Vanguard

"On May 1, 1975, John C. Bogle carried the day by persuading the reluctant Wellington Management board to back Vanguard. Vanguard’s charter was radical: the new investment management company would initiate an equity mutual fund that simply tracked the market, dispensing with any pretensions of active management. Not only that, but it would also operate “at cost”—owned by the funds it administered, paying all returns back to shareholders. The following year, the third innovation was put in place: Vanguard became a no-load fund—one with no sales commissions."

"Barrier. The barrier for Counter-Positioning seems a bit mysterious: how could a powerhouse (such as Fidelity Investments in this case) allow itself to be persistently humbled by an upstart over such an extended period? Couldn’t they foresee the potential success of Vanguard’s model? Freqently in such situations, naïve onlookers castigate the incumbent for lack of vision, or even just poor management. Often, too, they level this accusation at companies with prior plaudits for business acumen. In many cases, this view is unjust and misleading. The incumbent’s failure to respond, more often than not, results from thoughtful calculation. They observe the upstart’s new model, and ask, “Am I better off staying the course, or adopting the new model?”"

"To understand the ascendancy of Vanguard, I must first note these characteristics: An upstart who developed a superior, heterodox business model. That business model’s ability to successfully challenge well-entrenched and formidable incumbents. The steady accumulation of customers, all while the incumbent remains seemingly paralyzed and unable to respond."

"Returning to our Benefit/Barrier characterization of Power: Benefit. The new business model is superior to the incumbent’s model due to lower costs and/or the ability to charge higher prices. In Vanguard’s case, their business model resulted in substantially lower costs (the elimination of expensive portfolio managers, as well as the reduction of channel costs and unnecessary trading costs) which then translated into superior product deliverables (higher average net returns). Due to their business structure of returning profits to their fund-holders, they realized value from market share gains (s in the fundamental equation of strategy), rather than ramping up differential profit margins (m). Barrier. The barrier for Counter-Positioning seems a bit mysterious: how could a powerhouse (such as Fidelity Investments in this case) allow itself to be persistently humbled by an upstart over such an extended period? Couldn’t they foresee the potential success of Vanguard’s model? Freqently in such situations, naïve onlookers castigate the incumbent for lack of vision, or even just poor management. Often, too, they level this accusation at companies with prior plaudits for business acumen. In many cases, this view is unjust and misleading. The incumbent’s failure to respond, more often than not, results from thoughtful calculation. They observe the upstart’s new model, and ask, “Am I better off staying the course…"

"Benefit/Barrier characterization of Power: Benefit. The new business model is superior to the incumbent’s model due to lower costs and/or the ability to charge higher prices. In Vanguard’s case, their business model resulted in substantially lower costs (the elimination of expensive portfolio managers, as well as the reduction of channel costs and unnecessary trading costs) which then translated into superior product deliverables (higher average net returns). Due to their business structure of returning profits to their fund-holders, they realized value from market share gains (s in the fundamental equation of strategy), rather than ramping up differential profit margins (m)."