| Michael Porter |
Article Index for Michael |
Website Links For Michael |
Information AboutMichael Porter |
|
Michael Eugene Porter is an American academic focused on Management and Economic s. He has made important contributions to Strategic Management and Strategy theory, Porter's main academic objectives focus on how a firm or a region can build a Competitive Advantage and develop Competitive Strategy . Porter's strategic system consists primarily of:
BIOGRAPHY He is currently the Bishop William Lawrence University Professor based at Harvard Business School where he leads the Institute for Strategy and Competitiveness . He received a and Mechanical Engineering from Princeton University in 1969 , where he was elected to Phi Beta Kappa and Tau Beta Pi . He received an M.B.A. with high distinction in 1971 from the Harvard Business School , where he was a George F. Baker Scholar, and a Ph.D. in Business Economics from Harvard University in 1973 . In 1984 , he was one of the co-founders of Monitor Group , a global strategy and management consulting firm with headquarters in Cambridge, Massachusetts . In in the impoverished Inner City . The Porter Prize was established in 2001 in honor of him. The Graduate School Of International Corporate Strategy (ICS) at Hitotsubashi University in Tokyo , Japan serves as the organizing body for the prize. He has been rated among the Thinkers 50 , a survey of the most influential living management thinkers conducted by Suntop Media who specialise in management writing and editing for volume publication. WHERE DOES PORTER FIT? Porter brought the tools and language of economics to the field of strategic management research at an early stage of its development. His work fits into what is now termed Strategy Content research which is concerned with the 'what' of strategy, rather than the 'where' which is dealt with by Strategy Context or the how, who, and when of strategy which is the focus of Strategy Process research conducted by such authors as Andrew Pettigrew and Henry Mintzberg (De Wit & Meyer, 2003). KEY WORK
CRITICISMS Porter has been criticised by some academics for inconsistent logical argument in his assertions. 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. Critics have also labelled Porter's conclusions as lacking in empirical support and as justified with selective case studies.Speed, Richard J. (1989), "Oh Mr Porter! A Re-Appraisal of Competitive Strategy," Marketing Intelligence and Planning, 7 (5/6), 8-11. 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. Allio, Robert J. (1990), "Flaws in Porter's Competitive Diamond?," Planning Review, 18 (No. 5, September/October), 28-32. SEE ALSO
REFERENCES
EXTERNAL LINKS |
|
|