Michael Porter

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Michael Eugene Porter (born 1947) is an University Professor at Harvard Business School, with academic interests in management and economics. He is the founder of The Monitor Group. Porter's main academic objectives focus on how a firm or a region can build a competitive advantage and develop competitive strategy. He is also a Fellow Member of the Strategic Management Society.

Porter's strategic system consists primarily of:

• Porter's Five Forces Analysis
• strategic groups (also called strategic sets)
• the value chain
• the generic strategies of cost leadership, product differentiation, and focus
• the market positioning strategies of variety based, needs based, and access based market positions.
• Porter's clusters of competence for regional economic development

Contents 1 Key Work 2 Criticisms 3 See also 4 External links 5 References

[edit] Key Work

• Porter, M. (1979) "How competitive forces shape strategy", Harvard business Review, March/April 1979.
• Porter, M. (1980) Competitive Strategy, Free Press, New York, 1980.
• Porter, M. (1985) Competitive Advantage, Free Press, New York, 1985.
• Porter, M. (1987) "From Competitive Advantage to Corporate Strategy", Harvard Business Review, May/June 1987, pp 43-59.
• Porter, M. (1996) "What is Strategy", Harvard Business Review, Nov/Dec 1996.
• Porter, M. (1998) On Competition, Boston: Harvard Business School, 1998.
• Porter, M. (1990, 1998) "The Competitive Advantage of Nations", Free Press
• Porter, M. (2001) "Strategy and the Internet", Harvard Business Review, March 2001, pp. 62-78.
• Porter, Michael E. & Stern, Scott (2001) "Innovation: Location Matters", MIT Sloan Management Review, Summer 2001, Vol. 42, No. 4, pp. 28-36.
• Porter, Michael E. and Kramer, Mark R. (2006) "Strategy and Society: The Link Between Competitive Advantage and Corporate Social Responsibility", Harvard Business Review, December 2006, pp. 78-92.
• Porter, M. & Elizabeth Olmsted Teisberg (2006) "Redefining Health Care: Creating Value-Based Competition On Results", Harvard Business School Press

[edit] Criticisms

Porter has been criticised by some academics for inconsistent logical argument in his assertions.^[1] Critics have also labelled Porter's conclusions as lacking in empirical support and as justified with selective case studies.^{[2] [3] [4]}

[edit] See also

• Techno cluster
• Economics
• Marketing strategies
• Strategic planning
• Strategic management
• Porter 5 forces analysis
• Cluster development
• National Diamond

[edit] External links

• Michael Porter currently leads the Institute for Strategy and Competitiveness at Harvard
• Summary Biography from Global Leaders
• Biography at Harvard Business School Faculty Pages
• Michael E. Porter and Mark R. Kramer's latest article and winner of the 2006 McKinsey Award for the Best Harvard Business Review Article
• Michael Porter Biography at nonprofit consulting firm that he co-founded
• Porter Prize (English)

[edit] References

1. ^ Sharp, Byron; Dawes, John (1996), "Is Differentiation Optional? A Critique of Porter's Generic Strategy Typology," in Management, Marketing and the Competitive Process, Peter Earl, Ed. London: Edward Elgar.
2. ^ Speed, Richard J. (1989), "Oh Mr Porter! A Re-Appraisal of Competitive Strategy," Marketing Intelligence and Planning, 7 (5/6), 8-11.
3. ^ Yetton, Philip, Jane Craig, Jeremy Davis, and Fred Hilmer (1992), "Are Diamonds a Country's Best Friend? A Critique of Porter's Theory of National Competition as Applied to Canada, New Zealand and Australia," Australian Journal of Management, 17 (No. 1, June), 89-120.
4. ^ Allio, Robert J. (1990), "Flaws in Porter's Competitive Diamond?," Planning Review, 18 (No. 5, September/October), 28-32.