Provide 2 scholarly in-text citations between 2018 - 2023 with APA 7 references and DOI numbers to support each question.

1.Corporate strategy refers to the approach taken by a company to create value and competitive advantages by participating in multiple industries and markets. It involves competing in a core industry while also operating in adjacent businesses or markets. On the other hand, business-unit-level strategy focuses on creating competitive advantage within a single industry, market, or line of business.

The advantages of corporate strategy include diversification of revenue streams, risk reduction through operating in different markets, and the ability to leverage shared resources and capabilities across business units. By participating in multiple industries, a company can tap into different customer groups, distribute costs more effectively, and take advantage of synergies between different parts of the organization. Furthermore, corporate strategy allows for the exploration of new market opportunities and the ability to adapt to changing market conditions.

However, there are also disadvantages to corporate strategy. Managing multiple business units can be complex and resource-intensive, as different industries and markets may require distinct strategies and approaches. Coordinating activities and ensuring alignment across business units can be challenging, as each unit may have its own goals and objectives. Additionally, the diversification of a company's operations may lead to a loss of focus and dilution of resources, preventing the company from excelling in any one particular area.

One scholarly article that supports the above explanation is "Corporate Strategy vs. Business Unit Strategy: What's the Difference?" by Benjamin Marshall. The article discusses the differences between corporate and business unit strategies, highlighting the advantages and disadvantages of each approach. The article emphasizes the importance of aligning corporate and business unit strategies to ensure overall success and growth.

2. In the case of Cisco Systems, the related-linked approach to diversification seems to have the strongest return on investment. Related-linked diversification refers to entering markets that have some connection or similarity to the company's existing businesses, but still allow for leveraging of resources and capabilities across different business units.

Cisco's acquisition strategy, where it acquires companies with new and emerging technologies or products that enhance its current offerings, exemplifies related-linked diversification. By acquiring companies that are related to its core networking business, Cisco is able to expand its product lines, enter new markets, and gain access to new customers. This approach allows Cisco to leverage its existing technology platforms, resources, and capabilities while also exploring new growth opportunities.

One example of related-linked diversification in Cisco's case is its entry into the home computer and consumer market, which was an adjacent market to its networking business. By capitalizing on the increasing number of homes with internet connections, Cisco was able to expand its customer base and introduce new products and services tailored to the needs of consumers. This diversification strategy helped Cisco maintain its position as a leading business in the tech economy.

3. Diversification most often fails to add value due to challenges in effectively exploiting and leveraging resources and capabilities across different businesses. When diversifying, companies may struggle to achieve synergies and coordination between different business units, leading to inefficiencies and diluted focus.

For example, when a company diversifies into unrelated businesses that require different skills and operational capabilities, it may face difficulties in effectively managing and integrating these diverse operations. Diversification can also lead to increased complexity and higher costs, as each business unit may require its own set of resources and investments.

One well-known example of diversification failure is the case of Quaker Oats' acquisition of Snapple in the 1990s. Quaker Oats, a food and beverage company, acquired Snapple, a popular beverage brand. However, Quaker Oats struggled to integrate Snapple into its existing operations and failed to effectively leverage its distribution channels and brand resources. As a result, the acquisition was not successful, and Quaker Oats eventually sold Snapple at a loss.

4. When making a decision to diversify through green field entry rather than making an acquisition, executives should consider several factors.

Firstly, executives should assess the market potential and growth prospects of the target industry. Green field entry allows a company to enter a new market from scratch, which can be advantageous if the market is growing rapidly and offers significant opportunities for expansion. On the other hand, if the market is mature or highly competitive, acquiring an existing player may provide a quicker way to establish a presence and gain market share.

Secondly, executives should consider the company's existing resources and capabilities. Green field entry requires building new resources and capabilities from the ground up, which can be time-consuming and costly. If a company already possesses the necessary resources and capabilities to enter a new market, it may be more beneficial to pursue green field entry. However, if acquiring a company with existing resources and capabilities can provide a competitive advantage, an acquisition may be a more viable option.

Lastly, executives should evaluate the potential risks and challenges associated with green field entry. Building a new business from scratch involves uncertainties and risks, such as market acceptance, operational complexities, and regulatory compliance. Acquiring an existing company may mitigate some of these risks, as it provides a foundation of customers, infrastructure, and established operations.