ON TIME BUSINESS MANAGEMENT A+ WORK, ON TIME, NO PLAGARIZING; ON TIME

ФІНАНСОВО-КРЕДИТНА ДІЯЛЬНІСТЬ: ПРОБЛЕМИ ТЕОРІЇ ТА ПРАКТИКИ

ISSN: 2306-4994 | eISSN: 2310-8770 | Том 3 (68), 2026

456 DOI: 10.55643/fcaptp.3.68.2026.5194

EVALUATING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF ENTERPRISE DIVERSIFICATION PROCESS MANAGEMENT

ABSTRACT

The study addresses the problem of insufficiently integrated approaches to evaluating

the effectiveness of enterprise diversification process management under conditions of

market turbulence, economic instability, and increasing uncertainty. The aim of the ar-

ticle is to assess how diversification strategies influence enterprise resilience, financial-

economic outcomes, and strategic adaptability across different sectors of the economy.

The scientific novelty of the study lies in combining the Ansoff matrix, SWOT and PES-

TLE analyses, sectoral comparison, and scenario modelling into an integrated framework

for evaluating diversification management effectiveness. The empirical component sys-

tematised eight corporate cases from the technology, industrial, manufacturing, finan-

cial, and service-related sectors. The results showed that related diversification ac-

counted for 50.0% of the analysed cases, conglomerate or unrelated diversification for

37.5%, and unsuccessful diversification for 12.5%. Positive financial-economic dynam-

ics were identified in 87.5% of the companies and were reflected in revenue expansion,

broader market coverage, income-source diversification, stronger competitive position-

ing, and increased resilience. The study also identified three scenarios of diversification

management: optimistic, baseline, and pessimistic, which differ according to the level

of strategic preparedness, resource availability, and market response. The optimistic

scenario reflected a combination of strong strategic preparedness, sufficient financial

and organisational resources, favourable or manageable external conditions, and posi-

tive performance outcomes. The baseline scenario reflected partial achievement of di-

versification objectives under moderate resource and environmental constraints. The

pessimistic scenario reflected weak strategic preparation, limited resources, unfavoura-

ble market conditions, and negative or unstable performance outcomes. The practical

significance of the findings lies in the possibility of using the proposed framework to

support strategic planning, risk assessment, and diversification decision-making in in-

dustrial and service enterprises in Ukraine.

Keywords: diversification management, enterprise development, strategic planning,

financial stability, risk management, sectoral differentiation, competitive advantage,

adaptive management, economic resilience

JEL Classification: C44, D24, O14

INTRODUCTION

In today’s economy, businesses operate amid growing competition, market volatility,

technological change, and external uncertainty. Under these circumstances, diversifica-

tion at the corporate level has become an important strategic tool for reducing depend-

ence on a single line of business, spreading risk, and creating new opportunities for

growth. At the same time, diversification does not automatically guarantee positive re-

sults. Its effectiveness depends on the industry, the chosen form of diversification, the

availability of resources, and the quality of management decisions. Therefore, the key

issue is not only the implementation of diversification strategies but also the evaluation

of the effectiveness of managing the diversification process.

Diversification is a strategic approach that companies use to expand their activities,

reduce risks, and increase competitiveness. Depending on the industry, diversification

DOI: 10.55643/fcaptp.3.68.2026.5194

Oleh Hlushko

PhD Student of the Department of

Management, State University of Trade

and Economics, Kyiv, Ukraine;

ORCID: 0009-0005-5170-8011

Serhii Bai

D.Sc. in Economics, Professor of the

Department of Management, State

University of Trade and Economics,

Kyiv, Ukraine;

e-mail: [email protected]

ORCID: 0000-0003-0599-2582

(Corresponding author)

Yuliia Drozdova

Candidate of Philological Sciences,

Associate Professor of the Department

of Foreign Philology and Translation,

State University of Trade and

Economics, Kyiv, Ukraine;

ORCID: 0000-0002-2047-1075

Received: 25/02/2026

Accepted: 23/06/2026

Published: 30/06/2026

© Copyright

2026 by the author(s)

This is an Open Access article

distributed under the terms of the

Creative Commons CC-BY 4.0

FINANCIAL AND CREDIT ACTIVITY: PROBLEMS OF THEORY AND PRACTICE

ISSN: 2306-4994 | eISSN: 2310-8770 | Volume 3 (68), 2026

DOI: 10.55643/fcaptp.3.68.2026.5194 457

strategies can vary significantly, taking into account market specifics, technological features, and consumer needs. In the

financial sector, diversification is a key strategy for managing risk and ensuring stability. Banks and other financial institu-

tions spread their investments across different assets, such as loans, bonds, stocks, and real estate, to minimize potential

losses from fluctuations in individual markets. This approach reduces the overall risk of the portfolio and increases its

resilience to financial shocks. In healthcare, diversification can take the form of expanding the range of medical services,

introducing new diagnostic and treatment technologies, and developing the pharmaceutical sector. Medical institutions can

open new departments, introduce telemedicine, or collaborate with research institutions to develop new treatment meth-

ods. This not only improves the quality of patient care but also ensures the financial stability of the institution (Torchyno-

vych, 2023).

In the technology industry, diversification is a key strategy for ensuring sustainable growth and adapting to rapidly chang-

ing market conditions. Companies often expand their range of products or services by introducing new technologies or

entering adjacent markets. For example, Salomon (Salomon, 2026), which initially specialized in the production of ski

bindings, gradually diversified into the ski boot market and then into the ski and snowboard market. This is an example of

concentric diversification, as the new products were closely related to the company's original business (Lomonosova,

2020). In the industrial sector, diversification can take the form of vertical integration, where a company begins to manu-

facture products that are technologically and marketing-wise related to its existing products. This allows the company to

control most of the production chain, reduce costs, and improve product quality. Although diversification is a common

strategy for many industries, its implementation can vary significantly. In the financial sector, the emphasis is on spreading

investments across different assets to reduce risk and ensure stability.

The general problem is that existing approaches to assessing the effectiveness of diversification remain fragmented and

often focus only on individual outcomes, such as profitability, market expansion, or risk reduction. This makes it difficult

to gain a comprehensive understanding of how strategic, financial-economic, organizational, and external factors collec-

tively influence the final outcomes of diversification. Furthermore, in the context of digital transformation, changes in the

regulatory environment, and economic instability, companies require more adaptive and analytically grounded approaches

to managing diversification. For this reason, evaluating the effectiveness of diversification management has both theoret-

ical and practical significance, as it enables companies to make more informed strategic decisions and strengthen their

long-term stability and competitiveness.

LITERATURE REVIEW

The diversification process was an important tool for reducing risks and ensuring the stable development of enterprises.

The assessment of diversification management effectiveness covered various aspects, including strategic, economic, and

social indicators. Studies devoted to this process examined various approaches to diversification management based on

real-life examples from Ukraine and other countries. One such study was the work of Boronos et al. (2020), in which the

authors examined the strategic orientation of innovation activities in the context of Ukraine's integration into the European

Union. The study emphasizes that in the context of a changing global economy, effective diversification management has

become essential for companies seeking to ensure their competitiveness and sustainable development. According to the

author's approach, the assessment of diversification effectiveness should include both internal and external factors that

affect business processes and financial results of companies. The work by Britchenko et al. (2022) examines a system for

evaluating the effectiveness of a sustainable development strategy for enterprises in a decentralized environment. The

authors emphasize that diversification of enterprises in these conditions should take into account not only economic indi-

cators, but also social and environmental aspects. According to the study results, diversification effectiveness was deter-

mined through a comprehensive assessment of the enterprise's stability in the context of changes in the legislative and

market environment. The study by Buriak I. et al. (2022) aimed to analyze trends in the development of management and

business technologies in the Ukrainian economy. The authors noted that the processes of enterprise diversification could

be effectively assessed using information technologies that allow strategies to be quickly adapted to market changes. They

also pointed out the importance of integrating innovative technologies into diversification strategies to achieve competitive

advantages.

The use of state policy to reform higher library and information education in Ukraine was also considered in a study by

Byrkovych et al. (2023), where the authors noted that the effectiveness of diversification management in education could

be assessed through economic indicators reflecting the effectiveness of the reforms implemented and improvements in

the quality of educational services. The work of Hamayunova et al. (2025) focused on the diversification of oilseed culti-

vation in the southern steppe zone of Ukraine, emphasizing adaptation to climate change and environmental conditions.

ФІНАНСОВО-КРЕДИТНА ДІЯЛЬНІСТЬ: ПРОБЛЕМИ ТЕОРІЇ ТА ПРАКТИКИ

ISSN: 2306-4994 | eISSN: 2310-8770 | Том 3 (68), 2026

458 DOI: 10.55643/fcaptp.3.68.2026.5194

This study demonstrated that diversification in the agricultural sector can be successfully assessed through environmental

and economic indicators that help farmers adapt their strategies to new conditions.

The study by Kubitskyi et al. (2022) examined the management of educational and sports institutions in Ukraine. The

authors noted that effective management in the context of diversification of educational services requires a comprehensive

approach that includes adaptation to requirements and integration of new forms of learning and sports technologies.

Assessing the effectiveness of this process requires taking into account not only financial results, but also the level of

satisfaction of educational process participants and improvements in the quality of educational services. The work of

Kucher A. et al. (2023) analyzed the topic of sustainable and efficient water management for sustainable regional devel-

opment using Ukraine as an example. The authors emphasized that the diversification of management strategies in the

water resources sector has a direct impact on the efficiency of use, ensuring economic, environmental, and social sustain-

ability. In this context, the assessment of efficiency is based on comprehensive indicators that take into account not only

economic costs but also environmental consequences and social impact on local communities.

The study by Lohosha et al. (2020) is devoted to the institutionalization of the agricultural market in Ukraine and the

European Economic Community. The authors point out that diversification of the agricultural sector is important for im-

proving the country's economic stability, and that the effectiveness of its management can be assessed using various

criteria, including market stability, level of competition, access to the latest technologies and innovations, as well as envi-

ronmental aspects of sustainable development of agricultural enterprises. The work of Bohomaz et al. (2022) examined

the digitization and diversification of the educational space in Ukraine. The authors emphasized that diversification in

education includes not only the introduction of digital technologies, but also a change in approaches to learning, which

ensures access to a variety of educational resources and improves the quality of learning. The effectiveness of this process

is assessed based on integrated indicators, such as the level of accessibility of educational services, the growth of teaching

staff qualifications, and the level of pupils and students’ satisfaction.

In contemporary management research, diversification is increasingly interpreted not simply as expansion into new activ-

ities, but as a strategic instrument for balancing growth, risk distribution, resilience, and long-term value creation. Recent

international studies demonstrate that the relationship between diversification and performance is not linear and depends

on the type of diversification, firm capabilities, sectoral context, and external shocks. Choi J. et al. (2021), using machine-

learning analysis of annual reports, proposed a multidimensional approach to measuring diversification and showed that

diversification may be associated with higher firm value, especially when it develops within a related industry space. This

study is important because it also demonstrates that inconsistent findings in earlier literature were partly caused by insuf-

ficiently precise measurement of diversification itself.

A substantial contribution to the debate was made by Arte Larimo (2022), who conducted a meta-analysis of 263 effect

sizes from 187 primary studies and found that the relationship between international diversification and firm performance

follows an inverted U-shape. Their results indicate that moderate diversification may improve performance, whereas ex-

cessive diversification, particularly when combined with high or unrelated product diversity, can weaken firm outcomes.

This finding is important for assessing management effectiveness because it shifts attention from the simple fact of diver-

sification to the question of its optimal scale and structure. Research published after the COVID-19 crisis has further

expanded understanding of diversification as a mechanism of resilience. Essuman et al. (2023) demonstrated that foreign

diversification can strengthen firm resilience indirectly through foreign market scanning, especially in highly disruptive

supply-chain environments. This research is especially relevant for the present article because it connects diversification

not only with profitability, but also with adaptive capacity under crisis conditions.

Another important direction of recent scholarship concerns the interaction between diversification and digital transfor-

mation. Wang et al. (2025) argue that digital transformation significantly promotes corporate diversification by reducing

transaction costs, alleviating financing constraints, and stimulating digital innovation. Their findings suggest that diversifi-

cation effectiveness increasingly depends on the quality of digital infrastructure and managerial ability to reorganise inter-

nal resources. This conclusion supports the view that diversification management in the contemporary economy should be

assessed not only through financial indicators, but also through organisational and technological capabilities.

The newest studies also indicate that the effectiveness of diversification is shaped by sector-specific business models.

Adem et al. (2026) show that service diversification in manufacturing should not be treated as universally beneficial; its

performance effects depend on whether diversification is strategically chosen or imposed by necessity. This recent evidence

further confirms that diversification cannot be evaluated outside the broader context of resource-relatedness, managerial

intent, financial flexibility, and market environment. Consequently, the current international literature suggests that effec-

tive diversification management should be assessed through a combination of financial, strategic, and resilience-based

criteria rather than through a single universal indicator.

FINANCIAL AND CREDIT ACTIVITY: PROBLEMS OF THEORY AND PRACTICE

ISSN: 2306-4994 | eISSN: 2310-8770 | Volume 3 (68), 2026

DOI: 10.55643/fcaptp.3.68.2026.5194 459

Despite extensive research on the relationship between diversification and corporate performance, the existing literature

remains fragmented in several respects. Previous studies often examine individual aspects of diversification—such as prof-

itability, innovation, risk reduction, digital transformation, or industry resilience — without integrating these aspects into a

unified framework for evaluating the management of the diversification process. Furthermore, limited attention has been

paid to comparative cross-industry assessment that simultaneously takes into account the form of diversification, internal

organizational capabilities, external environmental conditions, as well as measurable financial, economic, and strategic

outcomes. This study addresses this gap by combining the Ansoff Matrix, SWOT and PESTLE analyses, multidimensional

performance criteria, comparative analysis of corporate case studies, and scenario modeling within an integrated analytical

model. This approach makes it possible to determine not only whether diversification leads to positive outcomes, but also

how its effectiveness depends on strategic readiness, resource potential, management quality, the industry context, and

the firm’s ability to adapt to economic instability and market uncertainty.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

The aim of the article is to assess the effectiveness of enterprise diversification process management by determining how

different diversification strategies influence measurable financial-economic and strategic performance indicators across

sectors of the economy. To achieve this aim, the study addressed the following objectives:

1. To systematise the main forms and strategic approaches to enterprise diversification using the Ansoff matrix and

sectoral classification.

2. To identify internal and external factors affecting diversification effectiveness through SWOT and PESTLE analysis.

3. To compare corporate cases from different sectors according to measurable financial-economic indicators.

4. To distinguish successful, moderate, and unsuccessful diversification scenarios based on the relationship between

strategic preparedness, resource capacity, market response, and performance outcomes.

5. To formulate practical recommendations for improving diversification management effectiveness in industrial and

service enterprises.

METHODS

The study employed a structured literature and document review combined with a comparative multiple-case analysis to

evaluate the effectiveness of enterprise diversification process management. Unlike an exclusively descriptive strategic

analysis, the methodological design integrated three levels of assessment: classification of diversification strategies, anal-

ysis of internal and external conditions, and evaluation of diversification outcomes using a standardised system of perfor-

mance criteria. The theoretical component included an analysis of scientific approaches to diversification, its principal

forms, influencing factors, management principles, and expected outcomes. Particular attention was paid to the relation-

ship between diversification and enterprise performance, including revenue growth, profitability, market expansion, or-

ganisational adaptability, innovation capacity, and risk reduction. Strategic approaches were systematised using the Ansoff

matrix, which distinguishes market penetration, market development, product development, and diversification strategies

(Ferreira & De Sá Moscoso, 2024). Within the diversification category, related, unrelated, or conglomerate, horizontal,

vertical, and unsuccessful or delayed diversification were considered separately.

The Ansoff Matrix (Ferreira & De Sá Moscoso, 2024) is an effective strategic planning tool that allows companies to identify

optimal growth paths, taking into account both existing and new markets and products. It includes four key strategies:

market penetration, market development, product development, and diversification. The market penetration strategy in-

volves increasing the company's share in an already developed segment through active marketing, improved service qual-

ity, or competitive pricing (Puyt et al., 2024). Market development aims to attract new consumer groups or enter new

geographical regions with existing products (Developing an effective…, 2025). Product development involves creating

innovative or modified products targeted at an existing customer base.

The documentary base comprised peer-reviewed scientific publications, official corporate materials, and documents issued

by international organisations. The institutional sources included European Union development strategies, particularly

“2020 European Semester: Annual Sustainable Growth Strategy” (2020), “Enhancing Sustainable Economic Growth Across

the EU” (2020), “Strategic Autonomy and European Economic and Research Security” (2026), and “Trade Diversification

and Policies for Economic Resilience” (2022). OECD documents included “Economic Diversification in Africa” (2011) and

ФІНАНСОВО-КРЕДИТНА ДІЯЛЬНІСТЬ: ПРОБЛЕМИ ТЕОРІЇ ТА ПРАКТИКИ

ISSN: 2306-4994 | eISSN: 2310-8770 | Том 3 (68), 2026

460 DOI: 10.55643/fcaptp.3.68.2026.5194

“Fostering Tourism Competitiveness in South East Europe” (2016), while World Bank materials included “Gabon: Increasing

Economic Diversification and Equalizing Opportunity to Accelerate Poverty Reduction” (2020) and “New World Bank Group

Strategy for Zambia to Support Economic Diversification and Private Sector Development” (2013).

The comparative analysis covered eight corporate cases: Apple, Amazon, Google, Samsung, Tesla, General Electric, Salo-

mon, and Kodak. The cases were selected according to four criteria: the existence of an identifiable diversification strategy;

representation of different diversification forms; availability of sufficient publicly accessible information on the implemen-

tation and outcomes of diversification; and representation of technology, industrial, manufacturing, financial, or service-

related activities. The inclusion of both successful and unsuccessful cases made it possible to examine not only the potential

advantages of diversification but also the consequences of delayed adaptation, weak strategic alignment, and ineffective

resource allocation. SWOT analysis was used to identify internal strengths and weaknesses associated with diversification

management and external opportunities and threats affecting its implementation. PESTLE analysis was applied to assess

political, economic, social, technological, legal, and environmental factors influencing the feasibility and outcomes of di-

versification. These instruments were treated as contextual analytical tools rather than direct measures of effectiveness.

Their results were therefore integrated with a separate performance evaluation model.

Diversification management effectiveness was evaluated across five dimensions: financial performance, including revenue

dynamics, profitability, return on investment, return on assets, return on equity, cash-flow stability, and the contribution

of new activities to total enterprise income; strategic performance, including expansion into new markets, growth of market

coverage, strengthening of competitive position, balance of the product and business portfolio, alignment of diversification

with long-term corporate objectives, and the creation of synergies between existing and new activities; organisational

performance, including the effectiveness of integrating new business units, the quality of resource allocation, coordination

between divisions, managerial flexibility, availability of relevant personnel competencies, and the capacity of the organisa-

tional structure to support diversified operations; innovation performance, including the introduction of new products and

services, investment in research and development, application of digital technologies, creation of new business models,

technological compatibility between business areas, and the ability to commercialise innovations; and risk-management

performance, including reduced dependence on a single product, market, sector, or customer group, diversification of

income sources, distribution of operational and investment risks, resilience to market shocks, and management of financial,

regulatory, technological, and reputational risks.

Scenario modelling combined the index results with the contextual findings of the SWOT and PESTLE analyses. The opti-

mistic scenario reflected a combination of strong strategic preparedness, sufficient financial and organisational resources,

favourable or manageable external conditions, and positive performance outcomes. The baseline scenario reflected partial

achievement of diversification objectives under moderate resource and environmental constraints. The pessimistic scenario

reflected weak strategic preparation, limited resources, unfavourable market conditions, and negative or unstable perfor-

mance outcomes.

RESULTS

Diversification strategies: approaches and implementation details

Diversification is one of the key tools for business development, allowing companies to adapt to changes in the market

environment, minimize risks, and increase competitiveness. It involves expanding or changing the scope of a company's

activities by entering new markets, developing new products, or transforming its business model. Managing the diversifi-

cation process requires a strategic approach, as irrational allocation of resources or the wrong choice of development

directions can lead to financial losses and loss of market positions. Assessing the effectiveness of diversification helps

determine how justified the relevant changes in the structure of the enterprise are, whether the set goals are being

achieved, and how to optimize further management decisions. To this end, both quantitative indicators covering financial

results, profitability, and market share growth, as well as qualitative criteria such as brand strengthening, increased inno-

vation, and improved organizational flexibility, are used. Diversification means expanding the scope of a company's activ-

ities by developing new areas or changing its business model. Its main goal is to reduce dependence on a single product

or market and increase resilience to external changes. It can be internal, when a company independently expands its

production capacity or develops new areas of activity, or external, involving mergers, acquisitions, and strategic alliances.

The main objectives of diversification are to reduce financial and market risks, expand the potential customer base, ensure

income stability in changing economic conditions, and increase the level of innovation and competitiveness.

FINANCIAL AND CREDIT ACTIVITY: PROBLEMS OF THEORY AND PRACTICE

ISSN: 2306-4994 | eISSN: 2310-8770 | Volume 3 (68), 2026

DOI: 10.55643/fcaptp.3.68.2026.5194 461

The concentric diversification strategy involves expanding into related industries associated with the core business. Its

goal is to use existing competencies and technologies to create new products or services. For example, a company spe-

cializing in the production of computer equipment may begin developing software for corporate clients. A distinctive feature

of this strategy is the synergy between the old and new directions, which contributes to cost optimization and increased

competitiveness.

Implementing this kind of diversification requires a deep analysis of the market, technical compatibility, and the right

human resources. Horizontal diversification involves entering new markets with related or new products that aren't tied to

the main technology. The goal is to meet a wider range of consumer needs and strengthen market positions. For example,

a juice manufacturer can enter the health food market with a line of bars made from natural ingredients. The main feature

is the search for a new consumer audience while maintaining the brand image.

Implementing this strategy requires active marketing, consumer preference research, and flexible logistics. Conglomerate

diversification is the riskiest because it involves expanding into completely new industries that aren't related to the core

business. The goal of this strategy is to reduce dependence on a single market or product. An example would be an oil

company investing in the renewable energy sector. The challenge lies in the need for significant financial resources and

an effective mechanism for managing a portfolio of diverse assets. Successful implementation requires in-depth analytics,

strategic planning, and an adaptive corporate culture.

Corporate diversification strategies are equally important for successful business development. Tesla (2026) implements a

diversification strategy by expanding its activities in the field of electric vehicle manufacturing and environmentally friendly

energy. This allows the company not only to strengthen its market position but also to adapt to changes in global energy

policy. Samsung (2026) is an example of conglomerate diversification, as the company operates in many areas, including

electronics, construction, financial services, and others.

This helps reduce risks and ensures stable growth, as different divisions of the company can compensate for market

fluctuations in individual sectors (Hsiao et al., 2024). General Electric (GE, 2026) uses the GE/McKinsey matrix to assess

the market position of businesses, which allows for effective planning of diversification strategies and allocation of re-

sources between different areas of activity (General Electric and..., 2026). Thus, diversification strategies play an important

role in ensuring economic stability and adaptability in the face of global change. They allow states and companies to reduce

the risks associated with dependence on individual sectors and open up new opportunities for development.

The effectiveness of diversification across different sectors of the economy

Management practice uses both traditional diversification concepts and approaches that have emerged as a result of

technological and economic development. Among the classic approaches, we can highlight the Ansoff model (Ferreira &

De Sá Moscoso, 2024), which considers possible options for the company's development through market or product port-

folio expansion, as well as Michael Porter's theory of competitive advantage (Shortform.com, 2020), which focuses on cost

leadership, differentiation, and focus strategies. The product life cycle concept plays a significant role in helping to deter-

mine the optimal moment for diversification.

Approaches that take into account the influence of digital platforms and the ecosystem approach, which involve combining

different areas of activity into a single system, have become widespread in strategic management. Entering international

markets through strategic partnerships and the use of digital tools is also common. Artificial intelligence and automation

play a special role in management processes, allowing for the optimization of processes, increasing the effectiveness of

management decisions, and forming competitive advantages for the enterprise. Thus, evaluating the effectiveness of

diversification management is an important tool for analyzing the effectiveness of strategic decisions and forming long-

term competitive advantages. For a better understanding of diversification as a management strategy, a SWOT analysis

was conducted, the results of which are presented in Table 1.

ФІНАНСОВО-КРЕДИТНА ДІЯЛЬНІСТЬ: ПРОБЛЕМИ ТЕОРІЇ ТА ПРАКТИКИ

ISSN: 2306-4994 | eISSN: 2310-8770 | Том 3 (68), 2026

462 DOI: 10.55643/fcaptp.3.68.2026.5194

Table 1. SWOT analysis of diversification as a management strategy.

Strengths Weaknesses

Increased company resilience to market changes Risk of losing focus on the core business

Reduced dependence on a single product or market Significant financial and resource costs for developing new areas

Increased competitiveness and expansion of the customer base Possible difficulties with the integration of new business processes

Optimization of existing resource usage The need to attract additional qualified specialists

Diversification of income sources and reduction of financial risks Increased complexity of management and coordination

Opportunities Threats

Entering new markets and expanding the geography of operations High costs of implementing a diversification strategy

Use of technological innovations to improve efficiency Instability of the external environment and legislative changes

Formation of strategic partnerships and alliances Rising competition levels in new industries

Creation of new business models and increased company flexibility Possible reputational risks in case of unsuccessful expansion

Strengthening brand awareness and market position Low profitability of some new business areas

A SWOT analysis of diversification as a management strategy shows that its effectiveness depends on the balance between

expanding the company's capabilities and controlled risk management. Diversification can strengthen the company's posi-

tion, but at the same time requires significant resources, strategic planning, and clear coordination. An important condition

for successful diversification is a deep understanding of the market, careful selection of new areas, and adaptation of the

organizational structure. To minimize threats, it is necessary to ensure financial stability, use analytical tools, and effective

change management methods. To assess the impact of the macroeconomic environment on diversification processes, a

PESTLE analysis was conducted, which is presented in Table 2.

Table 2. PESTLE analysis of the macroeconomic environment impact on diversification processes.

Factor Impact on diversification

Political Government stability, state support for business, tax policy, political crises, and conflicts can influence investment decisions and op-

portunities for expansion

Economic Currency fluctuations, inflation, interest rates, purchasing power, and access to financing determine the financial feasibility of diversi-

fication

Social Changes in consumer behavior, demographic trends, cultural characteristics, and education levels can influence the selection of new

markets and products

Technological The introduction of innovations, the development of automation, digital platforms, artificial intelligence, and new production technolo-

gies create opportunities for process optimization and increased competitiveness.

Legal Market regulation, competition laws, labor law, intellectual property, and certification requirements can both facilitate and restrict the

diversification process.

Environmental Stricter environmental standards, growing demand for “green” technologies, and measures to reduce emissions and resource con-

sumption may influence the choice of industries for diversification

PESTLE analysis shows that the success of diversification largely depends on external factors that can both create oppor-

tunities for development and limit a company's strategic choices. The most important thing is the ability of a company to

quickly adapt to changes, predict risks, and take advantage of favorable market trends. Global economic processes, regu-

latory changes, and technological progress require companies to be flexible and take a strategic approach to management.

It is important to analyze the long-term consequences of diversification in order to avoid unpredictable risks and ensure

stable business development.

Diversification is a key strategy for ensuring sustainability and development at both the national and corporate levels.

Different countries develop their own approaches to economic diversification, while international organizations such as the

World Bank Group (2026), the European Union (2026), and the OECD (2026) offer recommendations and support relevant

reforms. Studying global experience allows us to identify effective approaches to implementing diversification strategies

that promote economic growth and minimize risks. In public policy, diversification is aimed at developing various sectors

of the economy, reducing dependence on individual sectors, and creating conditions for long-term growth. The US uses a

FINANCIAL AND CREDIT ACTIVITY: PROBLEMS OF THEORY AND PRACTICE

ISSN: 2306-4994 | eISSN: 2310-8770 | Volume 3 (68), 2026

DOI: 10.55643/fcaptp.3.68.2026.5194 463

cluster model that increases the competitiveness of different regions and industries. This ensures the country's economic

stability and allows for the effective use of available resources. Germany is actively implementing strategies to support

priority sectors of the economy, ensuring its development and competitiveness at the global level (Analytical Brief on

Comparative..., 2024). China, thanks to state support for innovation and the technology sector, is gradually reducing its

dependence on traditional manufacturing and stimulating the development of high-tech industries. In general, the effec-

tiveness of diversification depends on a comprehensive analysis of market trends, strategic planning, and flexible resource

management.

Factors affecting the effectiveness of diversification

One of the most difficult but promising strategies is diversification, which can be related or unrelated. In the case of related

diversification, a company expands its activities in related industries using existing technologies and resources. For exam-

ple, Apple (2026), which started as a computer manufacturer, has successfully integrated into the mobile device, software,

and services segments. Unrelated diversification is characterized by a company's entry into completely new areas with no

obvious connection to its core business. An example is Google (About.google, 2026), which initially focused solely on its

search engine, but later invested in self-driving cars, biotechnology, and other innovative industries. An analysis of real-

life cases demonstrates both successful and unsuccessful diversification. Amazon (2026) expanded from e-commerce to

cloud technologies (AWS), streaming video, and electronic device manufacturing (What is an example…, 2024). Similarly,

Google has actively invested in various areas, leveraging its financial strength and technological capabilities. At the same

time, the story of Kodak (2026) is an example of unsuccessful diversification: the company, which dominated the photo-

graphic film market, failed to adapt to digital technologies, which led to its bankruptcy. Thus, Ansoff's matrix helps com-

panies systematize strategic approaches to development, but each strategy requires careful analysis, risk assessment, and

consideration of market conditions to ensure effective implementation. Three hypothetical scenarios for managing the

diversification process have been developed and are presented in Table 3.

Table 3. Scenarios for managing the diversification process. (Source: created by the authors based on SWOT and PESTLE analyses)

Scenario Characteristics Consequences for the company

Optimistic Effective diversification management based on thorough market analysis, investment in new areas, and utilization of competitive

advantages

Company growth, increased market share, increased profitability,

business expansion into new segments

Pessimistic Unsuccessful diversification due to insufficient market analysis,

mistakes in strategic planning, or high costs that do not pay off

Financial losses, reduced competitiveness, possible exit from the

market, or significant business cutbacks

Basic Moderate diversification performance, where the company does

not face significant risks but does not achieve significant success

Company stability, gradual expansion, no significant losses or

breakthroughs in new areas

An analysis of hypothetical diversification management scenarios shows that the success of this process largely depends

on strategic planning, market analysis, and the company's flexibility in decision-making. An important factor is the compa-

ny's ability to adapt to changes in the external environment and use its resources effectively. While risks are always

present, they can be minimized through detailed forecasting, gradual implementation of changes, and analysis of other

companies' experiences. The choice between aggressive growth and a cautious approach should be based on the real

capabilities of the business, its financial and operational capabilities.

Comparative distribution of diversification forms and financial-economic effects in the analysed companies

The analysed corporate cases were systematised by sector, diversification form, and financial-economic effect (Table 4).

The comparative review covered eight companies discussed in the article: Apple, Amazon, Google, Samsung, Tesla, Gen-

eral Electric, Salomon, and Kodak. Of these, five companies belonged to the technology and digital sector, while three

represented industrial and manufacturing activities. Related diversification was identified in four cases (50.0%), conglom-

erate or unrelated diversification in three cases (37.5%), and unsuccessful or delayed diversification in one case (12.5%).

This distribution shows that the most widespread model in the analysed sample was expansion into adjacent products,

services, or technological niches, whereas conglomerate diversification was used mainly by large corporations with broader

investment and managerial capacities.

ФІНАНСОВО-КРЕДИТНА ДІЯЛЬНІСТЬ: ПРОБЛЕМИ ТЕОРІЇ ТА ПРАКТИКИ

ISSN: 2306-4994 | eISSN: 2310-8770 | Том 3 (68), 2026

464 DOI: 10.55643/fcaptp.3.68.2026.5194

Table 4. Distribution of analysed companies by sector, diversification form, and financial-economic effect. (Source: compiled by the authors based on Apple (2026), Amazon (2026), About.google (2026), Tesla (2026), Samsung (2026), General Electric (2026), Salomon (2026), Kodak (2026))

Company Sector Form of diversi-

fication Main direction of diversification Financial-economic effect

Apple Technology Related Expansion from computers into mobile de-

vices, software, and services

Revenue growth, broader product ecosystem,

stronger market position

Amazon Technology Related Expansion from e-commerce into cloud ser-

vices, streaming, and devices

Revenue diversification, reduced dependence

on one business line, higher resilience

Google Technology Unrelated / con-

glomerate

Expansion from search into autonomous

technologies, biotechnology, and digital ser- vices

Expansion of investment portfolio, strength- ening of long-term market position

Samsung Technology / conglomerate

business

Conglomerate Expansion across electronics, construction, and financial services

Risk dispersion across sectors, greater in- come stability

Tesla Technology /

manufacturing Related

Expansion from electric vehicles into energy

storage and clean energy solutions

Revenue base expansion, strengthening of

strategic market presence

General

Electric

Industrial /

manufacturing Conglomerate

Diversified portfolio across industrial and

technological segments

Resource redistribution, stabilisation through

multi-sector operations

Salomon Manufacturing Related Expansion from ski bindings into ski boots

and snowboarding equipment

Product line growth, stronger niche speciali-

sation

Kodak Manufacturing Unsuccessful di-

versification

Late and ineffective transition towards digital

technologies

Financial losses, weakened competitiveness,

market decline

The comparison of the analysed cases demonstrates that positive financial-economic dynamics were observed in seven

out of eight companies (87.5%). These dynamics were expressed through revenue growth, broader market coverage, risk

dispersion, diversification of income sources, and improved competitive positioning. At the same time, one case (12.5%)

demonstrated negative dynamics due to delayed strategic adaptation, which confirms that diversification does not auto-

matically generate positive results and requires timely managerial decisions, adequate resources, and a clear understand-

ing of market trends. Therefore, the main result of the study is not only the typology of diversification strategies, but also

the comparative confirmation that the financial-economic effect of diversification depends on its form, sectoral context,

and managerial quality.

In healthcare, the key is to introduce new technologies and expand the range of medical services to improve service

quality. In the technology sector, the focus is on introducing innovations and expanding the product range to meet rapidly

changing consumer needs. In industry, vertical integration and control over the production chain are key to ensuring

efficiency and quality. Successful diversification in each industry requires careful analysis, strategic planning, and adapta-

tion to constantly changing market conditions.

Effective management of the diversification process requires a comprehensive approach that takes into account both the

company's internal capabilities and the external economic environment. To increase the effectiveness of diversification

strategies, it is necessary, first of all, to conduct an in-depth market analysis before making decisions. This involves stud-

ying consumer demand, assessing the competitive environment, analyzing economic trends, and potential barriers to

entering new markets. Companies with strong positions in their industry are better off using related diversification, which

is based on leveraging existing competencies and technologies. For companies seeking significant business expansion,

unrelated diversification may be justified, but it requires careful preparation, including the involvement of industry experts,

investment in market research, and adaptation of the business model to new conditions. Financial planning and risk man-

agement are integral components of effective diversification. Companies should assess potential costs and sources of

financing by developing several scenarios. The use of scenario planning methods makes it possible to predict the conse-

quences of implementing various strategies and develop mechanisms for rapid response in the event of adverse conditions.

In addition, it is worth considering the possibility of partnerships or mergers with existing companies in the new industry,

which can reduce financial risks and accelerate the process of entering the market. An effective organizational structure

and personnel policy are equally important factors for successful diversification management. Launching new business

areas requires flexible management, which may necessitate changes in the corporate structure, the introduction of new

control mechanisms, and the adaptation of decision-making processes. In addition, the company must invest in staff

training and attract specialists with relevant experience in new areas of activity. This contributes to increasing the profes-

sional competence of the team and reduces the likelihood of strategic mistakes.

FINANCIAL AND CREDIT ACTIVITY: PROBLEMS OF THEORY AND PRACTICE

ISSN: 2306-4994 | eISSN: 2310-8770 | Volume 3 (68), 2026

DOI: 10.55643/fcaptp.3.68.2026.5194 465

Technological modernization and innovation are important tools for improving diversification efficiency. The use of digital

technologies, process automation, and the introduction of artificial intelligence and analytical systems can improve opera-

tional efficiency and adapt businesses to new challenges. Investments in research and development can provide unique

competitive advantages and help a company gain a strong foothold in a new market. Significant attention should be paid

to marketing strategies, as the success of diversification largely depends on proper brand building and communication

with the target audience. To effectively enter a new market, it is important to develop a unique value proposition that

meets consumer needs. Using a personalized approach to marketing, customer behavior analytics, and the latest adver-

tising tools will help the company quickly gain consumer trust and achieve competitive advantages. Flexibility and adapt-

ability in the diversification process are essential for long-term success. The company must be prepared to review its

strategies in response to changing market conditions, implement corrective measures, and respond quickly to potential

difficulties. The use of Agile management principles (Orejuela et al., 2026) allows for more effective control of processes

and adaptation to change. Thus, to increase the effectiveness of diversification, it is necessary to take a comprehensive

approach to managing this process, taking into account market analysis, the choice of an appropriate strategy, financial

planning, personnel policy, technological innovations, marketing strategies, and management flexibility. Only the balanced

and well-founded implementation of diversification strategies will enable companies to achieve sustainable development

and increase their competitiveness.

DISCUSSION

The findings demonstrate that the effectiveness of diversification management is determined not merely by whether an

enterprise expands into new products, markets, or industries, but by the correspondence between the selected form of

diversification, the enterprise’s resource capacity, the sectoral environment, and the timeliness of managerial decisions.

Previous studies have frequently evaluated diversification through separate indicators, such as profitability, firm value,

market expansion, innovation activity, or risk reduction. The proposed approach expands this perspective by treating

effectiveness as a multidimensional management outcome that includes financial, strategic, organisational, innovation-

related, and risk-management dimensions. Consequently, the framework makes it possible to evaluate not only whether

diversification was followed by positive results, but also whether these results were consistent with the enterprise’s stra-

tegic objectives, resource capabilities, industry conditions, and exposure to external risks.

Revenue growth or market expansion may demonstrate the commercial effects of diversification, but they do not inde-

pendently reveal whether the new business portfolio is strategically balanced, whether risks have been reduced, or whether

the organisational structure is capable of coordinating heterogeneous activities. Choi et al. (2021) similarly demonstrated

that conclusions concerning the diversification–performance relationship depend substantially on how diversification is

measured. The present study develops this position by showing that the evaluation process should distinguish between

the form of diversification, the conditions of its implementation, and the resulting effects. Such differentiation reduces the

risk of interpreting all forms of business expansion as equally effective.

The predominance of related diversification in the analysed cases supports the argument that resource and capability

relatedness is an important condition of effective expansion. Apple, Amazon, Tesla, and Salomon extended their activities

into areas connected with their established products, technologies, customer bases, or brands. Their outcomes included

broader product ecosystems, diversified revenue sources, stronger market positions, and greater strategic resilience. This

result is consistent with the findings of Choi et al. (2021), who associated related diversification with stronger firm value,

and with the conclusions of Arte and Larimo (2022), according to which the effect of diversification may weaken when its

scope or complexity exceeds an enterprise’s managerial capacity. However, the results do not suggest that related diver-

sification is universally superior. The positive outcomes observed in conglomerate cases indicate that unrelated diversifi-

cation may also be effective when supported by substantial investment capacity, portfolio-management competencies, and

mechanisms for distributing resources among business units.

The Kodak case provides an important contrasting result. Its negative dynamics demonstrate that diversification effective-

ness depends not only on the selected direction of expansion but also on the speed of strategic response and the enter-

prise’s ability to recognise technological change. This case strengthens the analytical value of the proposed framework

because it shows that the absence of timely adaptation should be treated as a management outcome rather than merely

as an unfavourable market event. Therefore, the evaluation of diversification management should include indicators of

managerial responsiveness, technological readiness, and the alignment of investment decisions with changes in consumer

behaviour and industry structure. This finding corresponds with the broader argument of Essuman et al. (2023) that

diversification contributes to resilience only when enterprises possess the capacity to identify and respond to changes in

the external environment.

ФІНАНСОВО-КРЕДИТНА ДІЯЛЬНІСТЬ: ПРОБЛЕМИ ТЕОРІЇ ТА ПРАКТИКИ

ISSN: 2306-4994 | eISSN: 2310-8770 | Том 3 (68), 2026

466 DOI: 10.55643/fcaptp.3.68.2026.5194

The SWOT and PESTLE analyses further clarify the relationship between diversification conditions and performance out-

comes. The SWOT analysis identified potential benefits, including reduced dependence on a single market, broader income

sources, stronger competitiveness, and more efficient use of resources. At the same time, it revealed internal risks asso-

ciated with the loss of strategic focus, increased coordination complexity, higher resource requirements, and difficulties

integrating new business processes. The PESTLE analysis showed that diversification outcomes are also influenced by

political stability, inflation, access to financing, technological change, consumer behaviour, legal requirements, and envi-

ronmental regulation. The contribution of combining these tools with performance criteria is that contextual factors are

not treated as direct evidence of effectiveness. Instead, they explain why similar diversification strategies may produce

different outcomes under different organisational and sectoral conditions.

The three scenarios developed in the study provide an additional interpretative level. The optimistic scenario connects

strategic preparedness, adequate resources, favourable or manageable external conditions, and positive performance out-

comes. The baseline scenario reflects partial achievement of diversification objectives under moderate constraints, while

the pessimistic scenario represents weak preparation, resource limitations, and unstable or negative results. The scenario

approach contributes to diversification evaluation by moving beyond retrospective measurement and enabling enterprises

to interpret performance indicators in relation to possible future developments. This is especially relevant under market

turbulence because the same current result may have different long-term implications depending on resource reserves,

technological preparedness, and exposure to regulatory or economic shocks. Adnan et al. (2020) and Varakin et al. (2024)

similarly emphasised the importance of adaptive planning and rapid decision-making under unstable conditions.

The findings also support the need for sector-sensitive evaluation. The analysed cases demonstrate that the meaning of

effectiveness differs among technology, manufacturing, and conglomerate enterprises. In technology-oriented companies,

innovation capacity, digital infrastructure, ecosystem development, and the commercialisation of new products are partic-

ularly important. In industrial and manufacturing enterprises, resource allocation, operational compatibility, production-

chain integration, and capital intensity have greater significance. Wang et al. (2025) showed that digital transformation

facilitates diversification by reducing transaction costs, easing financial constraints, and supporting innovation. However,

the present findings indicate that digitalisation should be evaluated as an organisational capability contributing to diversi-

fication rather than as an independent guarantee of success. Similarly, Adem et al. (2026) demonstrated that the perfor-

mance effects of service diversification depend on whether it is strategically selected or imposed by necessity.

Accordingly, the proposed framework combines comparability with sectoral differentiation. A common set of dimensions

makes it possible to compare enterprises across industries, while the specific indicators and their relative importance may

be adjusted to sectoral characteristics. This approach addresses the weakness of universal evaluation models that apply

identical criteria regardless of technological intensity, capital requirements, regulatory conditions, or business-model struc-

ture. It also develops the position of Tanasiichuk et al. (2020), who emphasised the need to adapt management evaluation

methods to the conditions of international and sectoral diversification.

The findings should nevertheless be interpreted with several limitations. First, the empirical component was based on eight

purposively selected corporate cases and therefore cannot establish statistically generalisable relationships between diver-

sification type and enterprise performance. Second, the analysis relied primarily on publicly available secondary infor-

mation, which differs among companies in scope, detail, and reporting practices. Third, the identified associations between

diversification strategies and financial-economic dynamics should not be interpreted as direct causal relationships because

performance may also be influenced by market conditions, corporate size, technological leadership, access to capital,

acquisitions, and macroeconomic changes. Fourth, the study did not calculate a unified weighted effectiveness index or

examine the cases over a standardised longitudinal period.

Further research should test the proposed analytical framework using larger sector-specific samples, standardised longi-

tudinal financial data, and clearly operationalised indicators for each evaluation dimension. The development of a weighted

diversification management effectiveness index would allow researchers to compare enterprises more systematically and

determine the relative importance of financial, strategic, organisational, innovation, and risk-management factors. Future

studies could also examine how the relationships identified in the present analysis change under crisis conditions, digital

transformation, regulatory shifts, and different levels of market turbulence.

CONCLUSIONS

The study identified the main approaches to managing the diversification process, determined the factors that influence

its effectiveness in various industries, and formulated practical recommendations for improving the effectiveness of diver-

FINANCIAL AND CREDIT ACTIVITY: PROBLEMS OF THEORY AND PRACTICE

ISSN: 2306-4994 | eISSN: 2310-8770 | Volume 3 (68), 2026

DOI: 10.55643/fcaptp.3.68.2026.5194 467

sification strategies. The analysis showed that diversification is an important tool for business development, allowing com-

panies to reduce risks, expand markets, and increase competitiveness. It was found that the effectiveness of diversification

largely depends on the chosen strategy. The strategies analyzed in accordance with Ansoff's matrix confirmed that the

safest approach is market expansion and product development, as they are based on the company's existing competencies.

At the same time, diversification as a growth strategy carries the greatest risks, especially if it is implemented without

proper analysis of the market and competitive environment. The comparative analysis of eight companies included in the

study showed that diversification strategies were distributed unevenly across sectors and forms. Five analysed cases rep-

resented the technology sector and three belonged to industrial and manufacturing activities. Related diversification ac-

counted for 50.0% of the cases, conglomerate diversification for 37.5%, and unsuccessful diversification for 12.5%. Pos-

itive financial-economic dynamics were identified in 87.5% of the analysed companies and were manifested in revenue

expansion, broader market coverage, greater stability of income sources, and stronger competitive positions. At the same

time, the Kodak case demonstrated that delayed or poorly aligned diversification may lead to financial losses and weak-

ening of market positions. Thus, the study confirms that the effectiveness of diversification depends not simply on expan-

sion into new activities, but on the correspondence between the chosen strategy, the sectoral environment, and the

company’s managerial and resource capacities.

As part of the study, a SWOT analysis of diversification as a management strategy was conducted, which revealed the

strengths and weaknesses of this process, as well as opportunities and threats. The advantages of diversification include

increased company stability, market expansion, and diversification of income sources, while the risks may include loss of

focus, increased management costs, and the complexity of coordinating different areas of activity. In addition, a PESTLE

analysis of the macroeconomic environment showed that political stability, economic development, technological change,

legal regulation, and environmental factors influence the success of diversification. It has been determined that in condi-

tions of high economic uncertainty, companies with adaptive diversification strategies are better able to cope with market

challenges.

Based on the analysis, recommendations for improving the effectiveness of diversification have been formulated. The main

task is to conduct a thorough preliminary market analysis, develop flexible adaptation strategies, diversify investment risks,

and implement effective mechanisms for managing new areas of activity. Another important aspect is the development of

the company's internal competencies, which allows for the effective integration of new areas of activity without a significant

increase in costs.

A promising area for further research is the development of quantitative methods for assessing the effectiveness of diver-

sification processes, as well as the analysis of the impact of digital technologies on diversification strategies. In addition,

it is advisable to study the impact of global crises on the diversification strategies of enterprises and state economic

policies.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS

All authors have contributed equally.

FUNDING

The Authors received no funding for this research.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

The Authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.

REFERENCES

1. European Commission. (2020). 2020 European Semester:

Annual sustainable growth strategy. URL: https://commis-

sion.europa.eu/publications/2020-european-semester-an-

nual-sustainable-growth-strategy_en

2. Google. (2026). About Google. URL: https://about.google/

3. Adem, A., Battisti, G., Driffield, N., & Schroeder, A. (2026).

Choice versus necessity: Understanding service diversifica-

tion and firm performance in manufacturing. Journal of

Business Research, 206, Article 115949.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2025.115949

ФІНАНСОВО-КРЕДИТНА ДІЯЛЬНІСТЬ: ПРОБЛЕМИ ТЕОРІЇ ТА ПРАКТИКИ

ISSN: 2306-4994 | eISSN: 2310-8770 | Том 3 (68), 2026

468 DOI: 10.55643/fcaptp.3.68.2026.5194

4. Adnan, K. M., Ying, L., Ayoub, Z., Sarker, S. A., Menhas, R.,

Chen, F., & Yu, M. (2020). Risk management strategies to

cope catastrophic risks in agriculture: The case of contract

farming, diversification and precautionary savings. Agricul-

ture, 10(8), Article 351. https://doi.org/10.3390/agricul-

ture10080351

5. Amazon. (2026). Amazon. URL: https://www.amazon.com/

6. Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine. (2024). Analytical brief on

comparative legislation regarding the definition of strategic

and priority industries, directions, and economic sectors.

URL: https://research.rada.gov.ua/uploads/docu-

ments/32792.pdf

7. Appio, F. P., Frattini, F., Petruzzelli, A. M., & Neirotti, P.

(2021). Digital transformation and innovation management:

A synthesis of existing research and an agenda for future

studies. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 38(1),

4–20. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpim.12562

8. Apple. (2026). Apple. URL: https://www.apple.com/

9. Arte, P., & Larimo, J. (2022). Moderating influence of prod-

uct diversification on the international diversification–per-

formance relationship: A meta-analysis. Journal of Business

Research, 139, 1408–1423.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.10.037

10. Bellot, S., Mitchell, T. C., & Schaefer, H. (2020). Phyloge-

netic informativeness analyses to clarify past diversification

processes in Cucurbitaceae. Scientific Reports, 10(1), Article

488. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-57249-2

11. Bohomaz, O., Koreneva, I., Lihus, V., Kambalova, Y.,

Shevchuk, V., & Tolchieva, H. (2022). Digitalization and di-

versification of modern educational space (Ukrainian case).

International Journal of Computer Science and Network Se-

curity, 22(11), 11–18.

https://doi.org/10.22937/IJCSNS.2022.22.11.2

12. Boronos, V. G., Shkarupa, O. V., Demchyshak, N. B.,

Sineviciene, L., & Kubakh, T. G. (2020). Strategic orienta-

tion of innovative activity regulation: Ukraine and European

Union integration process. Financial and Credit Activity:

Problems of Theory and Practice, 1(32), 307–318.

https://doi.org/10.18371/fcaptp.v1i32.200478

13. Britchenko, I., Filyppova, S., Niekrasova, L., Chukurna, O.,

& Vazov, R. (2022). The system of evaluation efficiency of

the strategy of sustainable development of the enterprise in

the decentralisation conditions. Economic Studies, 31(1).

URL: https://www.ceeol.com/search/article-de-

tail?id=1014458

14. Buriak, I., Nechyporenko, K., Chychun, V., Polianko, H., &

Milman, L. (2022). Trends in the development of manage-

ment and business technologies in the context of the mod-

ern Ukrainian economy. Futurity Economics & Law, 2(4),

56–77. https://doi.org/10.57125/FEL.2022.12.25.04

15. Byrkovych, T., Humenchuk, A., Kobyzcha, N., Akimova, L.,

Grinberg, L., & Akimov, O. (2023). Economic effectiveness

of state policy in reforming higher library and information

education in Ukraine. Economic Affairs, 68(1), 599–616.

https://doi.org/10.46852/0424-2513.1.2023.28

16. Ceipek, R., Hautz, J., De Massis, A., Matzler, K., & Ardito, L.

(2021). Digital transformation through exploratory and ex-

ploitative internet of things innovations: The impact of fam-

ily management and technological diversification. Journal of

Product Innovation Management, 38(1), 142–165.

https://doi.org/10.1111/jpim.12551

17. Choi, J., Menon, A., & Tabakovic, H. (2021). Using machine

learning to revisit the diversification–performance relation-

ship. Strategic Management Journal, 42(9), 1632–1661.

https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.3317

18. Developing an effective strategy using the Ansoff matrix.

(2025). Stud.com.ua. URL:

https://stud.com.ua/45487/ekonomika/rozrobka_efek-

tivnoyi_strategiyi_dopomogoyu_matritsi_ansoffa

19. Dharfiz, H. F., Stahl, D. W., & Kumar, J. H. (2023). Diversi-

fication strategy and performance of processing firms: A

case study of Diamond Foods in California, USA. Journal of

Strategic Management, 7(4), 1–12. URL: https://www.strat-

fordjournals.com/journals/index.php/journal-of-strategic-

management/article/view/1615

20. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.

(2011). Economic diversification in Africa. OECD Publishing.

https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264096233-en

21. European Economic and Social Committee. (2020). Enhanc-

ing sustainable economic growth across the European Un-

ion. https://www.eesc.europa.eu/en/our-work/opinions-in-

formation-reports/opinions/enhancing-sustainable-eco-

nomic-growth-across-eu

22. Essuman, D., Owusu-Yirenkyi, D., Afloe, W. T., &

Donbesuur, F. (2023). Leveraging foreign diversification to

build firm resilience: A conditional process perspective.

Journal of International Management, 29(6), Article

101090. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intman.2023.101090

23. European Union. (2026). European Union. URL: https://eu-

ropean-union.europa.eu/index_en

24. Ferreira, A. P. P. F. S., & De Sá Moscoso, M. M. B. P.

(2024). The importance of the Ansoff matrix for the study

of the information services market. Canadian Journal of In-

formation and Library Science, 47(2), 78–84.

https://doi.org/10.5206/cjils-rcsib.v47i2.17432

25. Foris, D., Florescu, A., Foris, T., & Barabas, S. (2020). Im-

proving the management of tourist destinations: A new ap-

proach to strategic management at the destination man-

agement organization level by integrating lean techniques.

Sustainability, 12(23), Article 10201.

https://doi.org/10.3390/su122310201

26. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.

(2016). Fostering tourism competitiveness in South East Eu-

rope. OECD Publishing.

https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264251137-en

27. World Bank. (2020). Gabon: Increasing economic diversifi-

cation and equalizing opportunity to accelerate poverty re-

duction. World Bank Group. URL:

https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/entities/publica-

tion/2ee2607c-90d3-573c-87f3-dc5f9bf5f946

28. GE Aerospace. (2026). GE Aerospace. https://www.ge.com/

FINANCIAL AND CREDIT ACTIVITY: PROBLEMS OF THEORY AND PRACTICE

ISSN: 2306-4994 | eISSN: 2310-8770 | Volume 3 (68), 2026

DOI: 10.55643/fcaptp.3.68.2026.5194 469

29. General Electric and McKinsey matrix. (2026). Stud.com.ua.

URL: https://stud.com.ua/176766/market-

ing/matritsya_general_electric_mckinsey

30. Hamayunova, V., Khonenko, L., & Baklanova, T. (2025). Di-

versification of oil crops in the Southern Steppe of Ukraine:

Adaptation to climate changes and environmental condi-

tions. Technology Audit and Production Reserves, 1(3(81)),

69–74. https://doi.org/10.15587/2706-5448.2025.323953

31. Hsiao, H., Tang, J., & Wen, C. (2024). Diversification’s ef-

fect and manager experience on investment efficiency. Eco-

nomic Analysis and Policy, 81, 890–900.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eap.2024.01.009

32. Hunjra, A. I., Hanif, M., Mehmood, R., & Nguyen, L. V.

(2021). Diversification, corporate governance, regulation

and bank risk-taking. Journal of Financial Reporting and Ac-

counting, 19(1), 92–108. https://doi.org/10.1108/JFRA-03-

2020-0071

33. Inegbedion, H., Sunday, E., Asaleye, A., Lawal, A., &

Adebanji, A. (2020). Managing diversity for organizational

efficiency. SAGE Open, 10(1).

https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244019900173

34. Kodak. (2026). Kodak. https://www.kodak.com/en/

35. Kubitskyi, S., Saienko, V., Demianiuk, V., & Mykhasiuk, K.

(2022). Management of pedagogical and sports educational

institutions in Ukraine. SPORT TK-Revista EuroAmericana

de Ciencias del Deporte, 11, 19.

https://doi.org/10.6018/sportk.538991

36. Kucher, A., Krupin, V., Rudenko, D., Kucher, L., Serbov, M.,

& Gradziuk, P. (2023). Sustainable and efficient water man-

agement for resilient regional development: The case of

Ukraine. Agriculture, 13(7), Article 1367.

https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture13071367

37. Li, Z., Li, S., Bamasag, O. O., Alhothali, A., & Luo, X.

(2023). Diversified regularization enhanced training for ef-

fective manipulator calibration. IEEE Transactions on Neural

Networks and Learning Systems, 34(11), 8778–8790.

https://doi.org/10.1109/TNNLS.2022.3146888

38. Lohosha, R., Mykhalchyshyna, L., Prylutskyi, A., & Kubai, O.

(2020). Institutionalization of the agrarian market in

Ukraine and European Economic Community: Genesis, eval-

uation and analysis. Independent Journal of Management &

Production, 11(8), 727–750.

https://doi.org/10.14807/ijmp.v11i8.1107

39. Lomonosova, O. (2020). Diversification as an economic cat-

egory and as a concept. Scientific Bulletin of Uzhhorod Na-

tional University. Series: International Economic Relations

and World Economy, 33(2), 15–20.

40. Morales, H., & Atienza, M. (2022). New path capture: In-

sights from the diversification process in mining regions.

The Extractive Industries and Society, 11, Article 101064.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.exis.2022.101064

41. World Bank. (2013, March 14). New World Bank Group

strategy for Zambia to support economic diversification and

private sector development. URL:

https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/press-re-

lease/2013/03/14/new-world-bank-group-strategy-support-

economic-diversification-private-sector-development

42. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.

(2026). OECD. https://www.oecd.org/

43. Orejuela, S., Lindlöf, L., Andersson, M., & Johansson, G.

(2026). The interrelationship between the agile approach

and project complexity in product development. Interna-

tional Journal of Managing Projects in Business, 19(8), 54–

77. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJMPB-06-2025-0243

44. Pannetier, T., Martinez, C., Bunnefeld, L., & Etienne, R. S.

(2021). Branching patterns in phylogenies cannot distin-

guish diversity-dependent diversification from time-depend-

ent diversification. Evolution, 75(1), 25–38.

https://doi.org/10.1111/evo.14114

45. Purwanto, E., Isdiantoni, I., & Syahril, S. (2022). Processed

fish products based on diversification and standardization.

Journal of Community Service and Empowerment, 3(1), 18–

25. https://doi.org/10.22219/jcse.v3i1.19338

46. Puyt, R. W., Antoniou, P. H., & Caputo, A. (2024). The An-

soff archive: Revisiting Ansoff’s legacy and the holistic ap-

proach to strategic management. Strategic Change, 33(6),

513–518. https://doi.org/10.1002/jsc.2600

47. Recoder, R. S., & Rodrigues, M. T. (2020). Diversification

processes in lizards and snakes from the middle São Fran-

cisco River dune region, Brazil. In V. Rull & A. C. Carnaval

(Eds.), Neotropical diversification: Patterns and processes

(pp. 713–740). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-

030-31167-4_26

48. Rull, V., & Carnaval, A. C. (Eds.). (2020). Neotropical diver-

sification: Patterns and processes. Springer.

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-31167-4

49. Salomon. (2026). Salomon. URL: https://www.salo-

mon.com/en-us

50. Samsung. (2026). Samsung. URL: https://www.sam-

sung.com/ua/

51. Schwabl, P., Boité, M. C., Bussotti, G., Jacobs, A., Anders-

son, B., Moreira, O., & Cupolillo, E. (2021). Colonization

and genetic diversification processes of Leishmania infan-

tum in the Americas. Communications Biology, 4(1), Article

139. https://doi.org/10.1038/s42003-021-01658-5

52. Shahbaz, M. (2024). Economic globalization–energy diversi-

fication nexus and implications for environmental manage-

ment in China. Journal of Environmental Management, 360,

Article 121014. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jen-

vman.2024.121014

53. Sharma, G., Shrestha, S., Kunwar, S., & Tseng, T. M.

(2021). Crop diversification for improved weed manage-

ment: A review. Agriculture, 11(5), Article 461.

https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture11050461

54. Shortform. (2020). Michael Porter’s theory of competitive

advantage. URL: https://www.shortform.com/blog/michael-

porters-theory-of-competitive-advantage

ФІНАНСОВО-КРЕДИТНА ДІЯЛЬНІСТЬ: ПРОБЛЕМИ ТЕОРІЇ ТА ПРАКТИКИ

ISSN: 2306-4994 | eISSN: 2310-8770 | Том 3 (68), 2026

470 DOI: 10.55643/fcaptp.3.68.2026.5194

55. Solonenko, A. M., Podorozhniy, S. M., Bren, O. G., Siruk, I.

M., & Zhukov, O. V. (2021). Effect of stand density and di-

versity on the tree ratio of height to diameter relationship in

the park stands of Southern Ukraine. Ecologia Balkanica,

13(2), 181–192.

56. European Commission. (2026). Strategic autonomy and Eu-

ropean economic and research security. https://research-

and-innovation.ec.europa.eu/strategy/strategy-research-

and-innovation/europe-world/international-coopera-

tion/strategic-autonomy-and-european-economic-and-re-

search-security_en

57. Tamburini, G., Bommarco, R., Wanger, T. C., Kremen, C.,

van der Heijden, M. G. A., Liebman, M., & Hallin, S. (2020).

Agricultural diversification promotes multiple ecosystem ser-

vices without compromising yield. Science Advances, 6(45),

eaba1715. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aba1715

58. Tanasiichuk, A., Hromova, O., Kovalchuk, S., Perevozova,

I., & Khmelevskyi, O. (2020). Scientific and methodological

approaches to the evaluation of marketing management of

enterprises in the context of international diversification.

European Journal of Sustainable Development, 9(3), 349–

360. https://doi.org/10.14207/ejsd.2020.v9n3p349

59. Tesla. (2026). Tesla. https://www.tesla.com/

60. Agriculture and Horticulture Development Board. (2026).

The 5 principles of lean management.

https://ahdb.org.uk/knowledge-library/the-5-principles-of-

lean-management

61. Torchynovych, S. (2023). Diversification as a tool for inno-

vative development of an enterprise [Student research pa-

per, Western Ukrainian National University].

http://dspace.wunu.edu.ua/bit-

stream/316497/44729/1/ТорчиновичС.pdf

62. European External Action Service. (2022). Trade diversifica-

tion and policies for economic resilience.

https://www.eeas.europa.eu/eeas/trade-diversification-and-

policies-economic-resilience_en

63. Varakin, D., Osipenko, D., Ishchenko, V., Hlevatska, N., &

Hordieieva, I. (2024). Adaptive management strategies for

decision-making in business in the context of armed con-

flict. Pakistan Journal of Life and Social Sciences, 22(2),

10452–10465.

64. Wang, R., Wan, W., Bai, D., & Wang, J. (2025). Digital

transformation and corporate diversification: Evidence from

China's A-share listed companies. Economic Modelling, 150,

Article 107142.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econmod.2025.107142

65. What is an example of successful product diversification?

(2024). Dimet.in.ua. https://dimet.in.ua/ukraincyam/yakiy-

priklad-uspishnoi-diversifikacii-produkcii.html

66. World Bank Group. (2026). World Bank Group.

https://www.worldbank.org/ext/en/home

Глушко О., Бай С., Дроздова Ю.

ОЦІНЮВАННЯ РЕЗУЛЬТАТИВНОСТІ УПРАВЛІННЯ ПРОЦЕСОМ ДИВЕРСИФІКАЦІЇ

ПІДПРИЄМСТВА

У статті розглянуто проблему недостатньої комплексності підходів до оцінювання результативності управління про-

цесом диверсифікації підприємства в умовах ринкової турбулентності, економічної нестабільності й зростання не-

визначеності. Метою дослідження є оцінка впливу стратегій диверсифікації на стійкість підприємств, їхні фінансово-

економічні результати й стратегічну адаптивність у різних секторах економіки. Наукова новизна дослідження поля-

гає в поєднанні матриці Ансоффа, SWOT- і PESTLE-аналізу, секторального порівняння та сценарного моделювання

в єдину аналітичну основу для оцінки результативності управління диверсифікацією. Емпіричну частину дослі-

дження побудовано на систематизації восьми корпоративних кейсів із технологічного, промислового, виробничого,

фінансового та сервісного секторів. Результати показали, що пов’язана диверсифікація становила 50,0% проаналі-

зованих випадків, конгломератна або непов’язана диверсифікація – 37,5%, а неуспішна диверсифікація – 12,5%.

Позитивну фінансово-економічну динаміку виявлено у 87,5% компаній, що проявлялося в зростанні доходів, роз-

ширенні ринкового охоплення, диверсифікації джерел прибутку, посиленні конкурентних позицій і підвищенні стій-

кості. Також виокремлено три сценарії управління диверсифікацією: оптимістичний, базовий і песимістичний. Оп-

тимістичний сценарій відображав поєднання сильної стратегічної готовності, достатніх фінансових та організаційних

ресурсів, сприятливих або керованих зовнішніх умов і позитивних результатів ефективності. Базовий сценарій ві-

дображав часткове досягнення цілей диверсифікації за помірних обмежень ресурсів і навколишнього середовища.

Песимістичний сценарій відображав слабку стратегічну підготовку, обмежені ресурси, несприятливі ринкові умови

та негативні або нестабільні результати продуктивності.

Практична значущість результатів полягає в можливості застосування запропонованої аналітичної основи для стра-

тегічного планування, оцінювання ризиків і ухвалення управлінських рішень щодо диверсифікації на промислових і

сервісних підприємствах України.

Ключові слова: управління диверсифікацією, розвиток підприємства, стратегічне планування, фінансова стійкість,

управління ризиками, галузева диференціація, конкурентна перевага, адаптивне управління, економічна стійкість

JEL Класифікація: C44, D24, O14

© 2026. This work is published under https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance

with the terms of the License.