Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Criticism for porters diamond model
Porter's diamond model criticism
Porter's diamond model criticism
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
This study focuses on discussing the criticism of Porter’s model of national competitive advantage. In order to fully discuss the limitations of Porter’s model of national competitive advantage, the determinants in Porter’s diamond model should be explained. Therefore Porter’s diamond model and its elements are analyzed in the first part of the study while rest of the study is explaining the limitations of the Porter’s diamond model that are late development theory, the role of the state, multinational enterprises, foreign direct investment, national competitiveness and history. Porter’s Diamond Model of National Competitive Advantage Porter’s diamond model, introduced by Michael Porter (1990a) was created to understand the ways and the reasons firms and industries create competitive advantage. The model consists of four key elements: Factor condition, demand conditions, related and supporting industries, and firm strategy, structure and rivalry that includes two additional determinants, government and chance. (Porter, 1990a; Stone and Ranchodd, 2006; Dixit and Joshi, 2011). The first determinant – factor conditions, explains the necessary inputs for production such as capital, natural resources and their accessibility, human capital, technology, science, markets and finally geopolitical position of the nation (Porter, 1990a). The second element of Porter’s diamond model investigates the local demand conditions such as the size of domestic market, type of domestic customers, potential of domestic buyers and the transferability of the domestic demand into foreign markets (Dixit and Joshi, 2011; Wu, 2006) The third determinant of the diamond – related and supporting industries looks at the industry suppliers and... ... middle of paper ... ...ycle. Moreover, China is the best example for how important is the government’s role in nations economy. Chinese government have created national team to focus on specific sectors such as electronics and automobile. (Sutherland,2003). As a result of this strategy, China became the biggest automobile manufacturer in the world by the end of 2012. Also, Chinese government is very successful to control financial markets and it owns 3 of top 10 banks in the world. On the other hand, in another growing state, India, government is applying different strategy rather than Chinese government that is based over encouraging foreign direct investments into the state by lowering tariffs. Eventually India has joined the top ten automobile manufacturers in the world and net profit of the companies has slightly increased by the end of this process (Sardy and Fetscherin, 2009)
As strategy consultants of McCormick & Associates, we use Porters Five Forces Model as a framework when making a qualitative evaluation of a firm's strategic position (Appendix 1.2). These five forces determine the competitive intensity and therefore attractiveness of a market. These forces affect the ability of a company to serve its customers and make a profit. A change in any of the forces normally requires a company to re-assess the market place.
The government plays a vital role in making business policies. For example, the UK government in 2014 budget the government has introduced a rise of 40% in the tax. As a consequence, the lending interest rate falls but the taxation is still high. Since 2010, the growth of GDP in UK was at -11% and by 2013, the GDP growth was at -6.6%, this is a good indication though it is at slowest rate.
Final contribution of de beers to the diamond pipeline is the promotion of diamond jewelry for the industry; through advertising campaigns developed from extensive market research; trade promotional activities and jewelry design competitions
According to the article “Restoring American Competitiveness” by Gary P. Pisano and Willy C. Shih, the United States industries have worn down competition through the damages from outsourcing manufacturing. There are several issues that have caused serious problems to the U.S. economy, which have caused the decline of trade due to shortage of innovation and competition. Theses problems are lack of funding for research and development by government and businesses and poor financial decisions made by management for outsourcing. There are several recommendations that the government and business executives can do to rebuild U.S. industries.
Generally speaking governments intervene in the market for two main reasons: "social efficiency and equity". [1] One does not expect to see a government intervene in the economy to favor a firm, or because the government would profit from such an intervention in the way a firm sees profit (except maybe voters positive perception of the intervention).
Hendersern and Stern 2000, ‘Untangling the origins of competitive advantage’,Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 21, pp. 1123-1145.
Porter’s five forces is a framework for analyzing an industry and business strategy development. It looks at forces that determine the competitive intensity of an industry and hence the overall attractiveness of that industry. The configuration of the five forces differs by industry. Understanding the competitive forces and their underlying causes reveals the roots of an industry’s current profitability while providing a framework for anticipating and influencing competition over time.
Because the subject matter of strategic management is so inherently complex and because each one of us brings his own personal biases to the analysis, it was suggested early on that virtually all case material in the field be analyzed from the perspective of more than one methodology. Profit theory and industrial chains were selected as the first of a number of viable approaches to the analytical process. It would have been equally correct to select the Five Competitive Forces analysis refined by Michael Porter, one of the major figures in the field of strategic management. This methodology addresses the same issues but differs only in the language that they use to describe corporate behavior. The five forces are:
In a world of free trade, growing competition and accessibility to foreign markets, the need for methodical market analysis and assumptions is steadily rising in today’s business environment. It is just a normal way of thinking to primarily intent to eliminate the financial before entering a new and foreign market. This suggests that enterprises have to develop an overall strategy for their business in order to gain competitive advantage and consequently market share. With the words of Michael E. Porter, professor at Harvard University and leading authority on competitive strategy, this desirable market success is indirectly linked to the individual structure of a market. The unique structure of a single market influences the strategic behaviour and the development of a competitive strategy within a firm. The competitive strategy finally decides whether a company performs successfully on the market or not. Referring to this interpretation of business success, M. E. Porter established his five forces framework that enables directives to gather useful information about the business environment and the competitive forces in industries.
In conclusion, EasyJet has been doing exceptionally well since its establishment in 1995. However, EasyJet can no longer rely on its past success based on increasing number of competition and operating in a saturated market. Furthermore, with the continuation of the market evolving, globalization is needed in order for a company to be successful. Therefore, it is appropriate for EasyJet to implement the recommended strategy of internationalizing into an emerging country, Nigeria, especially when EasyJet’s main source of flying an airplane is a resource of the given market. This way, EasyJet will be able to maintain a competitive advantage over its competitors.
China and India both have ponderous bureaucracy systems created by history and tradition. Since the opening of China’s market to foreign investors in 1978 and India in 1991, they have been gradually moving from centrally planned economic system towards decentralisation. However, besides their continuous movements in order to provide businesses a better environment, significant problems still exist.
Rugman, A. M. and D’Cruz, J. R. (1993). The ‘double diamond’ model of international competitiveness: the Canadian experience’. Management International Review, 2, 17-39.
Political influence. Governments may more easily exert pressure on state-owned firms to help implementing government policy.
ii. Placed against targets to achieve 65 percent of the international market by 2010, India’s gem and jewellery industry has registered an impressive 21.33 percent growth in exports
Hitt, M., Ireland, and Hoskisson, R. (2009).Strategic management: Competitiveness and Globalization, Concepts and Cases. In M. Staudt & Stranz (Ed.