This paper has been prepared as part of a graduate Advanced Seminar in Strategic Management and Corporate Governance course and it is aimed to present information about the Joel Dean’s product life cycle theory, in an effort to identify and discuss their linkages to modern management implications. Although the parallelisms drawn to managerial implications are highly affected from the strategist’s views and therefore subjective in nature, the reasons for the claimed linkage has been sought to be explained by stressing on the foundations from theory and practice.
Hofer characterizes the item life cycle as "the most principal variable in deciding a proper business system is the phase of the item life cycle." On the other hand, Biggadike characterizes the item life cycle as one of the five real commitments that promoting has made to key administration. Furthermore he includes that the Boston Consulting Group's renowned portfolio methodology is dependent upon the item life cycle idea. Michael Porter likewise characterizes the item life cycle as "the granddad of ideas for anticipating the likely course of industry development." There is an expanding inner conflict at the item life cycle idea inside promoting. On one hand, the idea has a settled claim on account of the instinctive rationale of the product birth > growth > maturity > decline which is dependent upon a living similarity. Arena and Swan (1979) and Belville (1966) recommend that the source of