the a2 milk company case study analysis

• Harvard Business School →
• Faculty & Research →
• February 2019 (Revised September 2021)
• HBS Case Collection

The a2 Milk Company

• Format: Print
• | Language: English
• | Pages: 22

About The Author

Benjamin C. Esty

Related work.

• January 2019 (Revised February 2019)
• Faculty Research
• The a2 Milk Company  By: Benjamin C. Esty, Daniel Fisher and Greg Saldutte
• The a2 Milk Company  By: Benjamin C. Esty and Daniel Fisher

Brought to you by:

The a2 Milk Company

By: Benjamin C. Esty, Daniel Fisher

The a2 Milk Company (a2MC) became the most valuable company listed on the New Zealand stock exchange in 2018 by capitalizing on a biochemical discovery related to the protein composition of cow's…

• Length: 22 page(s)
• Publication Date: Feb 3, 2019
• Discipline: Strategy
• Product #: 719424-PDF-ENG

What's included:

• Teaching Note
• Educator Copy
• Supplements

$4.95 per student

degree granting course

$8.95 per student

non-degree granting course

Get access to this material, plus much more with a free Educator Account:

• Access to world-famous HBS cases
• Up to 60% off materials for your students
• Resources for teaching online
• Tips and reviews from other Educators

Already registered? Sign in

• Student Registration
• Non-Academic Registration
• Included Materials

The a2 Milk Company (a2MC) became the most valuable company listed on the New Zealand stock exchange in 2018 by capitalizing on a biochemical discovery related to the protein composition of cow's milk. Because many people find the A1 protein difficult to digest, and that protein may be related to other health problems (e.g., diabetes), a2MC sells dairy products containing the A2 protein only primarily in Australia and China. With sales of NZ$730 million in 2017 and a desire to grow, a2MC formed a strategic relationship with Fonterra, the world's sixth largest dairy company, in February 2018. But one month later, Nestle, the world's largest dairy company, confirmed that it had begun selling A2 infant formula in China, and people speculated that it would start selling A2 products in Australia and New Zealand later in the year. a2MC's retiring CEO Geoffrey Babidge and newly appointed CEO Janyne Hrdlicka must decide how to respond to Nestle's entry. Can this successful entrant become an incumbent with a sustainable competitive advantage?

Learning Objectives

This case was designed to help students:

1) understand the drivers of competitive advantage and the determinants of sustainability

2) explore tactics for market entry (i.e., judo strategy) and barriers to response by incumbents

3) assess industry/market attractiveness using Porter's Five Forces or Van den Steen's Five Factors framework

4) analyze strategic evolution and scope expansion over an extended period in an entrepreneurial firm

Feb 3, 2019 (Revised: Sep 20, 2021)

Discipline:

Harvard Business School

719424-PDF-ENG

We use cookies to understand how you use our site and to improve your experience, including personalizing content. Learn More . By continuing to use our site, you accept our use of cookies and revised Privacy Policy .

• Order Status
• Testimonials
• What Makes Us Different

The A2 Milk Company Harvard Case Solution & Analysis

Home >> Harvard Case Study Analysis Solutions >> The A2 Milk Company

The A2 Milk Company Case Study Help

Technological

The Company is highly focused on the Research and Development of its new products.It uses latest technology to make such milk formula(powder), which helps itsconsumers, before, during and during the pregnancy.

A2 milk bean dust is manufactured bySynlait Company. The sustainable strategy of the company is to reduce 1 kg of milk’s solid production, in order to install electric boilers instead of coal-fired boilers, with 50% of total greenhouse gas emissions, and 20 percentof water / kilogram of milk products.

Legal factors are considered to be immenselyimportant foroperating a business in a country. In short, it depends on how long it takes to over-enforce the law. The corporate governance rules adopted by a2Milk are intended to oblige all of its employees to perform their duties and to protect the shareholders ‘interests. In short, all factors have a significant impact over a company’s success.

Option 1: Maintain the current business model and strategy.

• The patent expires.

Option 2: Target competitors in the general market.

• Loss of the premium price.

Option 3: Focus mainly on R&D and innovation.

• "a2 course"
• Resourceful destruction.

Recommendations:

The chart in Appendix 1, shows the performance of a2 Milk Company’s share price. The share prices are calculated by using the share price of  March 2011, i.e. 100 as a reference price, followed by the share price based on the calculation of the annual stock’s price performance.

Breast-milk substitutes account for more than half of a2’s total income. The infant based formula is mostly from China. Powdered milk is transported from Australia to China, through a so-called “gray channel”. The Gray Channel accounts for 45-50% of sales of a2’s infant based formulas in the Australian continent.

The recently signed free trade agreement between China and Australia, could eventually make the gray channel disappear. In my opinion, the contract will promote the sales of infant products in China. In fact, a2 Milk is able to gain the market share without imposing imports on the infant based milk formulas marketed in China.

In addition, a2 Milk hasalso planned on expanding its product portfolio in the UK, and it intends to sell its products primarily in the Chinese market;therefore, the best solution for the company is to reduce the current premium-based price and to have a better response when it enters the Nestlé dairy market...............................

This is just a sample partical work. Please place the order on the website to get your own originally done case solution.

Related Case Solutions & Analyses:

Hire us for Originally Written Case Solution/ Analysis

Like us and get updates:.

Harvard Case Solutions

Search Case Solutions

• Accounting Case Solutions
• Auditing Case Studies
• Business Case Studies
• Economics Case Solutions
• Finance Case Studies Analysis
• Harvard Case Study Analysis Solutions
• Human Resource Cases
• Ivey Case Solutions
• Management Case Studies
• Marketing HBS Case Solutions
• Operations Management Case Studies
• Supply Chain Management Cases
• Taxation Case Studies

More From Harvard Case Study Analysis Solutions

• Altruism and Hedonism: Review and Discussion of recent findings in the mMarketing and Consumer Behavior Literature
• Gil Mandelzis and Traiana: Value Is in the Eye of the Beholder
• All American Pipeline
• Japan Case In Wto
• Oil And Gas Industry
• GLOBAL TRUCKING LTD

Contact us:

Check Order Status

How Does it Work?

Why TheCaseSolutions.com?

The A2 Milk Company Case Solution & Answer

Home » Case Study Analysis Solutions » The A2 Milk Company

The A2 Milk Company Case Study Solution

Introduction:

Dr. Corran McLachlan established a2 Milk in 2000. The aimbehind establishing this firm was to deliver milk that contained only a2 protein, instead of other dairy companies’ products which contain a1 and a2 proteins. Dr. Corran McLachlan soon learned that several people feel discomfort after overwhelming normal products, as opposed to products that contain only a2 protein.

Australia’s leading a2 Milk Company’s product line, includes an infant formula, the widest selection and the most innovative canned powder before, during and after the pregnancy.a2 Milk Company primarily engages in product marketing, with its main markets being Australia, China, New Zealand and the United States of America (USA).

The company has 32% share of the Australian breast milk formula, and is the fastest growing manufacturer of the baby products in Australia, by value. In 2017, the company’s total revenue was $ 728 million, while its rival:BellamysOrganic’s revenue in the same year, was just $ 328 million. This huge margin of the company’s revenue against its rivals, provided it an opportunity of spending more money on R&D (almost 8.5 percent of turnover) and helping itself in acquiring better talent to meet the business’s needs.

The strategy:

• Creating a brand collection of dairy based nutrition products,grounded on the claim that they do not contain a1 protein.
• Investing in attractive markets where you think, you can strengthen your competitiveness.
• Deepening your knowledge and experience of a2 protein.

The company states that it wants to expand further in Asia. By 2020, the number of the population generating medium income, will increase dramatically, considering which, the company should also plan on cateringthe markets that are expected to have a large growth, such as India, where birth rate is higher, i.e. 2.3 and GDP and literacy rates are rising.

As competition intensifies in the milk industry; the company maintains its leadership in meeting theconsumers ‘needs. By continuously evaluating its internal and external business environment; it maintains its dominance and strong brand reputation. This analysis will help the company in determining its future strategy and growth direction. Software analysis analyzes the strengths and weaknesses of evaluating a company’s internal and external business environments, facilitating a strategic decision-making. Below, we have represented SWOT analysis of a2 Milk Company, for its sustainable management and understanding of its nonstop growth strategy…………………………..

This is just a sample partical work. Please place the order on the website to get your own originally done case solution.

Related Case Solutions:

LOOK FOR A FREE CASE STUDY SOLUTION

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Published: 02 May 2005

The A2 milk case: a critical review

• A S Truswell 1  

European Journal of Clinical Nutrition volume  59 ,  pages 623–631 ( 2005 ) Cite this article

68k Accesses

95 Citations

204 Altmetric

Metrics details

This review outlines a hypothesis that A1 one of the common variants of β -casein, a major protein in cows milk could facilitate the immunological processes that lead to type I diabetes (DM-I). It was subsequently suggested that A1 β -casein may also be a risk factor for coronary heart disease (CHD), based on between-country correlations of CHD mortality with estimated national consumption of A1 β -casein in a selected number of developed countries. A company, A2 Corporation was set up in New Zealand in the late 1990s to test cows and market milk in several countries with only the A2 variant of β -casein, which appeared not to have the disadvantages of A1 β -casein.

The second part of this review is a critique of the A1/A2 hypothesis. For both DM-I and CHD, the between-country correlation method is shown to be unreliable and negated by recalculation with more countries and by prospective studies in individuals. The animal experiments with diabetes-prone rodents that supported the hypothesis about diabetes were not confirmed by larger, better standardised multicentre experiments. The single animal experiment supporting an A1 β -casein and CHD link was small, short, in an unsuitable animal model and had other design weaknesses.

The A1/A2 milk hypothesis was ingenious. If the scientific evidence had worked out it would have required huge adjustments in the world's dairy industries. This review concludes, however, that there is no convincing or even probable evidence that the A1 β -casein of cow milk has any adverse effect in humans.

This review has been independent of examination of evidence related to A1 and A2 milk by the Australian and New Zealand food standard and food safety authorities, which have not published the evidence they have examined and the analysis of it. They stated in 2003 that no relationship has been established between A1 or A2 milk and diabetes, CHD or other diseases.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Subscribe to this journal

Receive 12 print issues and online access

251,40 € per year

only 20,95 € per issue

Buy this article

• Purchase on Springer Link
• Instant access to full article PDF

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Similar content being viewed by others

Variant of the lactase LCT gene explains association between milk intake and incident type 2 diabetes

Intake of dairy products and associations with major atherosclerotic cardiovascular diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis of cohort studies

Evidence for a causal association between milk intake and cardiometabolic disease outcomes using a two-sample Mendelian Randomization analysis in up to 1,904,220 individuals

Abbott RD, Curb JD, Rodriguez BL, Sharp DS, Burchfiel CM & Yano K (1990): Effect of dietary calcium and milk consumption on risk of thromboembolic stroke in older middle-aged men: the Honolulu heart program. Stroke 27 , 813–818.

Article   Google Scholar  

Altman DG (1991): Practical Statistics for Medical Research , p 298. London: Chapman & Hall.

Google Scholar  

Armstrong B & Doll R (1975): Environmental factors and cancer incidence in different countries with special reference to dietary practices. Int. J. Cancer 15 , 617–631.

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Beaglehole R & Jackson R (2003): Balancing research for new risk factors and action for the prevention of chronic diseases. NZ Med. J. 116 , 291–292.

Beales PE, Elliott RB, Flohé S, Hill JP, Kolb H, Pozzilli P, Wang GS, Wasmuth H & Scott FW (2000): A multi-centre, blinded international trial of the effect of A1 and A2 β -casein variants on diabetes incidence in two rodent models of spontaneous Type 1 diabetes. Diabetologia 45 , 1240–1246.

Borch-Johnsen K, Mandrup-Poulsen T, Zachau-Christiansen B, Joner G, Christy M, Kasrup K & Nerup J (1984): Relation between breast-feeding and incidence rates of insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus. A hypothesis. Lancet 2 , 1083–1086.

Bostick RM, Kushi LH, Wu Y, Meyer KA, Sellers TA & Folsom AR (1999): Relation of calcium, vitamin D and dairy food intake to ischaemic heart disease mortality among postmenopausal women. Am. J. Epidemiol. 149 , 151–161.

Coleman DL, Kazuva JE & Leiter EH (1990): Effect of diet on incidence of diabetes in non obese diabetic mice. Diabetes 39 , 432–436.

Committee of Medical Aspects of Food & Nutrition Policy (1998): Nutritional aspects of the development of cancer . Report of the Working Group on Diet and Cancer of the Committee of Medical Aspects of Food & Nutrition Policy. London: The Stationery Office.

Couzin J (2003): Diabetes' brave new world. Science 300 , 1862–1865.

Crawford RA, Boland MJ & Hill JP (2003): Changes over time in the associations between deaths due to ischaemic heart disease and some main food types. Austral. J. Dairy Technol. 58 , 183.

Elliott RB (1992): Epidemiology of diabetes in Polynesia & New Zealand : In Epidemiology and Etiology of Insulin-Dependent Diabetes in the Young , eds Levy-Marchal C & Czernichow P, Vol 21, pp 66–71. Basel: Karger.

Elliott RB, Harris DP, Hill JP, Bibby NJ & Wasmuth HE (1999): Type 1 (insulin-dependent) diabetes mellitus and cow milk: casein variant consumption. Diabetologia 42 , 292–296.

Elliott RB, Wasmuth HE, Bibby NJ & Hill JP (1997): The role of β -casein variants in the induction of insulin-dependent diabetes in the non-obese diabetic mouse and humans. In Seminar on Milk Protein Polymorphism . IDF Special Issue no. 9702, pp 445–453. Brussels: International Dairy Federation.

Elwood PC, Yarnell JWG & Burr ML (1991): Epidemiological studies of cardiovascular disease: progress report VII . Cardiff: MRC Epidemiology Unit.

FAO/WHO Expert Consultation (1998): Carbohydrates in human nutrition . Report of a Joint FAO/WHO Expert Consultation, FAO Food & Nutrition Paper 66. Rome: Food & Agriculture Organization of the UN.

Gerstein HC (1994): Cow's milk exposure and type 1 diabetes mellitus. A critical review of the clinical literature. Diabetes Care 17 , 13–19.

Goldberg JP, Folta C & Must A (2002): Milk: can a ‘good’ food be so bad? Pediatrics 110 , 826–832.

Grundy SM & Abrams J (1983): Comparison of actions of soy protein and casein on metabolism of plasma lipoproteins and humans. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 38 , 245–252.

Hartwig A, Teschemacher H, Lehmann W, Gauly M & Erhardt G (1997): Influence of genetic polymorphisms in bovine milk on the occurrence of bioactive peptides. In Milk Protein Polymorphism , pp 459–460. Brussels: International Dairy Federation.

Hill JP, Boland M, Crawford RA & Norris CS (2003): Changes in milk consumption are not responsible for increase in the incidence of type-1 diabetes or decrease in the incidence of deaths due to ischaemic heart disease. Austral. J. Dairy Technol. 58 , 188.

Hill JP, Crawford RA & Boland MJ (2002): Milk and consumers health: a review of the evidence for a relationship between the consumption of beta casein A1 with heart disease and insulin dependent diabetes mellitus. Proc. NZ Soc. Animal Production 62 , 111–114.

Howard AN & Marks J (1977): Hypocholesterolaemic effect of milk. Lancet ii , 255.

Howard AN & Marks J (1979): Effect of milk products on serum cholesterol. Lancet ii , 957.

Howard AN & Marks J (1982): The lack of evidence for a hypocholesterolaemic factor in milk. Atherosclerosis 45 , 243–247.

Hussi E, Miettinen TA, Ollus A, Kostiainen E, Ehnholm C, Haglund B, Huttunen JK & Manninen V (1981): Lack of serum cholesterol-lowering effect of skimmed milk and butter milk under controlled conditions. Atherosclerosis 39 , 267–272.

Jones M, Swerdlow AJ, Gill LE & Goldacre MJ (1998): Pre-natal and early life risk factors for childhood onset diabetes mellitus: a record linkage study. J. Epidemiol. 27 , 444–449.

CAS   Google Scholar  

Keys A (1971): Sucrose in the diet and coronary heart disease. Atherosclerosis 14 , 193–202.

Keys A (1973): Letter to the editors. Atherosclerosis 18 , 352.

Kimpimaki T, Erkkola M, Korhonen S, Kupila A, Vertanen SM, Ilonen J, Simell O & Knip M (2001): Short-term exclusive breast-feeding predisposes young children with increased genetic risk of Type 1 diabetes to progressive beta-cell autoimmunity. Diabetologia 44 , 63–69.

Laugesen M & Elliott R (2003): Ischaemic heart disease, Type 1 diabetes, and cow milk A1 β -casein. NZ Med. J. 116 , 295–313.

Malkani S, Nomplegi D, Hanse JW, Greiner DL, Mordes JP & Rossini AA (1997): Dietary cows milk protein does not alter the frequency of diabetes in he BB rat. Diabetes 46 , 1133–1140.

Mann GV (1977): A factor in yoghurt which lowers cholesteremia in man. Atherosclerosis 26 , 335.

Mann JI, Appelby PN, Key TJA & Thorogood M (1997): Dietary determinants of ischaemic heart disease in health conscious individuals. Heart 78 , 450–455.

Mann J & Skeaff M (2003): Editorial: β -casein variants and atherosclerosis—claims are premature. Atherosclerosis 170 , 11–12.

Mayer EJ, Hamman RF, Gay EC, Lezotte DC, Savitz DA & Kingensmith GJ (1988): Reduced risk of IDDM among breast-fed children. Diabetes 37 , 1625–1632.

McLachlan CNS (1996a): New Zealand patent application 306584.

McLachlan CNS (1996b): WTO patent application 96/35239.

McLachlan CNS (2001): β -casein A 1 , ischaemic heart disease mortality, and other illnesses. Med. Hypotheses 56 , 262–272.

Meisel H (2001): Bioactive peptides from milk proteins: a perspective for consumers and producers. Austral. J. Dairy Technol. 56 , 83–92.

Muntoni S & Muntoni S (1999): New insights into the epidemiology of Type 1 diabetes in Mediterranean countries. Diabetes/Metab. Res. Rev. 15 , 133–140.

Ness AR, Davey Smith G & Hart C (2002): Milk, coronary heart disease and mortality. J. Epidemiol. Commun. Health 55 , 379–383.

New Zealand patent application 295774 (1994): Method of selecting non-diabetogenic milk or milk products and milk or milk products so selected. Filed by New Zealand Dairy Board and the NZ Child Health Research Foundation.

New Zealand patent application 314285 (1998): ‘Immune response diagnostic test’ filed in 1998 by NZ Dairy Board & Child Health Research Foundation.

Ng-Kwi-Hang KF & Grosclaude F (1992): Advanced Dairy Chemistry , Vol 1 Proteins, pp 405–455. London: Elsevier.

Norris JM, Klingensmith G, Yu L, Hoffman M, Chase HP, Erlich HA, Hamman RF, Eisenbarth GS & Rewers M (1996): Lack of association between early exposure to cow's milk protein and β -cell autoimmunity. Diabetes autoimmunity study in the young (DAISY). J. Am. Med. Assoc. 276 , 609–614.

Norris JM & Scott FW (1996): A meta-analysis of infant diet and insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus: do biases play a role? Epidemiology 7 , 87–92.

Paxson JA, Weber JG & Kulczycki A (1997): Cow's milk-free diet does not prevent diabetes in NOD mice. Diabetes 46 , 1711–1717.

Powers AS (2001): Diabetes mellitus. In Harrison's Principles of Internal Medicine , eds Braunwald E, Fauci AS, Kasper DL, Hauser SL, Longo DL & Jameson JL, 15th Edition, pp 2112–2114. New York: McGraw Hill.

Reijonen H, Ilonen J, Knip M & Åkerblom HK (1991): HLA-DQB1 alleles and absence of Asp 57 as susceptibility factors of IDDM in Finland. Diabetes 40 , 1640–1644.

Roberts DCK, Truswell AS, Sullivan DR, Gorrie J, Darnton Hill I, Norton H, Thomas MA & Allen JK (1982): Milk, plasma cholesterol and controls in nutritional experiments. Atherosclerosis 42 , 323–325.

Sacks FM, Breslow JL, Wood PG & Kass EH (1983): Lack of an effect of dairy protein (casein) and soy protein on plasma cholesterol of strict vegetarians. An experiment and a critical review. J. Lipid Res. 24 , 1012–1020.

CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Scott FW (1990): Cow milk and insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus: is there a relationship? Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 51 , 489–491.

Scott F (1995): AAP recommendations on cow milk, soy and early infant feeding. Pediatrics 96 , 515–517.

Scott FW (1996): Food-induced type1 diabetes in the BB rat. Diabetes/Metab. Rev. 12 , 341–359.

Shaper AG, Wannamethee G & Walker M (1991): Milk, butter and heart disease. BMJ 302 , 785–786.

Snowdon DA, Phillips RL & Fraser GE (1984): Meat consumption and fatal ischaemic heart disease. Prevent. Med. 13 , 490–500.

Stahelin HB, Eichholzer M & Gey KF (1992): Nutritional factors correlating with cardiovascular disease: results of the Basel study. Biblioteca Nutritio Dieta 49 , 24–35.

Tailford KA, Berry CL, Thomas AC & Campbell JH (2003): A casein variant in cows milk is atherogenic. Atherosclerosis 170 , 13–19.

Teschemacher H, Umbach M, Hamel U, Praetorius K, Ahert-Hilder G, Brantl V, Lottspeich F & Henschen A (1986): No evidence for the presence of β -casomorphins in human plasma after ingestion of cow's milk or milk products. J. Dairy Res. 53 , 135–138.

Truswell AS (2002): Meat consumption and cancer of the large bowel. Eur. J. Clin. Nutr. 56 (Suppl 1), S19–S24.

van Raaij JMA, Katan MB & Hautvast JGAJ (1979): Casein, soya protein, serum cholesterol. Lancet ii , 958.

van Raaij JMA, Katan MB, Hautvast JGAJ & Hermus RJJ (1981): Effects of casein versus soy protein diets on serum cholesterol and lipoproteins in young healthy volunteers. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 34 , 1261–1271.

van Raaij JMA, Katan MB, West CE & Hautvast JGAJ (1982): Influence of diets containing casein, soy isolate, and soy concentrate on serum cholesterol and lipoproteins in middle-aged volunteers. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 35 , 925–934.

Virtanen SM, Räsänen L, Aro A, Lindstrom J, Sipppola H, Lounama R, Toivanen L, Tuomilehto J & Åkerblom HK (1991): Infant feeding in children <7 years of age with newly diagnosed IDDM. Diabetes Care 14 , 415–417.

Virtanen SM, Läärä E, Hyppönen E, Reijonen H, Räsänen L, Aro A, Knip M, Ilonen J & Åkerblom HK (2000): Cows milk consumption, HLA-DQBI genotype, and type 1 diabetes. A nested case–control study of siblings of children with diabetes. Diabetes 49 , 912–917.

WHO/FAO Consultation (2003): Diet, Nutrition and the prevention of chronic diseases . Report of a Joint WHO/FAO Consultation, WHO Technical Report Series 916. Geneva: Word Health Organization.

Willett W (1990): Nutritional Epidemiology , pp 8–9. New York: Oxford University Press.

World Cancer Research Fund (1997): Total fat and breast cancer. In Food, Nutrition and the Prevention of Cancer: A Global Perspective , pp 261–267. Washington, DC: American Institute for Cancer Research.

Yudkin J (1964): Diet and coronary thrombosis. Hypothesis and fact. Lancet ii , 155–162.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Human Nutrition Unit, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia

A S Truswell

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to A S Truswell .

Additional information

Guarantor : AS Truswell.

Contributors : AST reviewed the literature and wrote the paper.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Truswell, A. The A2 milk case: a critical review. Eur J Clin Nutr 59 , 623–631 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.ejcn.1602104

Download citation

Received : 19 November 2004

Accepted : 19 November 2004

Published : 02 May 2005

Issue Date : 01 May 2005

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.ejcn.1602104

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• coronary heart disease
• type 1 diabetes
• A1 & A2 variants of β -casein in cow milk

This article is cited by

New perspective on the interaction behavior between riboflavin and β lactoglobulin-β casein complex by biophysical techniques.

• Farzaneh Samandar
• Sara Malek-Mohammadi
• Jamshidkhan Chamani

Cell Biochemistry and Biophysics (2024)

A2 milk consumption and its health benefits: an update

• Huijin Jeong
• Young-Seo Park
• Sung-Sik Yoon

Food Science and Biotechnology (2024)

Mechanisms and clinical management of eosinophilic oesophagitis: an overview

• Luc Biedermann
• Alex Straumann

Nature Reviews Gastroenterology & Hepatology (2023)

Effects of A1 and A2 variants of β-casein on human health—is β-casomorphin-7 really a harmful peptide in cow milk?

• Ravindra Semwal
• Sunil Kumar Joshi
• Deepak Kumar Semwal

Nutrire (2022)

Oral Feeding of Cow Milk Containing A1 Variant of β Casein Induces Pulmonary Inflammation in Male Balb/c Mice

• Shikha Yadav
• Nakul Dev S. Yadav
• V. P. Singh

Scientific Reports (2020)

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

Don't have an account? Sign up now

Already have an account login, get 10% off on your next order.

Subscribe now to get your discount coupon *Only correct email will be accepted

(Approximately ~ 0.0 Page)

Total Price

Thank you for your email subscription. Check your email to get Coupon Code.

The A2 Milk Company Limited Porter Five Forces Analysis

Posted by Zander Henry on Aug-22-2018

Porter Five (5) Forces Model

Porter Five (5) Forces Model was proposed by Michael E. Porter in 1979. The purpose was to assess and evaluate the competitive positioning and strengths of business organisations. The model has three horizontal competitive forces (Threat of Substitute Products or services, the threat of new entrants and rivalry among existing firms) and two vertical forces (Bargaining power of buyers and bargaining power of suppliers).

These forces shape the competition within any industry. The overall industry competitiveness declines when these forces reduce profitability. Porter found SWOT analysis lacking in rigour. Many new companies use the Porter Five (5) Forces Model to decide whether it is profitable to enter in a particular industry.

Here is the pictorial presentation of the Porter Five (5) Forces Model:

The A2 Milk Company Limited Porter Five (5) Forces Analysis

Application of this model can help The A2 Milk Company Limited to determine the industry attractiveness and understand its competitive positioning in the market. The analysis can also be used to make some strategically wise decisions that could improve the performance of The A2 Milk Company Limited and ensure long-term survival.

Threats of new entrants

Threat of new entrants reflects how new market players impose threats to the existing market players. If the industry will be profitable and barriers to enter the industry will be low, it will attract more players and hence, the threat of new entrants. will be high.

Here are some factors that reduce the threat of new entrants for The A2 Milk Company Limited:

• Entry in the industry requires substantial capital and resource investment. This force also loses the strength if product differentiation is high and customers place high importance to the unique experience.
• The A2 Milk Company Limited will face the low threat of new entrants if existing regulatory framework imposes certain challenges to the new firms interested to enter in the market. In this case, new players will be required to fulfil strict, time consuming regulatory requirements, which may discourage some players from entering the market.
• The threat will be low if psychological switching cost for consumers is high and existing brands have established a loyal customer base.
• New entrants will be discouraged if access to the distribution channels is restricted.

The A2 Milk Company Limited will be facing high new entrants threat if

• Existing regulations support the entry of new players.
• Consumers can easily switch the brands due to weak/no brand loyalty.
• Initial capital investment is high.
• Building a distribution network is easy for new players.
• Retaliation from the existing market players is not a discouraging factor.

How The A2 Milk Company Limited can tackle the Threat of New Entrants?

• The A2 Milk Company Limited can develop brand loyalty by working on customer relationship management. It will raise psychological switching costs.
• It can develop long-term contractual relationships with distributors to widen access to the target market.
• The A2 Milk Company Limited can also an investment in research and development activities, get valuable customer data and introduce innovative products/services to set strong differentiation basis.

Threat of Substitute Products or services

The availability of substitute products or services makes the competitive environment challenging for The A2 Milk Company Limited and other existing players. High substitute threat shows that customers can use alternative products/services from other industries to meet their needs. Various factors determine the intensity of this threat for The A2 Milk Company Limited

The Threat of Substitute Products or services increases when;

• A cheaper substitute product/service is available from another industry
• The psychological switching costs of moving from industry to substitute products are low.
• Substitute product offers the same or even superior quality and performance as offered by The A2 Milk Company Limited’s product.

However, this threat is substantially low for The A2 Milk Company Limited when;

• The switching cost of using the substitute product is high (due to high psychological costs or higher economic costs)
• Customers cannot derive the same utility (in terms of quality and performance) from substitute product as they derive from the The A2 Milk Company Limited’s product.

How The A2 Milk Company Limited can tackle the Threat of Substitute Products or services?

• The A2 Milk Company Limited can reduce the Threat of Substitute Products or services by clearly emphasising how its offered product/service is better than the available substitutes.
• It should provide convincing reasons to the customers by offering a better experience and high value for money.
• It can raise switching costs by working on loyalty.
• Lastly, it can improve the quality, maximise value for money and set strong differentiation basis to discourage customers from using the substitute product.

Rivalry among existing firms

The Rivalry among existing firms shows the number of competitors that give tough competition to the The A2 Milk Company Limited High rivalry shows The A2 Milk Company Limited can face strong pressure from the rival firms, which can limit each other’s growth potential. Profitability in such industries is low as firms adopt aggressive targeting and pricing strategies against each other.

The Rivalry among existing firms will be low for The A2 Milk Company Limited if;

• There are only a limited number of players in the market
• The industry is growing at a fast rate
• There is a clear market leader
• The products are highly differentiated, and each market player targets different sub-segments
• The economic/psychological switching costs for consumers are high.
• The exit barriers are low, which means firms can easily leave the industry without incurring huge losses.

Similarly, there are some factors that increase the Rivalry among existing firms for The A2 Milk Company Limited For example, the company will face intense Rivalry among existing firms if market players are strategically diverse and target the same market. The rivalry will also be intense if customers are not loyal with existing brands and it is easier to attract others’ customers due to low switching costs. Competitors with equal size and offering undifferentiated products with slow industry growth tend to adopt aggressive strategies against each other. These all factors make the Rivalry among existing firms a major strategic concern for The A2 Milk Company Limited

How The A2 Milk Company Limited can tackle the Rivalry among existing firms?

The A2 Milk Company Limited should focus on the implicit needs and expectations of its customers to strengthen the differentiation basis. It should raise switching costs by developing long-term customer relationships. The organisation should also invest in research and development activities to identify new customer segments. In some cases, collaborating with competitors can be mutually beneficial. The organisation can look for this option as well.

Bargaining Power of Suppliers

Bargaining power of suppliers in the Porter 5 force model reflects the pressure exerted by suppliers on business organisations by adopting different tactics like reducing the product availability, reducing the quality or increasing the prices. When suppliers have strong bargaining power, it costs the buyers- (business organisations). Moreover, high supplier bargaining power can increase the competition in the industry and lower the profit and growth potential for The A2 Milk Company Limited Similarly, weak supplier power can make the industry more attractive due to high profitability and growth potential.

Bargaining power of suppliers will be high for The A2 Milk Company Limited if:

• Suppliers have concentrated into a specific region, and their concentration is higher than their buyers.
• This force is particularly strong when the cost to switch from one supplier to other is high for buyers (for example, due to contractual relationships).
• When suppliers are few and demand for their offered product is high, it strengthens the suppliers’ position against The A2 Milk Company Limited
• Suppliers’ forward integration weakens the The A2 Milk Company Limited’s position as they also become the competitors in that area.
• If The A2 Milk Company Limited is not well educated, does not have adequate market knowledge and lacks the price sensitivity, it automatically strengthens the suppliers' position against the organisation.
• Other factors that increase the suppliers’ bargaining power include-high product differentiation offered by suppliers, The A2 Milk Company Limited making only a small proportion of suppliers’ overall sales and unavailability of the substitute products.

Contrarily, the bargaining power of suppliers will be low for The A2 Milk Company Limited if:

• Suppliers are not concentrated
• Switching costs are low
• Product lacks differentiation
• Substitute products are available
• The A2 Milk Company Limited is highly price sensitive and has adequate market knowledge
• There is no threat of forward integration by suppliers.

How The A2 Milk Company Limited can tackle the Bargaining Power of Suppliers?

The A2 Milk Company Limited can strengthen its position against suppliers by decreasing the dependency on one or a few suppliers. It will increase its price sensitivity. Developing the long-term contractual relationships with suppliers from different regions not only lowers their bargaining power but also allows The A2 Milk Company Limited to improve its supply chain efficiency. Finally, The A2 Milk Company Limited can find the alternate ways of producing the product if product demand is high enough and the firm has required competencies and expertise. However, it requires detailed cost-benefit analysis to determine its feasibility. Product redesign and diversification of the product lines can also help the organisation reduce the suppliers’ power in the market.

Bargaining Power of Buyers

Bargaining power of buyers indicates the pressure that customers exert on the business organisations to get high quality products at affordable prices with excellent customer service. This force directly influences the The A2 Milk Company Limited’s ability to accomplish the business objectives. Strong bargaining power lowers profitability and makes the industry more competitive. Whereas, when buyer power is weak, it makes the industry less competitive and increase the profitability and growth opportunities for The A2 Milk Company Limited

There are some factors that increase the bargaining power of buyers:

• A more concentrated customer base increases their bargaining power against The A2 Milk Company Limited
• Buyer power will also be high if there are few in number whereas a number of sellers (business organisations) are too many.
• Low switching costs (economic and psychological) also increase the buyers’ bargaining power.
• In case of corporate customers, their ability to do backward integration strengthen their position in the market. Backward integration shows the buyers' ability to produce the products themselves instead of purchasing them from The A2 Milk Company Limited
• Consumers’ price sensitivity, high market knowledge and purchasing standardised products in large volumes also increase the buyers' bargaining power.

Some factors that decrease the bargaining power of buyers include lower customer concentration (means the customer base is geographically dispersed), customers’ inability to integrate backwards, low price sensitivity, lower market knowledge, high switching costs and purchasing customised products in small volumes.

How The A2 Milk Company Limited can tackle the Bargaining Power of Buyers?

The A2 Milk Company Limited can manage the bargaining power of buyers by increasing and diversifying their customer base. It can be done by introducing new products, targeting new market segments and adopting the product diversification strategies. Marketing and promotional strategies can also be helpful in this regard. Building loyalty by embedding innovation and offering excellent customer experience can raise the switching costs, which will ultimately reduce their bargaining power. The A2 Milk Company Limited can adopt these strategies to strengthen its competitive positioning in the market.

Porter 5 force model implications

The application of Porter five (5) forces model in real-world context allows organisations to .make wise strategic decisions. Impact and importance of each of the five forces is context dependent. By using Five Force analysis, The A2 Milk Company Limited can determine the industry attractiveness, make effective entry/exit decisions and assess the influence of these forces on their own business and competitors. Moreover, the dynamic analysis of this model can reveal important information. For example, The A2 Milk Company Limited can combine the Porter 5 force model with PESTEL framework to determine the industry’s potential future attractiveness. In some cases, companies do not have the required information to analyse five forces. In such a scenario, the analysis can be conducted with the help of assumptions. Mostly, consultants consider this model as a starting point, and other frameworks (like PESTEL and Value Chain) are used in conjunction for a better understanding of the external environment.

Argyres, N., & McGahan, A. M. (2002). An interview with Michael Porter. Academy of Management Perspectives, 16(2), 43-52.

Bartusková, T., & Kresta, A. (2015). Application of AHP method in external strategic analysis of the selected organisation. Procedia Economics and Finance, 30, 146-154.

Bose, R. (2008). Competitive intelligence process and tools for intelligence analysis. Industrial management & data systems, 108(4), 510-528.

E. Dobbs, M. (2014). Guidelines for applying Porter's five forces framework: a set of industry analysis templates. Competitiveness Review, 24(1), 32-45.

Grundy, T. (2006). Rethinking and reinventing Michael Porter's five forces model. Strategic Change, 15(5), 213-229.

Manteghi, N., & Zohrabi, A. (2011). A proposed comprehensive framework for formulating strategy: a Hybrid of balanced scorecard, SWOT analysis, Porter's generic strategies and Fuzzy quality function deployment. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 15, 2068-2073.

Porter, M. E. (2008). The five competitive forces that shape strategy. Harvard business review, 86(1), 78-93.

Utami, R. M., & Lantu, D. C. (2014). Development competitiveness model for small-medium enterprises among the creative industry in bandung. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 115, 305-323.

Vining, A. R. (2011). Public agency external analysis using a modified “five forces” framework. International Public Management Journal, 14(1), 63-105.

Williams, B., & Figueiredo, J. (2014). Lessons from an innovation-leader and tools to learn them. Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management, 7(4), 932-960.

Warning! This article is only an example and cannot be used for research or reference purposes. If you need help with something similar, please submit your details here .

9416 Students can’t be wrong

PhD Experts

Mobarak Faris

I was finding it hard to write the assignment of Marketing. God bless you Emily for such a great paper!

I shared everything for the assignment. Consequently, the expert wrote an excellent paper. There was no wordiness and repetition in the sentences. Grateful!!

I would like to give four stars to this paper writing help because they provided me a flawless assignment. Thank you very much!

Jacob Roger

I just wanted to thank the team of professional writers who provided me with an explained document. The paper was accurate and I'm satisfied. Thanks a lot!

Calculate the Price

(approx ~ 0.0 page), total price $0, next articles.

• The Food Revolution Group Limited Porter Analysis
• Tianmei Beverage Group Corporation Limited Porter Analysis
• Treasury Wine Estates Limited Porter Analysis
• Wattle Health Australia Limited Porter Analysis
• Webster Limited Porter Analysis
• Wellard Limited Porter Analysis
• Wingara Ag Ltd Porter Analysis
• Yowie Group Ltd Porter Analysis
• Company Name Porter Analysis
• 1300 Smiles Limited Porter Analysis

Previous Articles

• Tegel Group Holdings Limited Porter Analysis
• Tassal Group Limited Porter Analysis
• Tasfoods Limited Porter Analysis
• Synlait Milk Limited Porter Analysis
• Sterling Plantations Limited Porter Analysis
• Select Harvests Limited Porter Analysis
• Seafarms Group Limited Porter Analysis
• Ridley Corporation Limited Porter Analysis
• Refresh Group Limited Porter Analysis
• Pacific Dairies Limited Porter Analysis

Be a great writer or hire a greater one!

Academic writing has no room for errors and mistakes. If you have BIG dreams to score BIG, think out of the box and hire Case48 with BIG enough reputation.

Our Guarantees

Zero plagiarism, best quality, qualified writers, absolute privacy, timely delivery.

Interesting Fact

Most recent surveys suggest that around 76 % students try professional academic writing services at least once in their lifetime!

Allow Our Skilled Essay Writers to Proficiently Finish Your Paper.

We are here to help. Chat with us on WhatsApp for any queries.

Customer Representative

The A2 Milk Company Case Study Solution Analysis

by HBR Three

The A2 Milk Company Case Study Solution & Analysis. Get The A2 Milk Company Case Study Analysis & Solution. Contact us directly at buycasesolutions(at)gmail(dot)com if you want to order for The A2 Milk Company Case Solution, Case Analysis, Case Study... More

The A2 Milk Company Case Study Solution & Analysis. Get The A2 Milk Company Case Study Analysis & Solution. Contact us directly at buycasesolutions(at)gmail(dot)com if you want to order for The A2 Milk Company Case Solution, Case Analysis, Case Study Solution. Benjamin C. Esty, Daniel Fisher Less

Email us for Any Case Solution at: [email protected] The a2 Milk Company Case Study Solution & Analysis The a2 Milk Company Case Study Solution & Analysis. Our tutors are available 24/7 to assist in your academic stuff, Our Professional writers are ready to serve you in services you need. Every Case Study Solution & Analysis is prepared from scratch, top quality, plagiarism free. Authors: Benjamin C. Esty, Daniel Fisher Get Case Study Solution and Analysis of The a2 Milk Company in a FAIR PRICE!! Steps for Case Study Solution & Analysis: 1. Introduction of The a2 Milk Company Case Solution The The a2 Milk Company case study is a Harvard Business Review case study, which presents a simulated practical experience to the reader allowing them to learn about real life problems in the business world. The The a2 Milk Company case consisted of a central issue to the organization, which had to be identified, analysed and creative solutions had to be drawn to tackle the issue. This paper presents the solved The a2 Milk Company case analysis and case solution. The method through which the analysis is done is mentioned, followed by the relevant tools used in finding the solution. The case solution first identifies the central issue to the The a2 Milk Company case study, and the relevant stakeholders affected by this issue. This is known as the problem identification stage. After this, the relevant tools and models are used, which help in the case study analysis and case study solution. The tools used in identifying the solution consist of the SWOT Analysis, Porter Five Forces Analysis, PESTEL Analysis, VRIO analysis, Value Chain Analysis, BCG Matrix analysis, Ansoff Matrix analysis, and the Marketing Mix analysis. The solution consists of recommended strategies to overcome this central issue. It is a good idea to also propose alternative case study solutions, because if the main solution is not found feasible, then the alternative solutions could be implemented. Lastly, a good case study solution also includes an implementation plan for the recommendation strategies. This shows how through a step-by-step procedure as to how the central issue can be resolved. 2. Problem Identification of The a2 Milk Company Case Solution Harvard Business Review cases involve a central problem that is being faced by the organization and these problems affect a number of stakeholders. In the problem

Email us for Any Case Solution at: [email protected] identification stage, the problem faced by The a2 Milk Company is identified through reading of the case. This could be mentioned at the start of the reading, the middle or the end. At times in a case analysis, the problem may be clearly evident in the reading of the HBR case. At other times, finding the issue is the job of the person analysing the case. It is also important to understand what stakeholders are affected by the problem and how. The goals of the stakeholders and are the organization are also identified to ensure that the case study analysis are consistent with these. 3. Analysis of the The a2 Milk Company HBR Case Study The objective of the case should be focused on. This is doing the The a2 Milk Company Case Solution. This analysis can be proceeded in a step-by-step procedure to ensure that effective solutions are found. In the first step, a growth path of the company can be formulated that lays down its vision, mission and strategic aims. These can usually be developed using the company history is provided in the case. Company history is helpful in a Business Case study as it helps one understand what the scope of the solutions will be for the case study. The next step is of understanding the company; its people, their priorities and the overall culture. This can be done by using company history. It can also be done by looking at anecdotal instances of managers or employees that are usually included in an HBR case study description to give the reader a real feel of the situation. Lastly, a timeline of the issues and events in the case needs to be made. Arranging events in a timeline allows one to predict the next few events that are likely to take place. It also helps one in developing the case study solutions. The timeline also helps in understanding the continuous challenges that are being faced by the organisation. 4. SWOT analysis of The a2 Milk Company An important tool that helps in addressing the central issue of the case and coming up with The a2 Milk Company HBR case solution is the SWOT analysis. The SWOT analysis is a strategic management tool that lists down in the form of a matrix, an organisation's internal strengths and weaknesses, and external opportunities and threats. It helps in the strategic analysis of The a2 Milk Company Once this listing has been done, a clearer picture can be developed in regards to how strategies will be formed to address the main problem. For example, strengths will be used as an advantage in solving the issue. Therefore, the SWOT analysis is a helpful tool in coming up with the The a2 Milk Company Case Study answers. One does not need to remain restricted to using the traditional SWOT analysis, but the advanced TOWS matrix or weighted average SWOT analysis can also be used.

Email us for Any Case Solution at: [email protected] 5. Porter Five Forces Analysis for The a2 Milk Company Another helpful tool in finding the case solutions is of Porter's Five Forces analysis. This is also a strategic tool that is used to analyse the competitive environment of the industry in which The a2 Milk Company operates in. Analysis of the industry is important as businesses do not work in isolation in real life, but are affected by the business environment of the industry that they operate in. Harvard Business case studies represent real-life situations, and therefore, an analysis of the industry's competitive environment needs to be carried out to come up with more holistic case study solutions. In Porter's Five Forces analysis, the industry is analysed along 5 dimensions. • These are the threats that the industry faces due to new entrants. • It includes the threat of substitute products. • It includes the bargaining power of buyers in the industry. • It includes the bargaining power of suppliers in an industry. • Lastly, the overall rivalry or competition within the industry is analysed This tool helps one understand the relative powers of the major players in the industry and its overall competitive dynamics. Actionable and practical solutions can then be developed by keeping these factors into perspective. 6. PESTEL Analysis of The a2 Milk Company Another helpful tool that should be used in finding the case study solutions is the PESTEL analysis. This also looks at the external business environment of the organisation helps in finding case study Analysis to real-life business issues as in HBR cases. • The PESTEL analysis particularly looks at the macro environmental factors that affect the industry. These are the political, environmental, social, technological, environmental and legal (regulatory) factors affecting the industry. • Factors within each of these 6 should be listed down, and analysis should be made as to how these affect the organisation under question. 7. VRIO Analysis of The a2 Milk Company This is an analysis carried out to know about the internal strengths and capabilities of The a2 Milk Company . Under the VRIO analysis, the following steps are carried out: • The internal resources of The a2 Milk Company are listed down. • Each of these resources are assessed in terms of the value it brings to the organization. • Each resource is assessed in terms of how rare it is. A rare resource is one that is not commonly used by competitors. • Each resource is assessed whether it could be imitated by competition easily or not.

Email us for Any Case Solution at: [email protected] • Lastly, each resource is assessed in terms of whether the organization can use it to an advantage or not. • The analysis done on the 4 dimensions; Value, Rareness, Imitability, and Organization. If a resource is high on all of these 4, then it brings long-term competitive advantage. If a resource is high on Value, Rareness, and Imitability, then it brings an unused competitive advantage. If a resource is high on Value and Rareness, then it only brings temporary competitive advantage. If a resource is only valuable, then it’s a competitive parity. If it’s none, then it can be regarded as a competitive disadvantage. 8. Value Chain Analysis of The a2 Milk Company The Value chain analysis of The a2 Milk Company helps in identifying the activities of an organization, and how these add value in terms of cost reduction and differentiation. This tool is used in the case study analysis as follows: • The firm’s primary and support activities are listed down. • Identifying the importance of these activities in the cost of the product and the differentiation they produce. • Lastly, differentiation or cost reduction strategies are to be used for each of these activities to increase the overall value provided by these activities. Recognizing value creating activities and enhancing the value that they create allow The a2 Milk Company to increase its competitive advantage. 9. BCG Matrix of The a2 Milk Company The BCG Matrix is an important tool in deciding whether an organization should invest or divest in its strategic business units. The matrix involves placing the strategic business units of a business in one of four categories; question marks, stars, dogs and cash cows. The placement in these categories depends on the relative market share of the organization and the market growth of these strategic business units. The steps to be followed in this analysis is as follows: • Identify the relative market share of each strategic business unit. • Identify the market growth of each strategic business unit. • Place these strategic business units in one of four categories. Question Marks are those strategic business units with high market share and low market growth rate. Stars are those strategic business units with high market share and high market growth rate. Cash Cows are those strategic business units with high market share and low market growth rate. Dogs are those strategic business units with low market share and low growth rate. • Relevant strategies should be implemented for each strategic business unit depending on its position in the matrix. The strategies identified from the The a2 Milk Company BCG matrix and included in the case pdf. These are either to further develop the product, penetrate the market, develop the market, diversification, investing or divesting. 10. Ansoff Matrix of The a2 Milk Company

Email us for Any Case Solution at: [email protected] Ansoff Matrix is an important strategic tool to come up with future strategies for The a2 Milk Company in the case solution. It helps decide whether an organization should pursue future expansion in new markets and products or should it focus on existing markets and products. • The organization can penetrate into existing markets with its existing products. This is known as market penetration strategy. • The organization can develop new products for the existing market. This is known as product development strategy. • The organization can enter new markets with its existing products. This is known as market development strategy. • The organization can enter into new markets with new products. This is known as a diversification strategy. The choice of strategy depends on the analysis of the previous tools used and the level of risk the organization is willing to take. 11. Marketing Mix of The a2 Milk Company The a2 Milk Company needs to bring out certain responses from the market that it targets. To do so, it will need to use the marketing mix, which serves as a tool in helping bring out responses from the market. The 4 elements of the marketing mix are Product, Price, Place and Promotions. The following steps are required to carry out a marketing mix analysis and include this in the case study analysis. • Analyse the company’s products and devise strategies to improve the product offering of the company. • Analyse the company’s price points and devise strategies that could be based on competition, value or cost. • Analyse the company’s promotion mix. This includes the advertisement, public relations, personal selling, sales promotion, and direct marketing. Strategies will be devised which makes use of a few or all of these elements. • Analyse the company’s distribution and reach. Strategies can be devised to improve the availability of the company’s products. 12. The a2 Milk Company Blue Ocean Strategy The strategies devised and included in the The a2 Milk Company case memo should have a blue ocean strategy. A blue ocean strategy is a strategy that involves firms seeking uncontested market spaces, which makes the competition of the company irrelevant. It involves coming up with new and unique products or ideas through innovation. This gives the organization a competitive advantage over other firms, unlike a red ocean strategy. 13. Competitors analysis of The a2 Milk Company The PESTEL analysis discussed previously looked at the macro environmental factors affecting business, but not the microenvironmental factors. One of the microenvironmental factors are competitors, which are addressed by a competitor

Email us for Any Case Solution at: [email protected] analysis. The Competitors analysis of The a2 Milk Company looks at the direct and indirect competitors within the industry that it operates in. • This involves a detailed analysis of their actions and how these would affect the future strategies of The a2 Milk Company . • It involves looking at the current market share of the company and its competitors. • It should compare the marketing mix elements of competitors, their supply chain, human resources, financial strength etc. • It also should look at the potential opportunities and threats that these competitors pose on the company. 14. Organisation of the Analysis into The a2 Milk Company Case Study Solution Once various tools have been used to analyse the case, the findings of this analysis need to be incorporated into practical and actionable solutions. These solutions will also be the The a2 Milk Company case answers. These are usually in the form of strategies that the organisation can adopt. The following step-by-step procedure can be used to organise the Harvard Business case solution and recommendations: • The first step of the solution is to come up with a corporate level strategy for the organisation. This part consists of solutions that address issues faced by the organisation on a strategic level. This could include suggestions, changes or recommendations to the company's vision, mission and its strategic objectives. It can include recommendations on how the organisation can work towards achieving these strategic objectives. Furthermore, it needs to be explained how the stated recommendations will help in solving the main issue mentioned in the case and where the company will stand in the future as a result of these. • The second step of the solution is to come up with a business level strategy. The HBR case studies may present issues faced by a part of the organisation. For example, the issues may be stated for marketing and the role of a marketing manager needs to be assumed. So, recommendations and suggestions need to address the strategy of the marketing department in this case. Therefore, the strategic objectives of this business unit (Marketing) will be laid down in the solutions and recommendations will be made as to how to achieve these objectives. Similar would be the case for any other business unit or department such as human resources, finance, IT etc. The important thing to note here is that the business level strategy needs to be aligned with the overall corporate strategy of the organisation. For example, if one suggests the organisation to focus on differentiation for competitive advantage as a corporate level strategy, then it can't be recommended for the The a2 Milk Company Case Study Solution that the business unit should focus on costs. • The third step is not compulsory but depends from case to case. In some HBR case studies, one may be required to analyse an issue at a department. This

Email us for Any Case Solution at: [email protected] issue may be analysed for a manager or employee as well. In these cases, recommendations need to be made for these people. The solution may state that objectives that these people need to achieve and how these objectives would be achieved. The case study analysis and solution, and The a2 Milk Company case answers should be written down in the The a2 Milk Company case memo, clearly identifying which part shows what. The The a2 Milk Company case should be in a professional format, presenting points clearly that are well understood by the reader. 15. Alternate solution to the The a2 Milk Company HBR case study It is important to have more than one solution to the case study. This is the alternate solution that would be implemented if the original proposed solution is found infeasible or impossible due to a change in circumstances. The alternate solution for The a2 Milk Company is presented in the same way as the original solution, where it consists of a corporate level strategy, business level strategy and other recommendations. 16. Implementation of The a2 Milk Company Case Solution The case study does not end at just providing recommendations to the issues at hand. One is also required to provide how these recommendations would be implemented. This is shown through a proper implementation framework. A detailed implementation framework helps in distinguishing between an average and an above average case study answer. A good implementation framework shows the proposed plan and how the organisations' resources would be used to achieve the objectives. It also lays down the changes needed to be made as well as the assumptions in the process. • A proper implementation framework shows that one has clearly understood the case study and the main issue within it. • It shows that one has been clarified with the HBR fundamentals on the topic. • It shows that the details provided in the case have been properly analysed. • It shows that one has developed an ability to prioritise recommendations and how these could be successfully implemented. • The implementation framework also helps by removing out any recommendations that are not practical or actionable as these could not be implemented. Therefore, the implementation framework ensures that the solution to the The a2 Milk Company Harvard case is complete and properly answered. 17. Recommendations and Action Plan for The a2 Milk Company case analysis

Email us for Any Case Solution at: [email protected] For The a2 Milk Company, based on the SWOT Analysis, Porter Five Forces Analysis, PESTEL Analysis, VRIO analysis, Value Chain Analysis, BCG Matrix analysis, Ansoff Matrix analysis, and the Marketing Mix analysis, the recommendations and action plan are as follows: • The a2 Milk Company should focus on making use of its strengths identified from the VRIO analysis to make the most of the opportunities identified from the PESTEL. • The a2 Milk Company should enhance the value creating activities within its value chain. • The a2 Milk Company should invest in its stars and cash cows, while getting rid of the dogs identified from the BCG Matrix analysis. • To achieve its overall corporate and business level objectives, it should make use of the marketing mix tools to obtain desired results from its target market.

• Related publications
• Add to favorites

Our Strategy

The a2 Milk Company has set clear goals for the business in four primary areas: People, Planet, Consumers and Shareholders, to ensure that in addition to achieving its commercial ambitions, it is also actively working to deliver its sustainability priorities and is executing in a way that further develops a trusted and transparent relationship with its shareholders.

How we create value

Our strategy

Medium term measures of success

Copyright © 2023 The a2 Milk Company Limited

The a2 Milk Company respectfully acknowledges the traditional owners of the land on which we live, work, and operate. We pay our respect to Elders past and present.  a2 Milk® is a trademark of The a2 Milk Company Limited

*A1 and A2 proteins refer to A1 and A2 beta-casein protein types

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List

A2 Milk: New Perspectives for Food Technology and Human Health

Salvador fernández-rico.

1 Laboratorio de Higiene Inspección y Control de Alimentos, Departamento de Química Analítica, Nutrición y Bromatología, Universidad de Santiago de Compostela, 27002 Lugo, Spain

Alicia del Carmen Mondragón

Aroa lópez-santamarina, alejandra cardelle-cobas, patricia regal, alexandre lamas, israel samuel ibarra.

2 Área Académica de Química, Universidad Autónoma del Estado de Hidalgo, Carretera Pachuca-Tulancingo Km. 4.5, Pachuca 42076, Hidalgo, Mexico

Alberto Cepeda

José manuel miranda, associated data.

No new data were created or analyzed in this study. Data sharing is not applicable to this article.

Although milk consumption is increasing worldwide, in some geographical regions, its consumption has persistently declined in recent decades. This fact, together with the increase in milk production prices, has caused both milk producers and the dairy industry to be immersed in a major crisis. Some possible solutions to this problem are to get people who do not currently consume milk to start drinking it again, or to market milk and dairy products with a higher added value. In this context, a type of milk called A2 has recently received attention from the industry. This type of milk, characterized by a difference in an amino acid at position 67 of the β-casein polypeptide chain, releases much smaller amounts of bioactive opioid peptide β-casomorphin 7 upon digestion, which has been linked to harmful effects on human health. Additionally, A2 milk has been attributed worse technological properties in the production of some dairy products. Thus, doubts exist about the convenience for the dairy industry to bet on this product. The aim of this review is to provide an update on the effects on human health of A2 milk, as well as its different technological properties to produce dairy products.

1. Introduction

Milk is regarded as one of the staples of Western diets because of its high nutritional value. It is the first food in the diet of mammals, providing all the energy and nutrients necessary for growth and development in their first periods of life [ 1 ]. Milk intake stops after weaning in all mammals except in humans, who continue their consumption in adulthood, not only as milk but also as dairy products. In recent years, the dairy sector has been immersed in a major crisis in Europe due to high price volatility, increments of production costs, and a recent deregulation process, due to the abolition of milk quotas [ 2 , 3 ]. Additionally, their consumption is being replaced in some consumer groups by plant-based milk substitutes, which are often presented as a healthier, more sustainable, and animal-friendly alternative to bovine milk [ 1 ].

In this context, the dairy sector needs to find ways to increase profitability [ 2 ]. One possible alternative is to incorporate milk into the diet of consumers who do not currently consume it. In this case, one of the major segments of the population that could increase the consumption of milk and dairy products are those who suffer adverse reactions after ingestion [ 4 ]. Digestive discomfort is mainly associated with lactose malabsorption, which affects approximately 65% of the adult population worldwide [ 5 ]. Lactose-intolerant individuals suffer diverse digestive symptoms after milk ingestion, such as abdominal pain, bloating sensation, stool frequency changes, and stool consistency changes [ 6 ]. Another option to increase dairy profitability is the search for differentiated products with a higher added value [ 7 ], such as milk or dairy products with associated benefits to human health. Food with health claims shows higher prices than those observed in high-volume food segments [ 8 ].

More than 95% of the proteins contained in cow’s milk consist of caseins and whey proteins. Caseins represent approximately 80% of total milk protein, and whey proteins represent about 20%. Among bovine skim milk caseins, four different types have been described: α-casein S1 (ranging 12–15 g/L), β-casein (9–11 g/L), α-casein S2 (3–4 g/L), and κ-casein (2–3 g/L). Among other protein fractions in bovine skim milk, the most relevant content is for α-lactalbumin (0.6–1.7 g/L), serum albumin (0.4 m/L), immunoglobulins (0.5–0.8 g/L), lactoferrin (0.02–0.1 g/L), and the secretory component (0.02–0.1 g/L) [ 9 ].

These proteins have a major implication in milk production, the industry, and consumer health. β-casein occupies the second position in bovine milk caseins in terms of abundance, in addition to presenting many amino acids [ 10 , 11 ]. All types of caseins undergo modifications in their structures due to the substitution or exclusion of some amino acids of the peptide chain, thus generating genetic variants. When there is more than one structural variant encoded by a gene, it can be referred to as a polymorphism [ 12 ]. These genetic variants that affect protein structures cause changes in their characteristics, in addition to influencing milk production and technological applications for industrial use [ 13 ].

In recent years, a new type of cow’s milk, named “A2 milk”, has been introduced in the market. This type of milk was first commercialized in New Zealand and has since been gaining a presence in the markets of several countries [ 7 ]. A2 milk is characterized by being free of the A1 variant of β-casein: a protein that represents approximately 30% of the caseins in cow’s milk [ 8 ]. By genotyping dairy cows and using semen from selected bulls, or genotyping and selecting only A2 calves for replacement, it is possible to obtain a dairy farm producing only A2-type milk [ 7 ]. The coding gene in β-casein synthesis is the CNS2 gene, for which 13 different allelic variants have been described (A1, A2, A3, B, C, D, E, F, G, H1, H2, and J) [ 14 ]. The A2 variant is present in the milk of many mammals, both in humans and in goats, sheep, and cows, while the A1 variant is only present in cattle [ 12 ].

The two most common variants of this protein are types A1 and A2, which differ by only one amino acid at position 67. In type A1 β-casein, there is an amino acid histidine at this position, whereas in type A2 protein, this histidine is replaced by a proline [ 15 ]. Thus, the original codon cytosine-cytosine-thymine (CCT), which forms the amino acid proline in the A2 variant, is modified to cytosine-adenine-thymine (CAT), which encodes the formation of histidine at position 67 of the β-casein polypeptide chain in A1 variants [ 16 ]. Dairy cow breeds show different β-casein patterns in their milk. Thus, the breed with the highest percentage of A2 alleles in Europe is Guernsey, with 92%, whereas A1 is the most common allele in other dairy breeds, such as Holstein (60%) or Ayrshire (60%) [ 17 ]. Currently, most milk marketed contains a mixture of A1 and A2 β-casein, which may be from A1/A2 heterozygous cows or from the milk mixture of A1/A1 and A2/A2 homozygous animals [ 18 ].

2. The A2 Milk Market

Although the worldwide consumption of milk and dairy products is constantly increasing and is expected to continue increasing over the next decade [ 19 ], milk consumption has decreased significantly since the 1970s in specific geographical areas, such the United States and the European Union [ 20 , 21 ]. Thus, the dairy industry has tried to be creative and develop new products to increase consumption. In 2003, the A2 Milk Company Limited emerged in New Zealand, commercializing both milk and dairy products (cheeses, yogurts, or creams) free of the A1 variant of β-casein. A2 milk strongly entered the market in this country and covered almost 10% of the milk market in Australia. In view of the possible benefits of A2 milk for human health, in addition to avoiding the negative effects of β-casein A1, many farmers around the world have switched to A2 milk production [ 22 ]. This successful market trend has spread to other geographic areas, such as North America, Europe, and China [ 20 ]. Consequently, other companies dedicated to the commercialization of semen for dairy farms have introduced the A2/A2 genotype in their sire directories as a characteristic of interest and added value for their animals [ 23 ].

The adoption of the A2 milk production system is complicated because not all farmers are willing to genotype their cattle to obtain 100% A2 milk. Generally, it is assumed that the Al allele brings better production performance characteristics in dairy cows than the A2 genotype [ 24 ], although some works did not find significant differences in milk production [ 25 ], and some studies even found that higher milk production rates are obtained with the A2 genotype [ 11 , 26 ]. Economically, genetic selection is not an excessive expense because genotyping tests are becoming cheaper [ 23 ]. However, the milk production process must be separated from that of milk coming from A1 cows. The cows must be milked separately, in separate tanks, with milk independently transported, brought to the factory separately, and manufactured without mixing or contaminating with A1 protein, as the risk of this happening is very high. Thus, it is necessary to have a large potential market and a milk price premium to make the whole process profitable. Many people could be interested in consuming only A2 milk, but only if its beneficial effects for human heath have been demonstrated by scientific evidence [ 7 ]. A recent work investigating consumers’ awareness of A2 milk [ 21 ] revealed that the factors that condition consumers to buy these dairy products are price; origin; and quality certification, such as “organic” or “traditional”. This same work revealed that the premium price that Italian consumers are willing to pay for A2 milk with respect to fresh lactose-free milk is approximately 20-euro cents/liter [ 21 ]. Other work [ 27 ] revealed that only 38% of a Brazilian group of consumers would pay an extra price for A2 milk with respect to conventional milk. The first dairy company commercializing A2 milk (The A2 milk company) claims that they pay a premium of around 5–7% to its farmer suppliers in New Zealand, Australia, and the United Kingdom [ 28 ].

A recent work [ 29 ] revealed that a high proportion of consumers did not know about A2 milk, and thus had never considered purchasing this type of milk. Moreover, a positive relationship was found between socioeconomic level and A2 milk awareness [ 30 ]. Therefore, it seems important to promote marketing strategies to improve awareness of A2 milk among less informed consumers and modify their buying behavior.

Additionally, in recent years, some legal problems have arisen from the adulteration of some milk marketed as A2 with other non-A2 milks. This addition of non-A2 milk to A2 milk represents fraud for consumers because they pay an extra price for this adulterated A2 milk, and they may be concerned about the consumption of mixed β-casein variant A1 [ 22 ]. This fact makes it necessary for the marketing of A2 milk at a premium price to be viable and for consumer authorities to implement good systems to control this possible fraud.

3. Physical and Technological Properties of A2 Milk

A recent work [ 31 ] investigating the sensory quality, color, and composition of A2 milk compared with A1 milk found that different genotypes did not affect the smell, taste, or general acceptance of the milk. However, some differences were found in the color. A2 milk showed color parameters closer to the gold standard for color, making it more appealing to consumers without artificial food coloring [ 31 ].

Milk protein composition is an important factor in the nutritional and technological characteristics of milk. The quantities and proportions of milk caseins and whey proteins have been identified as playing a major role in milk coagulation and curd firming processes [ 32 ]. Several studies have extensively assessed the effects of milk protein genetic variants on the composition and protein profile of milk [ 31 , 32 , 33 ] and its coagulation properties [ 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 ]. Milk caseins play an important role in the production of dairy products, such as in cheese manufacturing [ 36 , 37 ]. However, there are still few reports about the influence of A2 milk on dairy product manufacturing and consumer perceptions.

Because of the increasing trend in A2 milk consumption in some countries [ 38 , 39 , 40 ], some farmers and breeding associations began to increase the frequency of the β-casein A2 allele in dairy cattle populations without paying attention to the potential effect of this change on milk technological characteristics [ 29 ]. Nevertheless, it was revealed that due to their composition, A2 milk has a higher percentage of total proteins and fat than A1 milk [ 12 ]. A recent work found slight differences in the amino acid composition of A2 and A1 milk, showing that A2 milk had a higher amount of leucine that A1 milk but lower overall amino acid content [ 31 ]. A2 milk could also have worse technological characteristics to produce some dairy products, such as cheese or yogurt [ 29 ]. Therefore, producers should keep in mind that if its production is not for sale as drinking milk but as an ingredient for the manufacturing of dairy products, the better price they expect to obtain for A2 milk could remain without effect or even be considered a negative factor by the industry.

β-casein influences the gelation and coagulation of milk because it plays a central role in casein micelle formation. According to Nguyen et al. [ 39 ], A2 β-casein is less hydrophobic, more soluble, and has a higher chaperone activity than A1 β-casein. According to this, several authors [ 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 ] associated the A2 milk variant with poor rennet coagulation properties. A further study [ 29 ] also found that the A1 milk genotype was associated with the best cheese-making abilities with respect to A2 milk due to a slight worsening of the coagulation properties for A2 milk.

Other works [ 38 ] suggested that different genetic variants of β-casein could influence the distribution and balance of calcium in milk. Thus, such genetic variants could influence the assembly and structure of casein micelles [ 43 ], thereby affecting curd formation during cheese making ( Table 1 ). Several authors [ 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 44 ] reported that the gelling process of A2 milk is slower during fresh cheese making. In addition, a more porous microstructure and finer protein strands were observed in the gel made from milk with β-casein A2, which cause a lower gel strength compared to the gel from β-casein A1 milk [ 38 ]. However, a group of consumers detected no differences at the organoleptic level when asked about the taste of two types of Brazilian cheeses made from A1 or A2 milk, and only in one case (Minas Frescal cheese) did consumers find the cheese made from A2 milk softer and creamier and less consistent, rubbery, and drier than A1 cheese [ 27 ]. From these results, it can be concluded that A2 milk is associated with higher digestibility and better gut physiology, and the dairy industry should favor this genotype in milk destined for fresh consumption. However, it is inadvisable to use milk containing only the A2 variant of β-casein for cheese production, as this is associated with a worsening of milk technological characteristics and, consequently, a less efficient cheese-making process [ 29 ].

Differences in sensory characteristics and technological properties of A1 and A2 milk and dairy products.

Additionally, it was reported that A2 milk had lower fat globule diameters [ 45 ] and higher polyunsaturated fatty acids content [ 31 ] than A1 milk [ 45 ]. Milk fatty acids and fat globule size influence the physicochemical, nutritional, and sensorial properties of milk and milk products [ 45 ]. The morphometric characteristics and fatty acid composition of milk are strongly influenced by casein polymorphism, as shown by the significant differences found among casein haplotypes of milk. These results are of interest because the degree of differentiation in globule size influences renneting, cheese texture, color, flavor, and butter texture. With respect to fat % in A2 milk, some authors found higher rates of fat in A2 animals than in A1 genotype cows when produced by the same dairy cow breed and in the same ambient [ 11 , 24 ].

Other important processes for the dairy industry for which a different activity was reported from A1 and A2 milk are emulsion and foaming capacities, although the results reported are not entirely consistent. The A2 β-casein variant was associated with poorer foaming capacity compared to A1, which was due to a more extensive spread of β-casein A1 at the interface, facilitating the more rapid formation of a coherent interfacial layer than in A2 [ 46 ]. In contrast, it was also reported that milk with the β-casein A2 variant had better foaming properties than A1 milk [ 37 ]. The emulsion properties of milk containing different β-casein variants were compared by Darewicz and Dziuba [ 47 ]. They concluded that A2 milk was more efficient than A1 milk in the emulsion formation, but its emulsions were less stable than those formed with the A1 and B variants. In addition, the A1 and B variants have better ordered structures in the absorbed state than A2, which also contributes to differences in their emulsifying ability [ 47 ] ( Table 1 ).

In addition to cow’s milk, one work also investigated the allergenic and physicochemical properties of A2 goat’s milk [ 48 ], finding that the physicochemical properties of the A2 β-casein fraction are similar to those of bovine whole casein.

4. Implications for Human Health of Dairy β-Caseins and β-Casomorphins

Protein composition explains many of the applications of milk in the industry, in addition to its nutritional value. Many milk protein characteristics are a consequence of genetic polymorphisms of dairy cows, which is why there are stakeholders to improve milk production in the dairy industry and to improve bovine herds [ 12 ]. When dairy products are consumed, digestive enzymes in the human intestine act on β-casein A1, thereby releasing the bioactive opioid peptide β-casomorphin 7 (BCM-7), which is primarily responsible for triggering the allergic process and is associated with a delayed milk gastrointestinal transit time [ 5 , 54 ]. The opposite is true for β-casein A2, which only under specific in vitro conditions with pH and enzymatic conditions not found in the human intestine can release small amounts of BCM-7 [ 54 ]. In fact, the BCM-7 concentration in the gut was found to be four times higher when produced from milk obtained from homozygous A1 cattle than from A2/A2 cattle [ 55 ]. Moreover, BCM-7 may be detected in the blood after the digestion of A1 milk but not after the consumption of A2 milk [ 13 ].

In dairy products, although BCM-7 has been detected in several types of cheeses, it is generally at lower concentrations than in milk [ 39 ]. Nguyen et al. [ 39 ] reported that BCM-7 is at a higher concentration in mold cheeses than in semihard cheeses because proteolytic enzymes from cheese starter cultures reduce its presence during ripening. The hydrolysis of BCM-7 by specific yogurt-forming bacteria reduced its presence to an unusual level [ 14 ].

Thus, after the intake of milk or dairy foods containing β-casein A1, the produced BCM-7 binds with µ-opioid receptors, which are responsible for pain or thirst, in the walls of the gastrointestinal tract and nervous system of consumers. In contrast, A2 milk consumption has been shown to increase the natural production of glutathione, which shows antioxidant activity and, consequently, health benefits. Due to its opioid-like activity, BCM-7 was proposed as a risk factor for adverse gastrointestinal symptoms perceived by consumers as milk intolerance, as well as for certain diseases [ 17 ], whereas A2 milk is considered safe.

Nevertheless, there is not convincing evidence for the relation of BCM-7 and consequently for β-casein A1 intake, and its adverse effects have been achieved by all authors [ 56 , 57 ]. Although related reviews have gathered a large amount of scientific evidence, the role of β-casomorphins (BCMs), such as BCM-7, and their physiological functions remain controversial, and more research with improved diagnostic techniques is needed to unequivocally determine their mechanism of action and study their possible health-related impacts [ 22 ]. Recently, other reviews [ 15 , 58 , 59 , 60 ] concluded that human-based published evidence provided moderate certainty for the adverse digestive health effects of A1 β-casein compared with A2 β-casein, but only indications and not conclusive evidence for the relation with other health effects. Globally, the adverse effects of BCM-7 on health have obtained positive results when experimental animal models were used for their study. Table 2 summarizes the results of the investigations about the effects of A1 or A2 β-casein in the development of gastrointestinal discomfort [ 61 , 62 ], gut microbiota [ 63 ], inflammatory response [ 61 ], type 1 diabetes [ 64 , 65 , 66 ], cardiovascular health [ 67 ], and pulmonary inflammation [ 68 ]. In all cases except one [ 64 ], no beneficial effect was found for A2 milk consumption with respect to A1 milk consumption.

Use of A2 milk in experimental animal trials to treat or prevent different health issues.

Conversely, fewer positive effects of A2 milk in comparison to A1 milk consumption were found when trials were performed in humans ( Table 3 ). Thus, only in the case of digestive intolerance did A2 consumption show beneficial effects when compared with A1 milk consumption [ 12 , 17 , 69 , 70 ], but no positive effects were found for cardiovascular markers [ 71 , 72 ], chronic functional constipation [ 73 ], muscle soreness [ 74 ], or type 1 diabetes [ 75 ]. With respect to neurological disorders, BCM-7 in the urine of autistic children who consumed A1 milk was found to be 10-fold higher than in children who consumed A2 milk, indicating a potential benefit of A2 milk consumption for this group [ 76 ].

Use of A2 milk in human clinical trials to treat or prevent different health issues.

As cited below, when A1 milk is consumed and reaches the human stomach, enzymatic digestion by gastric enzymes, such as pepsin, pancreatic elastase, and leucine aminopeptidase, would yield BCM-7 in an approximate proportion of 4 mg of BCM-7 released in the human jejunum from 30 g of A1 β-casein, which is related to increased inflammation and gastrointestinal discomfort [ 13 , 17 ]. This inflammation and discomfort derived from the digestion of A1 milk could explain the dairy intolerance that many individuals perceive as lactose or milk intolerance [ 13 , 16 ]. BCM-7 is also known to induce the production of mucins (the sticky proteins of mucus) [ 77 ], which provides a logical explanation as to why many people associate milk with mucus production.

This relationship was confirmed by a clinical trial comparing the effects of consuming milk with either β-casein A2 or a mixture of β-casein A1 and A2 for a 14-day period followed by an equivalent washout period in individuals who self-reported lactose intolerance. It was found that after consumption of the mixed A1/A2 milk, those individuals who self-perceived themselves as lactose intolerant experienced an exacerbation of lactose intolerance-related symptoms [ 13 ]. Even in consumers who are actually lactose intolerant, the substitution of A1 milk for A2 milk may ameliorate symptoms associated with intolerance. Clarke et al. [ 78 ] found in a rat trial that consumption of milk composed of 75% β-casein A2 elevated duodenal lactase activity compared to A1-fed rats. Subsequently, a randomized, double-blind clinical study found that A2 milk caused fewer symptoms of lactose intolerance in 25 subjects with maldigestion than mixed A1A2 milk [ 18 ]. Volunteers who consumed A1 milk reported abdominal pain, whereas those who consumed A2 milk showed no adverse effects [ 69 ].

BCM-7 may also influence lactose intolerance by affecting lactase production and activity, leading to hypolactasia with consequent symptoms of lactose malabsorption. On the other hand, BCM-7 was associated with gastrointestinal delay, which favors fermentation of lactose and many other oligosaccharides, causing many of the symptoms associated with lactose intolerance, such as colon irritation or inflammation, measured by the inflammatory marker myeloperoxidase [ 6 ].

Other negative effects attributed to A1 milk consumption have been widely discussed [ 16 ]. These potential beneficial effects of A2 milk consumption with respect to A1 milk are mainly related to allergic response, oxidative stress, diabetes, cardiovascular health, neurological disorders [ 4 , 16 , 79 , 80 , 81 ], sudden death infant syndrome [ 82 ], and the modulation of gut microbiota [ 63 ]. In addition to initiating gastrointestinal effects, BCM-7 released from A1 β-casein has been implicated in promoting oxidative stress by decreasing the uptake of the sulfur amino acid cysteine, which may be particularly important during the postnatal transition from placental to gastrointestinal nutrition in infants [ 78 ]. The adequate absorption of cysteine not only provides antioxidant resources for the gastrointestinal tract but also represents the portal to entry to support reduced glutathione (GSH) concentrations for the entire body. A recent clinical trial demonstrated that GSH concentrations in human subjects increased 2-fold after ingestion of A2 milk consumption compared with A1 milk consumption [ 83 ]. The health benefits of increased GSH levels are due to its high antioxidant capacity, which allows the aerobic metabolism to proceed without cellular damage caused by reactive oxygen species. The study revealed that supplementation with the A2 variant reduces the risk of diseases associated with oxidative stress and thus reduces the effects of aging, promotes the recovery of damaged tissues, and promotes fertility. Conversely, a decrease in GSH concentrations is associated with an increase in inflammation, including an increased release of proinflammatory cytokines such as tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α). BCM-7 can also exert a significant influence on methylation reactions, which is of particular importance for neurodevelopment [ 68 , 81 ].

4.1. Effects of A2 Milk on Allergies and Intolerance

The incidence of allergies through food consumption is low with respect to total allergies, not even representing 10% of the worldwide allergies that occur in the population under 18 years of age. The percentage of allergy occurrence has increased worldwide and is associated with numerous factors, such as race, age, and degree of urbanization [ 84 ]. Allergies associated with the consumption of BCM-7 have been gaining more importance in scientific studies. Different responses of infants to the consumption of breast milk and infant formulas have been observed; the latter causes alterations in bacterial adhesion and intestinal barrier status, as well as the dysfunction of tight junctions in the intestinal epithelium caused by calcium ions. On the other hand, BCM-7 elicits allergic responses not only in children but also in adults, since the presence of this peptide in the systemic circulation causes changes in the immune response [ 17 ]. The rationale for studying the difference between the A1 and A2 subvariants of the β-casein protein was based on the hypothesis that chronic functional constipation may in fact be an allergic immune response to the ingested BCM-7 protein [ 17 ].

BCM-7 can influence nervous, digestive, and immune functions through µ-opioid receptors located on the cell surfaces of these systems [ 85 ]. In this regard, Barnett et al. [ 61 ] compared the gastrointestinal effects of milk-based diets with β-casein type A1 or A2 in rats. They found a significantly longer gastrointestinal transit time in the A1 milk-fed group than for A2 milk, and that jejunal proline dipeptidyl peptidase IV enzyme activity was also higher in the A1 group than in the A2 group. Proline dipeptidyl peptidase IV is the main enzyme capable of hydrolyzing BCMs. In the same vein, in a study in mice, it was concluded that consumption of the β-casein A1 genetic variant can increase the inflammatory response and increase intestinal permeability and interleukin-4 levels in the intestine by activating the Th2 pathway compared to the A2 variant [ 86 ].

The difference in symptoms of milk intolerance when consuming A1 milk and A2 milk was investigated in Chinese adults [ 87 ], and it was found that gastrointestinal problems caused by consuming A2 β-casein were much lower than in the case of conventional milk. These findings indicated that A2 β-casein was associated with more severe gastrointestinal symptoms and exhibited a slight tendency for improvement of these symptoms.

Jung et al. [ 48 ] assessed the hypoallergenic property of the A2 β-casein fraction by measuring the release of histamine and TNF-α from HMC-1 human mast cells. The outcome of the study revealed no significant differences in the levels of histamine and TNF-α after treatment with A2 β-casein and in the control.

4.2. Effects of A2 Milk on Cardiovascular Health

Cardiovascular diseases can be caused by multiple factors and develop over a long period of time before presenting symptoms or being diagnosed. Therefore, generally, when they appear, it is very difficult to attribute them to a single cause but rather to a combination of multiple predisposing factors. The main risk factors for cardiovascular disease are high blood pressure, high LDL cholesterol and low HDL cholesterol, smoking, obesity, and physical inactivity [ 88 ]. Venn et al. [ 72 ] found that rabbits fed milk containing β-casein A2 had lower total cholesterol levels and less aortic intima-media thickening than those fed A1. Several clinical studies confirmed that the consumption of milk containing an A1 variant of β-casein favored the development of heart disease in humans. This fact was hypothesized because certain human populations that consumed milk from ruminant species free from A1 β-casein exhibited relatively lower incidences of cardiovascular diseases than Europeans [ 5 ]. At the cardiovascular level, it was reported that animals exposed to β-casein A1 showed significantly higher cholesterol, LDL, HDL, and triglyceride concentrations than subjects who consumed β-casein A2, as a control group, which consumed only whey protein [ 67 ]. These results suggest that the consumption of β-casein A1 may contribute to an increased risk of ischemic heart disease and, potentially, to a significantly higher mortality rate caused by adverse cardiovascular events.

The same findings were mimicked [ 67 ], which found that β-casein A2 was less atherogenic than A1. However, not all the work completed shows consistent results in this regard, as another randomized trial with 62 participants found no differential effects on cholesterol levels in humans consuming A1 or A2 milk or other dairy products for more than 4 weeks [ 72 ].

Similar to other BCMs, BCM-7 has been found to be related to the stimulation of LDL-cholesterol oxidation and is an important risk factor for acute cardiovascular events [ 11 ]. The LDL fraction is responsible for transporting lipids through the plasma, is essential for cholesterol transport to peripheral tissues, and is highly susceptible to oxidative damage. This oxidation plays a major role in the development of cardiovascular disease and atherosclerosis [ 16 ].

There have been several studies on the consumption of A1 and A2 β-caseins in animals, where it has been shown that those fed with A1 milk had a higher level of cholesterol and a greater deposit on the surface of the aorta. One of the most important and significant studies was performed with rabbits; Tailford et al. [ 67 ] concluded that both A1 and A2 β-caseins caused aortic fatty streaks, although A1 produced more extensive lesions. The thickness of striae in A1-fed rabbits was greater than that in A2-fed rabbits; even with increased dietary cholesterol, the thickness was significantly greater in A1 than in A2. On the other hand, the Tailford study also investigated whether β-casein A2 had an atheroprotective effect when compared with cholesterol-containing whey (0.5%). It was concluded that, for the first time, β-casein A2 had a slight protective effect, since those rabbits fed β-casein A2 at 20% had a much lower aortic thickness, a lower serum cholesterol level, and a significant reduction in LDL cholesterol [ 67 ]. Similar results were obtained in another work carried out in rabbits [ 64 ], which found that A2 is slightly less atherogenic than A1.

However, the effects of A1 or A2 milk could not be confirmed in humans. In this sense, in a randomized crossover human trial performed in New Zealand over 62 subjects, researchers found no significant differences in plasma concentrations of triacylglycerol and total LDL and HDL cholesterol between β-caseins A1 and A2 [ 72 ].

On the other hand, to reinforce this hypothesis, a posterior study was performed to examine whether A1 β-casein supplementation would promote a relative risk in people at high risk of developing cardiovascular diseases compared to A2 β-casein supplementation, but there was no evidence that this was possible [ 71 ]. People supplemented with A1 and A2 beta-casein had very similar blood cholesterol levels 12 weeks after the intervention, and aortic pressure was also similar, so it has been concluded that β-casein supplementation has no cardioprotective advantage over A1 [ 71 ]. Currently, there are not enough scientific studies that corroborate the hypothesis that β-casein A1 consumption promotes the occurrence of cardiovascular disease.

4.3. Effects on Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus

Diabetes has reached epidemic levels worldwide, with almost 300 million people suffering from this disease. Although type 2 diabetes is the most common worldwide, type 1 diabetes accounts for 10–15% of all cases of diabetes and is continuously growing in all age groups [ 89 ]. Type 1 diabetes mellitus is an autoimmune disease that affects the β-cells of the pancreas, preventing them from producing insulin. Generally, it appears at early ages, which is why it is known as “childhood diabetes”; however, it can also appear in adulthood. The incidence of type 1 diabetes mellitus varies by region due to the genetic difference that exists between herds at each site, and thus the composition of their milk. Several studies have shown that the incidence of type 1 diabetes has been higher in countries such as Finland and Sweden, where A1 milk consumption is higher, while its incidence is lower in Japan and Venezuela (with the lowest A1 milk consumption per capita).

The main risk factor for type 1 diabetes is genetic, which is often triggered by environmental factors [ 90 ]. Numerous triggers have been identified, including prenatal and postnatal exposures, as is the case of β-casein A1, recognized as a key environmental trigger that may explain a significant increase in type 1 diabetes. Early exposure of infants to cow’s milk has been identified as a major factor in the development of type 1 diabetes. Autoimmunity to β-cells arises at early ages, and an early bovine milk-based diet may modulate the risk of type 1 diabetes [ 89 ].

A long-term experimental study revealed that A1 β-casein-fed mice developed diabetes after 250 days of treatment, whereas A2-fed mice were found to be nondiabetic under similar conditions [ 91 ]. Padberg et al. [ 92 ] found that in a clinical trial involving a total of 1257 individuals, increased amounts of anti-β-casein A1 antibodies were recorded among patients with type 1 diabetes and their siblings, whereas the parents and control persons contained antibodies against the A2 variant.

It has been observed that β-casein A1 affects the immune system by producing an inhibition in the lymphocytes of the intestinal system, causing an increased susceptibility of the endogenous virus that can infect the B islets of Langerhans of the pancreas and thus favoring the development of type 1 diabetes [ 11 ]. The evidence that β-casein A1 is the main trigger for type 1 diabetes is still controversial and needs to be proven. The most convincing data were provided by Laugesen and Eliott [ 79 ], who demonstrated a positive correlation between per capita consumption of β-casein A1 and type 1 diabetes in 19 developed countries. On the other hand, it has also been studied in rodent models, although the mechanisms are not well defined [ 89 ]. One has shown that generationally, the likelihood of type 1 diabetes if accompanied by A1 milk feeding increases compared to A2 milk. Four generations of rodents at risk for diabetes were fed a β-casein A1-based diet and a β-casein A2-based diet, and the results were quite conclusive, because in the first two generations, there was not much incidence of type 1 diabetes; in the next two at thirty weeks, there was a difference between those fed A1 milk and those fed A2 milk [ 89 ].

With respect to the mechanisms’ effects of β-casein regarding type 1 diabetes, it was described that BCM-7 acts as an immunosuppressant in the intestinal immune system, impairing tolerance to dietary antigens, which may contribute to the development of type 1 diabetes. It is well established that intestinal inflammation, along with accompanying changes in gut permeability, predisposes individuals to develop cellular autoimmunity by affecting gut permeability and immune activation [ 18 ]. There are two basic hypotheses for the possible association between A1 milk and type 1 diabetes. The first mechanism is based on the opioid action of the peptide product of BCM-7. The disruption of metabolic processes caused by the opioid activity of BCM-7 could result in the dysregulation of insulin and thus in an alteration of established glucose control mechanisms, including the ability of BCM-7 to reduce GSH concentrations, which can lead to cell death by ferroptosis [ 93 ], an effect that could be reversed by administering an opioid receptor inhibitor [ 89 ]. The second proposal described is through molecular mimicry of the casein protein and an epitope on the glucose transporter 2 present in the cells [ 89 ]. It is unknown whether the existence of cellular autoantibodies is only a biomarker of type 1 diabetes or a factor in the disease process [ 90 ]. In addition, it has been postulated that low expression of antioxidant enzymes may predispose islet cells to autoimmune reactions, resulting in type 1 diabetes [ 94 ]. Chia et al. [ 89 ] reviewed animal-based trials and in vitro assays and concluded that A1 β-casein and BCM-7 were the dominant triggers of type 1 diabetes in individuals with genetic risk factors. This was consistent with those reported [ 95 ], who hypothesized that exposure to A1 β-casein milk is related to the rising incidence of type 1 diabetes, and Kohil et al. [ 96 ], who postulated that BCM-7 could act as an epigenetic modulator, differentially methylating genes involved in type 1 diabetes development.

Although there are studies showing a correlation between β-casein A1 consumption and the incidence of type 1 diabetes, evidence of causality in this field is limited, and even the studies performed show contradictory results [ 16 ]. In this regard, recent work in rats found no difference between the type of milk consumed and nondifferent health markers related to diabetes [ 65 ].

A1 and A2 diets were protective in two rodent models of spontaneous type 1 diabetes, and the A1 diet was somewhat more diabetogenic [ 64 ]. However, no differences were recorded in the analysis of insulitis and pancreatic cytokine gene expression in animals fed A1 and A2. In contrast, Thakur et al. [ 65 ] found no differences in the blood profile and histopathology of the heart, liver, and kidney of diabetic rats after consuming A1 and A2 diets for 60 days.

4.4. Effects on Neurological Disorders

With respect to neurological disorders, a randomized double-blind clinical study with 45 participants showed that the consumption of mixed A1/A2 milk worsened cognitive processing speed and accuracy within 14 days [ 5 ], whereas subjects who consumed only A2 milk did not show this effect. Clarke and Yelland [ 97 ] found a direct relationship between the consumption of variant A1 and reduced cognitive function and, similarly, between the consumption of variant A2 and improved cognitive function in preschoolers after the consumption of A2 milk compared with conventional milk [ 70 ]. The precise mechanism or type specificity of the protein and its effects on neurological pathology are unclear, but one hypothesis is that BCM-7 interacts with the nervous system given its μ-opioid receptor stimulatory nature [ 11 ]. Another hypothesis, supported by preclinical studies in animal models, is that the A1 variant may trigger a much higher degree of inflammation than the A2 variant [ 16 ].

Opioid receptors are widely distributed throughout the brain and are also found in the spinal cord and peripheral sensory nerves and are involved in several different functions, including appetite, depression, feeding behavior, respiratory behavior, and euphoria [ 88 ]. The µ receptor to which BCMs preferentially bind shows high levels of expression in areas of the brain and spinal cord with an important role in pain and analgesia, gastrointestinal functions, or even mood and thermoregulation [ 88 ].

Among the different neurological disorders, special attention has been given to the relationship between A1 β-casein intake and autism. Autism is characterized by difficulties in the individual’s personality, social interactions, communication difficulties, and abnormal isolating behaviors [ 11 ]. It was seen to be directly related to the opioids mentioned above, as increased BCM-7 from A1 milk induces an inflammatory response in the gastrointestinal tract of children. This is exacerbated because the gut is highly permeable, leading to an increase in BCM-7 at the blood–brain barrier. This accumulation in the brain and its binding to μ-opioid receptors develop autism. This arises mostly in infants and children highly susceptible to autism due to an underdeveloped intestinal mucosa and an early introduction to their diet of cow’s milk. A direct correlation has been observed between autism and BCM-7 levels in both the blood and urine of children with autism [ 98 ]. On the other hand, it has also been observed in a recent study that A1 milk replaced by A2 milk showed an improvement in cognitive performance [ 11 ].

Sudden infant death is the most common factor seen in sudden infant death syndrome in infants within the first year of life and is the replacement of breastfeeding with bovine milk. When fed A1 milk, the milk protein is digested in the underdeveloped intestine, so BCM-7 is fully absorbed and passes directly into the bloodstream. This absorption is complete, so it passes beyond the blood–brain barrier without blocking the central nervous system. These BCM-7 molecules act as ligands for opioid receptors in the brain and can affect the respiratory system or induce depression, as well as reduce blood pressure, leading to sudden infant death [ 11 ]. Several animal studies have shown that ingestion of A1 milk causes ventilatory depression, such as sudden infant death syndrome. Ventilatory depression only occurs when BCMs are injected directly into the cerebroventricular cavity. On the other hand, in infants with such a syndrome, BCMs are found in the cerebrospinal fluid, whereas in normal infants, they are not [ 99 ]. The blood circulation of BCM-7 indicates that the complete absorption of opioid peptides from A1 milk causes neurodevelopmental alterations in humans. Another article suggested a reduction in schizophrenic symptoms related to a decrease in A1 milk intake in the USA and Europe [ 100 ].

4.5. Effects on the Intestinal Microbiota

The effects of the A1 and A2 β-caseins on gut microbiota have only been assayed in a mouse model thus far [ 63 ]. In this work, the A2 milk-fed group showed a higher content of fecal short-chain fatty acids (in particular, isobutyrate) of intestinal CD4+ and CD19+ lymphocytes in the intraepithelial compartment and improved villi tropism. The analysis of fecal microbiota identified Deferribacteriaceae and Desulfovibrionaceae as the most discriminant families for the A2 milk-fed mouse group, while Ruminococcaceae was the most abundant bacterial family for the A1 group. Taken together, these results suggest a positive role of milk, when containing exclusively A2 beta-casein, on gut immunology and morphology of a mouse model [ 63 ]. However, this is the only article published to date investigating the different effects of A1 and A2 β-caseins on gut microbiota, and there is very limited knowledge of the metabolomic analysis related to gut microbiota and A2 milk intake [ 101 ].

In another mouse model, it was found that A2 milk increased the levels of intestinal short-chain fatty acids produced by gut microbiota in aged mice. These fatty acids are very important for good colonic epithelial maintenance, as they are the main source of energy for colonic epithelial cells [ 102 ].

Other recent work [ 103 ] showed that A2 β-casein intake improved gastrointestinal symptoms in adults in a group of 60 volunteers, and an increase in Bifidobacterium spp. was found in the distal colon with respect to ordinary milk consumption. This increase in Bifidobacterium spp. counts was accompanied by improved symptoms of gastrointestinal discomfort, such as a reduced proportion of abdominal distension and bowel movement, increased frequency of bowel movements, and changed stool characteristics in comparison to uncharacterized ordinary milk.

There are not enough studies on the effects that the different β-caseins can cause on the human intestinal microbiota, considering that only mouse assays and only one study in humans have been performed thus far. Although the results obtained seem to suggest slight benefits at this level derived from the substitution of A1 β-caseins with A2 β-caseins, these effects must be studied from a broader point of view, since the human gut microbiota is a very complex system from which no significant conclusions can be drawn from the increase or decrease of a single genus or metabolite.

5. Conclusions

In general, the positive results obtained in experimental animal trials concerning the health effects of A2 milk have not always been confirmed by clinical trials in humans. However, there seems to be a sufficient consensus on the beneficial effects of A2 milk on the reduction in digestive intolerance associated with the consumption of A1 milk. This positive effect is of great importance, since a good part of the consumers who have abandoned milk consumption have done so because conventional milk causes them discomfort. Combined with the fact that some consumers are willing to pay a higher price for A2 milk, A2 milk could help to alleviate the current economic difficulties suffered by both milk producers and the dairy industry. To this end, information campaigns would be necessary, since in some countries, the level of awareness of the potential benefits of A2 milk consumption among consumers still seems to be low. For the rest of the potential positive effects on human health, despite the contradictory results to date, there have not been enough clinical trials carried out for the conclusions obtained to be definitive, and it would be very interesting to deepen the research in this sense.

In dairy producers who use a significant part of their production to produce dairy products, especially cheese, the less suitable technological properties of A2 milk compared to A1 milk must also be considered.

Funding Statement

The authors thank the European Regional Development Funds (FEDER), grant ED431C 2018/05, and Programa Iberoamericano de Ciencia y Tecnología para el Desarrollo (CyTED), grant PCI2018-093245, for covering the cost of publication.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, S.F.-R., A.L.-S. and J.M.M.; methodology, A.C.-C., A.L. and P.R.; data analysis, I.S.I. and A.C.; writing—original draft preparation, A.C., P.R. and S.F.-R.; writing—review and editing, A.d.C.M., A.C. and J.M.M. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Data availability statement, conflicts of interest.

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Vrio Analysis of The A2 Milk Company Case Analysis

Home >> Harvard Business School >> The A2 Milk Company >> Vrio Analysis

Vrio Analysis of The A2 Milk Company Case Study Help

Another broad range structure used is the Vrio Analysis of The A2 Milk Company Case Analysis, which provides the remarkable opportunity to the Vrio Analysis of The A2 Milk Company Case Help to gain the practical competitive benefit in the market.

Alternative

The options for addressing the inefficient worker management and weak appointment system are as follows: User-friendly, quicker and effective booking system The Vrio Analysis of The A2 Milk Company Case Analysis can implement the user-friendly, quicker and more powerful appointment system, due to which, completion outcome would more than likely make the process of appointment more efficient, so that the quantity of time that is required by agent to get connected with customer would increase, hence generating more earnings. The brand-new system would minimize the actions for booking from 7 to 5, and it would determine the previous visitor or customers, so that the travel representative would go through their history of buying. The newest automatic performance would help the Vrio Analysis of The A2 Milk Company Case Solution in saving the time of agent, moving more control and versatility into their hands and turning multiple phone calls into 3 simple steps. It would offer anintuitive reservation experience on the basis of the travel partners' feedback. Pros The greater marketing and sales synergy. A modern reservation method. Saves personnel time. Business is available for booking. Faster payments. Cons Needs an internet access. It is pricey. An inefficient employee management. The HR group priorities should be converted to drive the positioning of the Vrio Analysis of The A2 Milk Company Case Help through improved efficiency management as well as an improved internal communication. Such technique would offer the foundation to track the employees' development and efficiency with the passage of time.The Vrio Analysis of The A2 Milk Company Case Help can encourage the staff members by producing CLEVER goals. The Vrio Analysis of The A2 Milk Company Case Analysis needs to lower the worker turnover rate, cross train workers, and the expense. The assessment report of staff members on plainly specified job expectation ought to be developed in order to assure that they receive actionable and clear input that would be made an application for the higher organizational efficiency. The simple to use and reliable cloud based staff member evaluation software application would improve the performance of the group as a whole. Pros It tracks and improves the staff member performance It cuts the staff members' cost Enhancement in the employees' productivity It creates higher benefits to the Vrio Analysis of The A2 Milk Company Case Solution. Enhances the staff member loyalty and retention. Lead to recognition and benefit. Maximizes the engagement. Clear responsibilities. Expense benefits. Cons It is pricey. Barrier in the efficiency of the employees. After taking into consideration the options to address the emerging concerns with the organization, it is recommended that the Vrio Analysis of The A2 Milk Company Case Solution should utilize the IT spending on facilities, in order to improve the reservation system, which would allow the Vrio Analysis of The A2 Milk Company Case Help to understand the optimum efficiency through marketing, sales as well as the revenue yield management capabilities. By improving the booking system, the infrastructure of the Vrio Analysis of The A2 Milk Company Case Analysis would be enhanced, hence making the clients pleased and offering marketing before they board ships.

Action strategy

The A2 milk case: a critical review

Affiliation.

• 1 Human Nutrition Unit, University of Sydney, Australia. [email protected]
• PMID: 15867940
• DOI: 10.1038/sj.ejcn.1602104

This review outlines a hypothesis that A1 one of the common variants of beta-casein, a major protein in cows milk could facilitate the immunological processes that lead to type I diabetes (DM-I). It was subsequently suggested that A1 beta-casein may also be a risk factor for coronary heart disease (CHD), based on between-country correlations of CHD mortality with estimated national consumption of A1 beta-casein in a selected number of developed countries. A company, A2 Corporation was set up in New Zealand in the late 1990s to test cows and market milk in several countries with only the A2 variant of beta-casein, which appeared not to have the disadvantages of A1 beta-casein. The second part of this review is a critique of the A1/A2 hypothesis. For both DM-I and CHD, the between-country correlation method is shown to be unreliable and negated by recalculation with more countries and by prospective studies in individuals. The animal experiments with diabetes-prone rodents that supported the hypothesis about diabetes were not confirmed by larger, better standardised multicentre experiments. The single animal experiment supporting an A1 beta-casein and CHD link was small, short, in an unsuitable animal model and had other design weaknesses. The A1/A2 milk hypothesis was ingenious. If the scientific evidence had worked out it would have required huge adjustments in the world's dairy industries. This review concludes, however, that there is no convincing or even probable evidence that the A1 beta-casein of cow milk has any adverse effect in humans. This review has been independent of examination of evidence related to A1 and A2 milk by the Australian and New Zealand food standard and food safety authorities, which have not published the evidence they have examined and the analysis of it. They stated in 2003 that no relationship has been established between A1 or A2 milk and diabetes, CHD or other diseases.

Publication types

• Caseins / adverse effects*
• Caseins / immunology
• Coronary Disease / chemically induced
• Coronary Disease / epidemiology*
• Coronary Disease / prevention & control
• Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1 / chemically induced
• Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1 / epidemiology*
• Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1 / prevention & control
• Endorphins / adverse effects
• Endorphins / immunology
• Milk / adverse effects*
• Milk / immunology
• Peptide Fragments / adverse effects
• Peptide Fragments / immunology
• Peptide Fragments
• beta-casomorphin 7