WhatsApp 
The competitive environment of Harvard would be studied by means of Porter's five forces analysis which would highlight the degree of rivalry in the market.
Currently we can see that the adhesive market has a high growth capacity due to the existence of fragmented segments with Harvard delighting in management and a combined market share of 75% with two other industry gamers, Eastman and Permabond. While market competition between these gamers could be called 'intense' as the customer is not brand conscious and each of these players has prominence in terms of market share, the truth still stays that the market is not saturated and still has numerous market segments which can be targeted as potential specific niche markets even when releasing an adhesive. We can even point out the truth that sales cannibalization may be leading to market rivalry in the adhesive dispenser market while the market for immediate adhesives provides development potential.
Bargaining Power of Buyer: The Bargaining power of the buyer in this industry is low specifically as the purchaser has low knowledge about the item. While business like Harvard have handled to train distributors concerning adhesives, the last consumer is dependent on distributors. Around 72% of sales are made directly by manufacturers and distributors for immediate adhesives so the purchaser has a low bargaining power.
Bargaining Power of Supplier: Offered the truth that the adhesive market is controlled by 3 gamers, it could be stated that the provider enjoys a greater bargaining power compared to the purchaser. The truth remains that the supplier does not have much influence over the purchaser at this point especially as the buyer does not reveal brand name acknowledgment or price level of sensitivity. When it comes to the adhesive market while the maker and the purchaser do not have a major control over the real sales, this shows that the distributor has the higher power.
Threat of new entrants: The competitive environment with its low brand name loyalty and the ease of entry revealed by foreign Japanese rivals in the instantaneous adhesive market indicates that the market permits ease of entry. If we look at Harvard in specific, the company has dual capabilities in terms of being a producer of adhesive dispensers and instant adhesives. Prospective threats in devices dispensing market are low which reveals the possibility of creating brand name awareness in not just instantaneous adhesives but likewise in giving adhesives as none of the industry players has handled to position itself in dual capabilities.
Threat of Substitutes: The threat of alternatives in the instant adhesive industry is low while the dispenser market in particular has replacements like Glumetic pointer applicators, built-in applicators, pencil applicators and sophisticated consoles. The truth stays that if Harvard presented Bond-A-Matic, it would be enjoying sales cannibalization for its own products. (see appendix 1 for framework).