:** [Unified/Holding/Federated/Independent]

**Business Units Analyzed:** N units

**Shared Capabilities:**
- [Capability 1] - [Description]
- [Capability 2] - [Description]
- [Capability 3] - [Description]

### Definition Test Results

| Test Question | Result | Implication |
|---------------|---------|--------------|
| Share customers? | ✅ Yes | Potential cross-selling |
| Share brand? | ✅ Yes | Brand consistency |
| Share assets? | ✅ Yes | Asset optimization |
| Share supply chain? | ✅ Yes | Cost efficiency |
| Share channels? | ❌ No | Channel conflicts |
| Common leadership? | ✅ Yes | Management coordination |
| Integrated planning? | ❌ No | Planning autonomy |
| Economies of scale? | ✅ Yes | Scale advantages |

**Conclusion:** [Unified/Separate business structure]

### Proposed Structure

**Target Structure:** [New structure type]

**Rationale:**
1. [Reason 1] - [Why change?]
2. [Reason 2] - [Strategic benefit]
3. [Reason 3] - [Operational necessity]

**Business Unit Alignment:**
- [Unit A] → [New parent/placement]
- [Unit B] → [New parent/placement]
- [Unit C] → [New parent/placement]

### Transition Plan

| Phase | Action | Owner | Timeline |
|--------|--------|---------|------------|
| Planning | Define new org structure | CEO | Q1 |
| Design | Create governance model | Legal | Q2 |
| Implementation | Transfer assets/people | Ops | Q3 |
| Stabilization | Optimize processes | All Units | Q4 |

### Value Capture Assessment

| Synergy Type | Estimated Value | Cost | Net Benefit |
|------------|-----------------|----------|------------|
| Cost reduction | $X M | $Y M | [Positive] |
| Revenue enhancement | $X M | $Y M | [Positive] |
| Capability leverage | $X M | $Y M | [Positive] |
| **Total** | $Z M | $W M | [Net Value] |

**ROI:** [Net Benefit / Cost] × 100%

---

### Risk Assessment

| Risk | Probability | Impact | Mitigation |
|------|---------|----------|-------------|
| Disruption risk | High | High | [Mitigation] |
| Synergy failure | Medium | High | [Mitigation] |
| Cost overruns | Medium | Medium | [Mitigation] |
| Governance complexity | Low | Low | [Mitigation] |

---

### Strategic Implications

1. **[Implication 1]** - [Analysis]
2. **[Implication 2]** - [Analysis]

### Governance Recommendations

1. **[Recommendation 1]** - [Description]
2. **[Recommendation 2]** - [Description]
3. **[Recommendation 3]** - [Description]

Tips

• Don't force unification - structure should serve strategy
• Consider cultural compatibility - can they work together?
• Assess synergy potential realistically - don't assume automatic gains
• Evaluate both benefits and costs - net value matters
• Consider transition costs - often higher than expected
• Governance is critical - define clear decision rights
• Communicate transparently - manage expectations throughout

References

• Various organizational design and strategy sources
• M&A case studies and corporate restructuring literature

Source & license

This open-source skill is cataloged on AgentStack and links to its original source — we do not rehost the code.

• Author: linuszz
• Source: linuszz/business-strategy-planning-skills
• License: MIT

Install and usage instructions live in the source repository linked above.