Editor’s Note: In 1979, Harvard Business Review
published “How Competitive Forces Shape Strategy”
by a young economist and associate professor,
Michael E. Porter. It was his first HBR article, and it
started a revolution in the strategy field. In subsequent decades,
Porter has brought his signature economic rigor to
the study of competitive strategy for corporations,
regions, nations, and, more recently, health care and
philanthropy. “Porter’s five forces” have shaped a generation of
academic research and business practice. With
prodding and assistance from Harvard Business School
Professor Jan Rivkin and longtime colleague Joan Magretta,
Porter here reaffirms, updates, and extends the classic work. He
also addresses common misunderstandings, provides
practical guidance for users of the framework, and
offers a deeper view of its implications for strategy
today.
In
essence, the job of the strategist is to
understand and cope with competition. Often, however,
managers define competition too narrowly, as if it occurred
only among today’s direct competitors. Yet
competition for profits goes beyond
established industry rivals to include four other competitive forces as
well: customers, suppliers, potential
entrants, and substitute products. The
extended rivalry that results from all five forces defines an
industry’s structure and shapes the nature of
competitive interaction within an industry.As different from one another as industries might appear on the surface, the underlying drivers of profitability are the same. The global auto industry, for instance, appears to have nothing in common with the worldwide market for art masterpieces or the heavily regulated health-care delivery industry in Europe. But to understand industry competition and profitability in each of those three cases, one must analyze the industry’s underlying structure in terms of the five forces. (See the exhibit “The Five Forces That Shape Industry Competition.”)
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 (and profitability) over time. A healthy industry structure should be as much a competitive concern to strategists as their company’s own position. Understanding industry structure is also essential to effective strategic positioning. As we will see, defending against the competitive forces and shaping them in a company’s favor are crucial to strategy.
Forces That Shape Competition
The configuration of the five forces differs by industry. In the market for commercial aircraft, fierce rivalry between dominant producers Airbus and Boeing and the bargaining power of the airlines that place huge orders for aircraft are strong, while the threat of entry, the threat of substitutes, and the power of suppliers are more benign. In the movie theater industry, the proliferation of substitute forms of entertainment and the power of the movie producers and distributors who supply movies, the critical input, are important.
The strongest competitive force or forces determine the profitability of an industry and become the most important to strategy formulation. The most salient force, however, is not always obvious.
For example, even though rivalry is often fierce in commodity industries, it may not be the factor limiting profitability. Low returns in the photographic film industry, for instance, are the result of a superior substitute product—as Kodak and Fuji, the world’s leading producers of photographic film, learned with the advent of digital photography. In such a situation, coping with the substitute product becomes the number one strategic priority.
Industry structure grows out of a set of economic and technical characteristics that determine the strength of each competitive force. We will examine these drivers in the pages that follow, taking the perspective of an incumbent, or a company already present in the industry. The analysis can be readily extended to understand the challenges facing a potential entrant.
No comments:
Post a Comment