Michael Porter wrote a book, Competitive Advantage

 

 

 

Michael Porter wrote a book, Competitive Advantage (New York: The Free Press, 1980), which became the standard text on corporate strategy during the 1980s and 1990s, and remains so even today. In it, he claims that there are three sources of competitive advantage (1980, pp. 35-40):

(1) Overall cost leadership (you make something everybody else makes at lower unit cost)

(2) Differentiation (nobody else makes exactly what you make, and consumers are willing to pay a little extra to buy what you make rather than a substitute)

(3) Focus (you make a product or produce a service which is generally available, but focus on serving a narrow customer base and doing it better than anyone else)

Approach (3), if you think hard about it, is really just a combination of the other two, focused on a specific, often narrow customer base. Porter refers to the first two as “pure strategies.” See Slides 4-10 of the Lesson 10 Power Point for an analysis of these two pure strategies.

The rest of Porter’s book is a framework—the 5 Forces Model and its application—for assessing a business’s competitive situation, and how to direct its energies towards “winning.”

Deliverables

What is the relationship between Porter’s approach and that of “Blue Ocean” theory? What significant differences are there between them (if there are any)?
How are these approaches related to Drucker’s concept of “creating a customer”? Justify your position.
How are each of them related to Drucker’s 5th principle of systematic entrepreneurship (“Aim at market leadership”)? Justify your position.
Do you prefer one of these approaches over the other? Why or why not?

Sample Solution

ts say this is obvious proof that there was a breeze on set in region 51 and the recordings could never have been taken in space. They likewise take a gander at the still photography taken on the moon. The photographs were taken by the space explorers, who had cameras lashed to their suits. The issue is that the one who planned the cameras expresses that it was basically impossible so that Armstrong or Aldrin could see what they were really catching. With how the cameras were joined, the space explorers couldn’t change the camera for good points or outlining with their hands and they needed to utilize their body and make their most realistic estimation. However, a significant number of the photographs have items and individuals impeccably outlined. Trick scholars say the photographs are outlined excessively well and excessively top notch to have been taken “aimlessly.”

They additionally examine the actual photographs and point out irregularities in lighting points and backdrop illumination, and they take a gander at the shadows and accept they have numerous light sources, despite the fact that they ought to just be lit by the sun. Scheme scholars check out and analyze the foundation of the photographs and say that some photographs have indistinguishable foundations while taking a gander at the mountains and holes in any event, when they should have been removed miles from one another. Intrigue scholars say that this an indication of terrible photoshopping, or what could be compared to photoshop. The last irregularity called attention to is that in all of the photographs and recordings, the sky is just unadulterated darkness. No stars are noticeable overhead, which trick scholars say is on the grounds that the arrival was in a set. Paul Lazarus, maker of Capricorn One which is a film about faking an arrival to Mars, says that he accepts the innovation was and is accessible for NASA to counterfeit the arrival, as he did in his film with Mars. Considerably previous NASA Astronaut Brian O’Leary who likewise filled in as a logical counselor to the Apollo program said in the unique that it was unquestionably conceivable NASA might have pulled off the fabrication.

On the off chance that this is every one of the a deception however, what befell space explorers Gus Grissom, Ed White, and Roger Chaffee that consumed to death in the recreation? Intrigue scholars have a response for that as well. They were executed. Not officially, yet rather that the “unplanned” fire touched off in the recreation was set deliberately. One of the greatest backers for this hypothesis is the group of one of the people in question: Gus Grissom. Grissom was an open pundit of the space program, and the two his significant other and child accept that at any rate, NASA has and is holding from them data about what truly occurred. Trick scholars take this thought a lot further and say that administration authorities intentionally set the fire to quietness basic Grissom before he learned, or b

This question has been answered.

Get Answer
WeCreativez WhatsApp Support
Our customer support team is here to answer your questions. Ask us anything!
👋 Hi, Welcome to Compliant Papers.