Port of Tanjung Pelepas (ptp) of Malaysia
- Narrative
After more than 30 years operating, The Port of Singapore Authority (PSA) never had experience significant competition from nearby port. Port of Tanjung Pelepas (PTP) of Malaysia, which is just 30-minute drives away from PSA, giving price far below the PSA. High performance, well-known, PSA with premium price is now challenge by the low price, low cost PTP. With such differences, PSA cannot neglect the competition, its biggest shippers Maersk choose to shift for lower price, follow by other shipping giant such as Evergreen Marine. This condition faltering PSA optimism to their future. By evaluating all decision, they have made and may be made, PSA situation can be appraised. This appraisal could have determined PSA next steps.
- List Threats and Opportunities
Threats | Opportunities |
Low Price Competitor | Higher Performance give more efficiency for customer |
Limited Resources | Technology Advancement |
High fixed cost | Superior Experienced than PTP |
High living cost (Impact to Labor cost) | Larger Connectivity |
Limited size of land, less opportunities to expand than PTP | Cooperation with Competitor or other international port |
Big customer shift because of price and resources different, such as Maersk, Evergreen | Existing Joint Venture with Maersk, The Port of Dalian, to enter Chinese port Industry |
Reclamation for expansion |
- Separate and Clarify Concerns
Statement | Concerns | |
a. | Low Price Competitor | Price maybe number one concern for the shippers but It isn’t the only one that can reduce shipper cost (safety, connectivity, speed, and others). |
b. | Limited Resources, size of land | Technology advancement and reclamation maybe the solution, but will take much cost. Cooperation agreement in international scope help. |
c. | High Fixed Cost | Invest more to create more efficient port and higher utilization rates may reduce fixed cost ratio to revenue |
d. | High Labor Cost | Labor cost are high but low number of labors, PSA may employ labor from more low living cost, develop a dedicated living area for the labor. PSA may also focus on maximize labor in lower living cost area. Cooperation agreement in international scope help. |
e. | Customers Shift | PSA still enjoyed million more of TEU than PTP. Should preserve existing shippers. Even PSA still have to find a way to attract big shipping companies, they should not be distracted with the shifts. |
- Set Priority Using Current Impact, Future Impact, and Time Frame
Concern (Total Score) | Seriousness | Urgency | Growth | |||
Statement | Rate | Statement | Rate | Statement | Rate | |
a (6) | It can sway the employee confidence to stay improving Quality even take much cost | M | Executives still believes in Quality over Price | L | Low price competitor may still attract more shifts | H |
b (8) | PTP is taking lead in expansion. PSA still have international credibility which convince others to cooperate | H | The solution must be found before PTP getting more expansion and hard to compete | H | More attractive, may attract the shifters | M |
c (5) | General problem of running a port | L | Fixed cost will increase. As soon as possible | M | Efficient fixed cost may provide attractive price | M |
d (7) | Labor cost is high, efficiency in this cost give high impact in the company | H | Before living cost getting higher. National human resources may not interest in working with PSA | M | PSA may have more services and innovate more through hybrid development between technology and human power | M |
e (9) | It affects the PSA image and credibility | H | Need to focus on existing Shipper so they don’t shift | H | May attract more shipper or even make more shifting | H |
Rating, score = H: High, 3 M: Medium, 2 L: Low, 1