Strategic Management and Harvard Business Review

I am going the review the Article "The Five Competitive Forces That Shape Strategy" written by Micheal E. Porter. This article was published in Harvard business Review in year 2008.

This article was really interesting as it discussed a matrix developed for creating strategies by a professor at Harvard. Michael Porter the creator, discussed the notion of how powerful this tool is because companies or organizations look at competition too narrowly. The five competitive forces include:

2. Capabilities - can be defined as 1) organizational capabilities – the network of organizational routines and processes that determine how efficiently and effectively the organization transforms its inputs (resources) into outputs (products including physical goods and services) and 2) dynamic capabilities – an organizations ability to build, integrate and reconfigure capabilities to address rapidly changing environments.

Selecting a business strategy that details valuable resources and distinctive competencies, strategizing all resources and capabilities and ensuring they are all employed and exploited, and building and regenerating valuable resources and distinctive competencies is key. The analysis of resources, capabilities and core competencies describes the external environment which is subject to change quickly. Based off this information a firm has to be prepared and know its internal resources and capabilities and offer a more secure strategy. Furthermore, resources and capabilities are the primary source of profitability. Resources entail intangible, tangible, and human resources.

“Competitive Advantage introduces the concept of the value chain, a general Framework for thinking strategically about the activities involved in any business and assessing their relative cost and role in differentiation”. Michael Porter, (1985).

Barney, J. (2004). Firm resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage. Strategy: Process Content Context: an international perspective, de Wit & Meyer , 285-292.

This report demonstrates the evaluation of current performance of JD Sports Company. Method of Analysis includes Ansoff’s matrix and Porter’s generic growth strategies to discuss the nature of the market which JD Sports invest in. The financial methods are including the flexibility and stability of JD sports which judged by the liquidity, current ratio, operation capital, gearing and profit margin of this company. These figures could be collected from the annual report or balance sheet. This report analyzed the JD sport’s position in the market, and used generic and external growth method to expand market size. Such as acquired a lot stores to improve business profitability. Obviously, JD has expanded to the European

For a business to be successful and have a competitive advantage, it is important to evaluate the company’s resources and capabilities (Pitt & Koufopoulos, 2012). Resources in a company are the productive assets owned (tangible or intangible) whereas capabilities are what the company can do with this (Grant, 2010). “Establishing competitive

According to Porter (1985) a company can apply three generic types of strategies to protect itself while competitive force is a key issue of the management. To achieve this position a strategy based on competency must be accomplished

“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

This strategy emphasizes the use of an organization’s resources and capabilities to achieve a core competence that cannot be imitated by competitors. Furthermore, the resource based school argues that if an organization distinctively improves its internal capability; that is being able to have effective inside machinery to deliver products and services to customers, the organization will enjoy a massive advantage in the market. This school also argues that in order to have a competitive advantage, an organization must have resource and capabilities that are sophisticated to those of competitors (QuickMBA,

The Mission, Vision and Values of a company play a Fundamental role in Strategy Formulation and Strategic planning. We will discuss throughout this assignment, how developing effective mission, vision and values can help shape, develop and guide a firms Strategic choices. They reflect the firm's fundamental core ideology. At the most basic level a mission statement can describe the firms overall purpose for being. It provides an inside to the present business scope and purpose of the firm that is "who we are, what we do, and why we are here". It explains the firm's very reason for existing. It will

When many corporations were struggling in unstable and unpredictable competitive environment in the 1990s, the proposition of the concept of core competence became the dominant framework in management theory (Liu, 2006). This essay will review the article entitled “the core competence of the corporation” by Prahalad and Hamel from three aspects. Initially the position of the article will be analyzed compared with the Porter’s positioning perspective followed by the presentation of three theoretical assumptions of the article. In the last part, the strength and weakness of the article would be critically investigated.

Competitive advantage is explained by Mahoney and Pandian (1992) as the function of industry analysis, organizational governance and the firm’s effects in the form of resource advantages and strategies. In order for a firm to be competitive it must adapt to the volatile business environment and through strategic management decisions establish a competitive advantage that will ultimately produce superior performance relative to its competitors (Akimova 2000).

exists when the firm is able to deliver the same benefits as competitors but at a