CAGE Distance Framework

https://ik.imagekit.io/beyondpmf/frameworks/cage-distance-framework.png
The CAGE Distance Framework primarily addresses strategic friction by helping businesses understand the challenges and opportunities presented by different markets. It allows companies to assess market attractiveness, aiding in decisions about international expansion and market prioritization, which directly impacts their overall strategy.

The CAGE Distance Framework is a tool used by companies to evaluate the differences or distances between countries in terms of culture, administration, geography, and economics. This framework assists businesses in understanding the challenges and opportunities in global expansion and strategic decision-making. It is particularly beneficial for assessing market potential, risks, and entry strategies in international business.

Steps / Detailed Description

Identify the countries for comparison. | Analyze Cultural distances considering language, ethnicity, religion, and social norms. | Assess Administrative distances including political ties, legal and financial institutions. | Evaluate Geographic distances factoring in physical size, within-country distances to borders, time zones, and access to waterways. | Examine Economic distances by comparing consumer incomes, costs of resources, and economic infrastructure.

Best Practices

Use reliable and up-to-date data sources for analysis. | Combine with other frameworks for a holistic view. | Regularly update assessments as country conditions change.

Pros

Provides a comprehensive analysis of cross-country differences. | Facilitates strategic decision-making for entering new markets. | Helps in tailoring business strategies to specific regional conditions.

Cons

May oversimplify complex inter-country relationships. | Data collection for all four dimensions can be time-consuming. | Primarily focuses on differences, potentially overlooking similarities that could be leveraged.

When to Use

Considering international expansion. | Evaluating potential new markets for products or services.

When Not to Use

When detailed, country-specific data is not available. | For assessing short-term tactical decisions.

Related Frameworks

Categories

Lifecycle

Scope

Scope not defined

Maturity Level

Maturity level not specified

Time to Implement

2–4 Weeks
3–6 Months
1–2 Weeks
3–6 Months
1–2 Months
3–6 Months
1–2 Weeks
Less Than 1 Day
1–2 Weeks
Longer Than 6 Months
1–2 Weeks
Longer Than 6 Months
1–2 Weeks
3–6 Months
1–2 Weeks
1–2 Weeks
1–2 Weeks
1–2 Weeks
1–2 Days
1–2 Weeks
1–2 Weeks
1–2 Weeks
1–2 Weeks
1–2 Weeks
1–2 Weeks
3–6 Months
1–2 Weeks
1–2 Weeks
1–2 Weeks
3–6 Months
1–2 Weeks
1–2 Weeks
2–4 Weeks
1–2 Weeks
1–2 Days
1–2 Weeks
Longer Than 6 Months
Longer Than 6 Months
3–6 Months
Longer Than 6 Months
Longer Than 6 Months
Longer Than 6 Months
1–2 Weeks
Longer Than 6 Months
3–6 Months
Less Than 1 Day
3–6 Months
1–2 Months
3–6 Months
Longer Than 6 Months
3–6 Months
Less Than 1 Day
1–2 Weeks
3–6 Months
3–6 Months
1–2 Weeks
3–6 Months
1–2 Weeks
1–2 Weeks
1–2 Days
1–2 Weeks
1–2 Months
Longer Than 6 Months
1–2 Weeks
Longer Than 6 Months
1–2 Weeks
3–6 Months
1–2 Weeks
Less Than 1 Day
1–2 Weeks
3–6 Months
1–2 Weeks
3–6 Months
1–2 Weeks
1–2 Weeks
Longer Than 6 Months
Less Than 1 Day
3–6 Months
Longer Than 6 Months
1–2 Months
1–2 Weeks
Longer Than 6 Months
1–2 Weeks
3–6 Months
1–2 Weeks
1–2 Weeks
3–6 Months
Less Than 1 Day
1–2 Weeks
1–2 Weeks
3–6 Months
3–6 Months
Less Than 1 Day
1–2 Weeks
Longer Than 6 Months
1–2 Months
1–2 Weeks
1–2 Weeks
1–2 Weeks
Longer Than 6 Months

Copyright Information

Autor:
Pankaj Ghemawat
2001
Publication:
Harvard Business Review