2. Does Porter Fail to Explain How the Factor and Demand Conditions That Mould a Nation’s Corporate Strategies, Business Structures, and Industrial Clusters Are Established? What Other Theories and Evidence Might Assist Such an Explanation?

Michael Porter also invented competitive forces model. This model allows us to understand why, for example, the airlines industry is the least profitable one. It has an easy market entry, so there are a lot of different companies, and customer has to choose one, but it is difficult for him to differentiate between different companies, so the customers just chooses what is the most convenient for him at the current moment of time. There is an intense competition because of

Porter argues that there is a key force in any industry, one that exerts more influence than the other forces. Now, is it an attractive industry? You need to explain, briefly, why or why not. Bear in mind that it is often not a clear decision because the forces are mixed – for example, there may be little concern about new entrants, suppliers or substitutes, but buyers may be fickle

The main strengths in the production sector are manufacturing for medical devices, drugs & pharmaceuticals, and manufacturing support and weaknesses are the research and development cluster and logistics cluster. The main strengths in the service sector are patient care and education and weaknesses are marketing, human resources, consulting services, laboratories, and financial resources. There are regional externalities, defined by Kitson as “resources that reside outside of individual local firms but which are drawn on directly or indirectly by those firms and which influence their efficiency, innovativeness, flexibility, dynamism, productivity and competitive advantage. A few examples of regional externalities are quality and skills of the labor force, the extent, depth and orientation of social networks and institutional forms, the range and quality of cultural facilities and assets, the presence of an innovative and creative class, and the scale and quality of public infrastructure. He states that the more localized the industrial clusters are, the more intense the interaction will be between Porter’s components of his “competitive diamond” (social embeddedness, existence of facilitative social networks, social capital, and institutional structures) which will increase

2. How Porter's Five Forces of Competition impact the company Porter set out his famous Five Forces model in chapter 1 of his 1980 Competitive Strategy: Techniques for Analyzing Industries and Competitors, which has now become the dominant paradigm for the "Structural Analysis of Industries." The model places supply chain forces on the horizontal access and market structure vertically above and below industry competition, which they all point to as the center of potential profitability (Hitt, Ireland and Hoskisson,

There have been many different reactions towards Porter’s theory on how nations ought to compete. Some responses were validated while others rebutted his theory. Firstly, the positive response will be discussed before focusing on the criticisms of Porter’s theory. Oz (2002) implemented Porter’s Diamond model to analyse the competitive advantage of five Turkish industries and the outcome was favourable and thus validated Porter’s theory. For example, the uncompetitive Turkish automobile industry resulted in uncompetitive companies, while the presence of demanding buyers and hence intense local rivalry in Turkish construction and leather-clothing industries pushed the companies to innovate and become globally competitive. The Turkish findings by Oz thus validated Porter’s theory that indeed, competitive industries of a nation are inclined to cluster together.

“Porter’s five forces”: Introduction. “Porter’s five forces” is widely applied in today’s business world. Harvard Professor Michael E. Porter’s first HBR article “How competitive forces shape strategy” was published in 1979. It became revolutionary in the field of strategy. Porter’s subsequent work has brought big changes to the study of competitive strategy for corporations, regions, and nations. With assistance from his colleagues from Harvard Business School, Porter continues to update and extend his classic work, providing practical guidance for

In the article “The Competitive Advantage of Nations” Michael Porter describes a diamond shaped relationship of forces that define a country’s potential for being competitive in a specified industry. The four points on the diamond representing the different forces are: factor conditions; demand conditions; firm strategy, structure and rivalry; and related and supporting industries. According to Porter, the four points apply pressure to each other resulting in a national

Although the model is still studied in business schools, they propose whether his theory on competitiveness and the five forces are still applicable in the 21st century. The emergence of digitisation and globalisation cannot be denied. Businesses no longer rely on inside industry competition and must define their standing in an industry. Porter’s model does not flow with the pace of technology and is based on a static positioning of companies (Mekic and Mekic

Each nation operates and establishes four main attributes which constitute the diamond of national advantage; these attributes are factor conditions, demand condition, related and supporting industries and firm strategy, structure, and rivalry. When identifying these attributes, it may helps companies to learn how to compete; and each point of the whole system can affect directly for achieving international competitive advantage in the company. We can cite the pressures to invest and innovate, the goals of the managers and owners, the information available that shapes the opportunities, the direction in which they deploy their skills and the availability of skills and resources. First factor conditions according to an economic view that the factors of production are labor, natural resources, land… all these determine the flow of trade. But in the sophisticated companies it creates the most important factor of production such as skilled human resources and performance. Considering and involving heavy and specialized investment which constitutes an advantage in knowledge intensive industries. Sometimes nations succeed

There have been many different reactions towards Porter’s theory on how nations ought to compete. Some responses were validated while others rebutted his theory. Firstly, the positive response will be discussed before focusing on the criticisms of Porter’s theory. Oz (2002) implemented Porter’s Diamond model to analyse the competitive advantage of five Turkish industries and the outcome was favourable and thus validated Porter’s theory. For example, the uncompetitive Turkish automobile industry resulted in uncompetitive companies, while the presence of demanding buyers and hence intense local rivalry in Turkish construction and leather-clothing industries pushed the companies to innovate and become globally competitive. The Turkish findings by Oz thus validated Porter’s theory that indeed, competitive industries of a nation are inclined to cluster together.

It is undeniable that strategies of today’s organization lead to manage for Globalization because the world is becoming global market. Concerning the relevance for Today’s Business, it is questionable: Are Porter’s Five Competitive forces still applicable? Dälken (2014) argued that the question to what extent digitalization, globalization and deregulation affect Porter’s Five Competitive Forces can be answered as follows: Since Porter’s Five Forces relies on the principals of microeconomics; the challenge of the credibility of the model is limited. The mentioned three forces make network unstable, more extensive, and more dynamic.

Porter describes three choices of strategic position that influence the configuration of a firm's activities:

Michael E. Porter, associate professor published the article titled “How Competitive Forces shape Strategy” in Harvard Business Review in 1979. This article is retitled as “The Five Competitive Forces That Shape Strategy” and published in Harvard Business Review in 2008. Michael E. Porter developed the model of Five Competitive Forces which is defined as “Competitive Strategy – Techniques for Analyzing Industries and Competitors”. It has become a main device for analyzing an organizations structure in strategic practices.

Eighteen years ago in his masterpiece “The Competitive Advantage of Nations” Michael Porter developed a model to analyze the competitiveness and economic development of nations, regions, and cities, a model that is still a milestone in this field of enquiry. In this work I will try to show how that theory about competitiveness is related with some important aspects of economics of innovation, also in the light of the already visible effects of globalization.

Any country should use porter diamond theory of national advantage. It's designed to help understand the competitive advantage nations. It suggests that the national home base of any organizations are playing a supportive role in shaping the size or scoop to which it is likely to achieve advantage on a global scale. This home base provides basic factors, which support organizations from building advantages in international competition. Porter classifies four determinants: Factor Condition, Diamond Condition, Relatives & supporting and Structure, strategy & Rivalry. Egypt government acts to catalysts to improve Egypt position in a globally competitive economic environment. They found that they can create new factors such as skilled labor and high technology (Porter M., 1990). Porter's diamond model suggests threat there are inherent reasons why some nations are more competitive than others on an international market. Another factor that influence in competitive advantages such as the policies that put by government. One of the most influencer policies is (FDI) Foreign direct investment