Modul MIchael Potter Five Generic Strategy

MODUL PERKULIAHAN
Distinctive Strategic
Management
Michael potter’s five generic strategies

Cost leadership strategies
Focus strategies
Differentiation strategies
Strategies for competing in turbulent high-velocity market
Fakultas Program Studi Tatap Muka Kode MK Disusun Oleh
06
Ekonomi & Bisnis Magister 35009 Dr. Baruna Hadibrata, SE., MM
Manajemen
Abstract Kompetensi
This module illustrates process of Understanding Michael potter’s five
Financial Strategies. generic strategies, Focus strategies
Differentiation strategies, Strategies for
competing in turbulent high-velocity
market
Pembahasan
Michael potter’s five generic strategies
Porter's generic strategies describe how a company pursues competitive advantage across its
chosen market scope. There are three/four generic strategies, either lower cost,
differentiated, or focus. A company chooses to pursue one of two types of competitive
advantage, either via lower costs than its competition or by differentiating itself along
dimensions valued by customers to command a higher price. A company also chooses one of
two types of scope, either focus (offering its products to selected segments of the market) or
industry-wide, offering its product across many market segments. The generic strategy
reflects the choices made regarding both the type of competitive advantage and the scope.
The concept was described by Michael Porter in 1980.
Porter wrote in 1980 that strategy target either cost leadership, differentiation, or focus.
These are known as Porter's three generic strategies and can be applied to any size or form
of business. Porter claimed that a company must only choose one of the three or risk that the
business would waste precious resources. Porter's generic strategies detail the interaction
between cost minimization strategies, product differentiation strategies, and market focus
strategies.
Porter described an industry as having multiple segments that can be targeted by a firm. The
breadth of its targeting refers to the competitive scope of the business. Porter defined two
types of competitive advantage: lower cost or differentiation relative to its rivals. Achieving
competitive advantage results from a firm's ability to cope with the five forces better than its
rivals. Porter wrote: "(Achieving competitive advantage requires a firm to make a
choice...about the type of competitive advantage it seeks to attain and the scope within which
it will attain it." He also wrote: "The two basic types of competitive advantage [differentiation
and lower cost) combined with the scope of activities for which a firm seeks to achieve them
lead to three generic strategies for achieving above average performance in an industry: cost
leadership, differentiation and focus. The focus strategy has two variants, cost focus and
differentiation focus." In general:
2012 Nama Mata Kuliah dari Modul Pusat Bahan Ajar dan eLearning
2 Dosen Penyusun http://www.mercubuana.ac.id
If a firm is targeting customers in most or all segments of an industry based on offering the
lowest price, it is following a cost leadership strategy;
If it targets customers in most or all segments based on attributes other than price (e.g., via
higher product quality or service) to command a higher price, it is pursuing a differentiation
strategy. It is attempting to differentiate itself along these dimensions favorably relative to its
competition. It seeks to minimize costs in areas that do not differentiate it, to remain cost
competitive; or If it is focusing on one or a few segments, it is following a focus strategy. A
firm may be attempting to offer a lower cost in that scope (cost focus) or differentiate itself
in that scope (differentiation focus).
The concept of choice was a different perspective on strategy, as the 1970s paradigm was the
pursuit of market share (size and scale) influenced by the experience curve. Companies that
pursued the highest market share position to achieve cost advantages fit under Porter's cost
leadership generic strategy, but the concept of choice regarding differentiation and focus
represented a new perspective.
Empirical research on the profit impact of marketing strategy indicated that firms with a high
market share were often quite profitable, but so were many firms with low market share. The
least profitable firms were those with moderate market share. This was sometimes referred
to as the hole in the middle problem. Porter’s explanation of this is that firms with high market
share were successful because they pursued a cost leadership strategy and firms with low
market share were successful because they used market segmentation to focus on a small but
profitable market niche. Firms in the middle were less profitable because they did not have a
viable generic strategy.
Porter suggested combining multiple strategies is successful in only one case. Combining a
market segmentation strategy with a product differentiation strategy was seen as an effective
way of matching a firm’s product strategy (supply side) to the characteristics of your target
market segments (demand side). But combinations like cost leadership with product
differentiation were seen as hard (but not impossible) to implement due to the potential for
conflict between cost minimization and the additional cost of value-added differentiation.
Since that time, empirical research has indicated companies pursuing both differentiation and
low-cost strategies may be more successful than companies pursuing only one strategy.
Some commentators have made a distinction between cost leadership, that is, low cost
strategies, and best cost strategies. They claim that a low cost strategy is rarely able to provide
a sustainable competitive advantage. In most cases firms end up in price wars. Instead, they
claim a best cost strategy is preferred. This involves providing the best value for a relatively
low price.
Cost leadership strategy

Cost leadership is a concept developed by Michael Porter, used in business strategy. It
describes a way to establish the competitive advantage. Cost leadership, in basic words,
means the lowest cost of operation in the industry. The cost leadership is often driven by
company efficiency, size, scale, scope and cumulative experience (learning curve). A cost
leadership strategy aims to exploit scale of production, well defined scope and other
economies (e.g a good purchasing approach), producing highly standardized products, using
high technology. In the last years more and more companies choose a strategic mix to achieve
market leadership. This patterns consist in simultaneous cost leadership, superior customer
service and product leadership.
Cost leadership is different from price leadership. A company could be the lowest cost
producer, yet not offer the lowest-priced products or services. If so, that company would have
a higher than average profitability. However, cost leader companies do compete on price and
are very effective at such a form of competition, having a low cost structure and manageme
This strategy involves the firm winning market share by appealing to cost-conscious or price-
sensitive customers. This is achieved by having the lowest prices in the target market
segment, or at least the lowest price to value ratio (price compared to what customers
receive). To succeed at offering the lowest price while still achieving profitability and a high
return on investment, the firm must be able to operate at a lower cost than its rivals. There
are three main ways to achieve this.
The first approach is achieving a high asset utilization. In service industries, this may mean for
example a restaurant that turns tables around very quickly, or an airline that turns around
flights very fast. In manufacturing, it will involve production of high volumes of output. These
approaches mean fixed costs are spread over a larger number of units of the product or
service, resulting in a lower unit cost, i.e. the firm hopes to take advantage of economies of
scale and experience curve effects. For industrial firms, mass production becomes both a
strategy and an end in itself. Higher levels of output both require and result in high market
share, and create an entry barrier to potential competitors, who may be unable to achieve
the scale necessary to match the firms low costs and prices.
The second dimension is achieving low direct and indirect operating costs. This is achieved by
offering high volumes of standardized products, offering basic no-frills products and limiting
customization and personalization of service. Production costs are kept low by using fewer
components, using standard components, and limiting the number of models produced to
ensure larger production runs. Overheads are kept low by paying low wages, locating
premises in low rent areas, establishing a cost-conscious culture, etc. Maintaining this
strategy requires a continuous search for cost reductions in all aspects of the business. This
will include outsourcing, controlling production costs, increasing asset capacity utilization,
and minimizing other costs including distribution, R&D and advertising. The associated
distribution strategy is to obtain the most extensive distribution possible. Promotional
strategy often involves trying to make a virtue out of low cost product features.
The third dimension is control over the value chain encompassing all functional groups
(finance, supply/procurement, marketing, inventory, information technology etc..) to ensure
low costs. For supply/procurement chain this could be achieved by bulk buying to enjoy
quantity discounts, squeezing suppliers on price, instituting competitive bidding for contracts,
working with vendors to keep inventories low using methods such as Just-in-Time purchasing
or Vendor-Managed Inventory. Wal-Mart is famous for squeezing its suppliers to ensure low
prices for its goods. Other procurement advantages could come from preferential access to
raw materials, or backward integration. Keep in mind that if you are in control of all functional
groups this is suitable for cost leadership; if you are only in control of one functional group
this is differentiation. For example Dell Computer initially achieved market share by keeping
inventories low and only building computers to order via applying Differentiation strategies
in supply/procurement chain. This will be clarified in other sections.
Cost leadership strategies are only viable for large firms with the opportunity to enjoy
economies of scale and large production volumes and big market share. Small businesses can
be cost focus not cost leaders if they enjoy any advantages conducive to low costs. For
example, a local restaurant in a low rent location can attract price-sensitive customers if it
offers a limited menu, rapid table turnover and employs staff on minimum wage. Innovation
of products or processes may also enable a startup or small company to offer a cheaper
product or service where incumbents' costs and prices have become too high. An example is
the success of low-cost budget airlines who despite having fewer planes than the major
airlines, were able to achieve market share growth by offering cheap, no-frills services at
prices much cheaper than those of the larger incumbents. At the beginning for low-cost
budget airlines choose acting in cost focus strategies but later when the market grow, big
airlines started to offer same low-cost attributes, cost focus became cost leadership!
A cost leadership strategy may have the disadvantage of lower customer loyalty, as price-
sensitive customers will switch once a lower-priced substitute is available. A reputation as a
cost leader may also result in a reputation for low quality, which may make it difficult for a
firm to rebrand itself or its products if it chooses to shift to a differentiation strategy in future.
 Examples of Cost Leadership & Strategy Marketing
When it comes to marketing your business, there are three generic strategies you can use:
focus, differentiation and cost leadership. While the cost leadership strategy can be highly
successful, it can be can be difficult to employ. It involves marketing your company as the
cheapest source for a good or service. This means that you need to minimize your costs and
pass the savings on to your customers. By looking at examples of firms that have employed
this strategy successfully, you can see how it can benefit your own business.
Wal-Mart
Wal-Mart Stores Inc. has been successful using its strategy of everyday low prices to attract
customers. The idea of everyday low prices is to offer products at a cheaper rate than
competitors on a consistent basis, rather than relying on sales. Wal-Mart is able to achieve
this due to its large scale and efficient supply chain. They source products from cheap
domestic suppliers and from low-wage foreign markets. This allows the company to sell their
items at low prices and to profit off thin margins at a high volume.
McDonald's
The restaurant industry is known for yielding low margins that can make it difficult to compete
with a cost leadership marketing strategy. McDonald's has been extremely successful with
this strategy by offering basic fast-food meals at low prices. They are able to keep prices low
through a division of labor that allows it to hire and train inexperienced employees rather
than trained cooks. It also relies on few managers who typically earn higher wages. These staff
savings allow the company to offer its foods for bargain prices.
Ikea
The Swedish furniture retailer Ikea revolutionized the furniture industry by offering cheap but
stylish furniture. Ikea is able to keep its prices low by sourcing its products in low-wage
countries and by offering a very basic level of service. Ikea does not assemble or deliver
furniture; customers must collect the furniture in the warehouse and assemble at home
themselves. While this is less convenient than traditional retailers, it allows Ikea to offer lower
prices that attract customers.
Southwest Airlines
The airline industry has typically been an industry where profits are hard to come by without
charging high ticket prices. Southwest Airlines challenged this concept by marketing itself as
a cost leader. Southwest attempts to offer the lowest prices possible by being more efficient
than traditional airlines. They minimize the time that their planes spend on the tarmac in
order to keep them flying and to keep profits up. They also offer little in the way of additional
thrills to customers, but pass the cost savings on to them.
Differentiation Strategy
Differentiate the products/services in some way in order to compete successfully. Examples
of the successful use of a differentiation strategy are Hero, Honda, Asian Paints, HUL, Nike
athletic shoes (image and brand mark), BMW Group Automobiles, Perstorp BioProducts,
Apple Computer (product's design), Mercedes-Benz automobiles, and Renault-Nissan
Alliance.
A differentiation strategy is appropriate where the target customer segment is not price-
sensitive, the market is competitive or saturated, customers have very specific needs which
are possibly under-served, and the firm has unique resources and capabilities which enable it
to satisfy these needs in ways that are difficult to copy. These could include patents or other
Intellectual Property (IP), unique technical expertise (e.g. Apple's design skills or Pixar's
animation prowess), talented personnel (e.g. a sports team's star players or a brokerage firm's
star traders), or innovative processes. Successful differentiation is displayed when a company
accomplishes either a premium price for the product or service, increased revenue per unit,
or the consumers' loyalty to purchase the company's product or service (brand loyalty).
Differentiation drives profitability when the added price of the product outweighs the added
expense to acquire the product or service but is ineffective when its uniqueness is easily
replicated by its competitors. Successful brand management also results in perceived
uniqueness even when the physical product is the same as competitors. This way, Chiquita
was able to brand bananas, Starbucks could brand coffee, and Nike could brand sneakers.
Fashion brands rely heavily on this form of image differentiation.
Differentiation strategy is not suitable for small companies. It is more appropriate for big
companies. To apply differentiation with attributes throughout predominant intensity in any
one or several of the functional groups (finance, purchase, marketing, inventory etc..). This
point is critical. For example GE uses finance function to make a difference. You may do so in
isolation of other strategies or in conjunction with focus strategies (requires more initial
investment). It provides great advantage to use differentiation strategy (for big companies) in
conjunction with focus cost strategies or focus differentiation strategies. Case for Coca Cola
and Royal Crown beverages is good sample for this.
Variants on the Differentiation Strategy

The shareholder value model holds that the timing of the use of specialized knowledge can
create a differentiation advantage as long as the knowledge remains unique. This model
suggests that customers buy products or services from an organisation to have access to its
unique knowledge. The advantage is static, rather than dynamic, because the purchase is a
one-time event.
The unlimited resources model utilizes a large base of resources that allows an organisation
to outlast competitors by practicing a differentiation strategy. An organisation with greater
resources can manage risk and sustain profits more easily than one with fewer resources. This
provides a short-term advantage only. If a firm lacks the capacity for continual innovation, it
will not sustain its competitive position over time.
Focus strategies
This dimension is not a separate strategy for big companies due to small market conditions.
Big companies which chose applying differentiation strategies may also choose to apply in
conjunction with focus strategies (either cost or differentiation). On the other hand this is
definitely appropriate strategies for small companies especially for those wanting to avoid
competition with big ones.
In adopting a narrow focus, the company ideally focuses on a few target markets (also called
a segmentation strategy or niche strategy). These should be distinct groups with specialised
needs. The choice of offering low prices or differentiated products/services should depend on
the needs of the selected segment and the resources and capabilities of the firm. It is hoped
that by focusing your marketing efforts on one or two narrow market segments and tailoring
your marketing mix to these specialised markets, you can better meet the needs of that target
market. The firm typically looks to gain a competitive advantage through product innovation
and/or brand marketing rather than efficiency. A focused strategy should target market
segments that are less vulnerable to substitutes or where a competition is weakest to earn
above-average return on investment.
Examples of firm using a focus strategy include Southwest Airlines, which provides short-haul
point-to-point flights in contrast to the hub-and-spoke model of mainstream carriers, United,
and American Airlines.
Recent developments
Michael Treacy and Fred Wiersema (1993) in their book The Discipline of Market Leaders have
modified Porter's three strategies to describe three basic "value disciplines" that can create
customer value and provide a competitive advantage. They are operational excellence,
product leadership, and customer intimacy.
A popular post-Porter model was presented by W. Chan Kim and Renée Mauborgne in their
1999 Harvard Business Review article "Creating New Market Space". In this article they
described a "value innovation" model in which companies must look outside their present
paradigms to find new value propositions. Their approach complements most of Porter's
thinking, especially the concept of differentiation. They later went on to publish their ideas in
the book Blue Ocean Strategy. Thus it is difficult, but not impossible, to topple a firm that has
established a dominant standard.
Criticisms of generic strategies

Several commentators have questioned the use of generic strategies claiming they lack
specificity, lack flexibility, and are limiting.
Porter stressed the idea that only one strategy should be adopted by a firm and failure to do
so will result in “stuck in the middle” scenario.[8] He discussed the idea that practising more
than one strategy will lose the entire focus of the organization hence clear direction of the
future trajectory could not be established. The argument is based on the fundamental that
differentiation will incur costs to the firm which clearly contradicts with the basis of low cost
strategy and on the other hand relatively standardised products with features acceptable to
many customers will not carry any differentiation[9] hence, cost leadership and
differentiation strategy will be mutually exclusive.[8] Two focal objectives of low cost
leadership and differentiation clash with each other resulting in no proper direction for a firm.
In particular, Miller[10] questions the notion of being "caught in the middle". He claims that
there is a viable middle ground between strategies. Many companies, for example, have
entered a market as a niche player and gradually expanded. According to Baden-Fuller and
Stopford (1992) the most successful companies are the ones that can resolve what they call
"the dilemma of opposites". Furthermore, Reeves and Routledge's (2013) study of
entrepreneurial spirit demonstrated this is a key factor in organisation success, differentiation
and cost leadership were the least important factors.
However, contrarily to the rationalisation of Porter, contemporary research has shown

evidence of successful firms practising such a “hybrid strategy”. Research writings of Davis
(1984 cited by Prajogo 2007, p. 74) state that firms employing the hybrid business strategy
(Low cost and differentiation strategy) outperform the ones adopting one generic strategy.
Sharing the same view point, Hill (1988 cited by Akan et al. 2006, p. 49) challenged Porter’s
concept regarding mutual exclusivity of low cost and differentiation strategy and further
argued that successful combination of those two strategies will result in sustainable
competitive advantage. As to Wright and other (1990 cited by Akan et al. 2006, p. 50) multiple
business strategies are required to respond effectively to any environment condition. In the
mid to late 1980s where the environments were relatively stable there was no requirement
for flexibility in business strategies but survival in the rapidly changing, highly unpredictable
present market contexts will require flexibility to face any contingency (Anderson 1997,
Goldman et al. 1995, Pine 1993 cited by Radas 2005, p. 197). After eleven years Porter revised
his thinking and accepted the fact that hybrid business strategy could exist (Porter cited by
Prajogo 2007, p. 70) and writes in the following manner.
Though Porter had a fundamental rationalisation in his concept about the invalidity of hybrid
business strategy, the highly volatile and turbulent market conditions will not permit survival
of rigid business strategies since long-term establishment will depend on the agility and the
quick responsiveness towards market and environmental conditions. Market and
environmental turbulence will make drastic implications on the root establishment of a firm.
If a firm’s business strategy could not cope with the environmental and market contingencies,
long-term survival becomes unrealistic. Diverging the strategy into different avenues with the
view to exploit opportunities and avoid threats created by market conditions will be a
pragmatic approach for a firm. Critical analysis done separately for cost leadership strategy
and differentiation strategy identifies elementary value in both strategies in creating and
sustaining a competitive advantage. Consistent and superior performance than competition
could be reached with stronger foundations in the event “hybrid strategy” is adopted.
Depending on the market and competitive conditions hybrid strategy should be adjusted
regarding the extent which each generic strategy (cost leadership or differentiation) should
be given priority in practice.
Strategies for competing in various types of industries

This best strategy for a given firm is ultimately a unique construction reflecting it's particular.
- MICHAEL E. PORTER. This topic discusses on the various strategies available for/adapted by
firms in various business scenarios or market conditions. Listed below are the different market
environments and the strategies that managers have the option of adapting in order to make
strategic decisions and face challenges in order to survive in the market.
Strategies for Competing in Turbulent, High-Velocity Markets

The world is changing more rapidly, and consequently industries and firms themselves are
changing faster than ever. Some industries are changing so fast that researchers call them
turbulent, high-velocity markets, such as telecommunications, medical, biotechnology,
pharmaceuticals, computer hardware, software, and virtually all Internet-based industries.
High-velocity change is clearly becoming more and more the rule rather than the exception,
even in such industries as toys, phones, banking, defense, publishing, and communication.
Meeting the challenge of high-velocity change presents the firm with a choice of whether to
react, anticipate, or lead the market in terms of its own strategies. To primarily react to
changes in the industry would be a defensive strategy used to counter, for example,
unexpected shifts in buyer tastes and technological breakthroughs. The react-to-change
strategy would not be as effective as the anticipate-change strategy, which would entail
devising and following through with plans for dealing with the expected changes. However,
firms ideally strive to be in a position to lead the changes in high-velocity markets, whereby
they pioneer new and better technologies and products and set industry standards. As
illustrated, being the leader or pioneer of change in a high-velocity market is an aggressive,
offensive strategy that includes rushing next-generation products to market ahead of rivals
and being continually proactive in shaping the market to one’s own benefit. Although a lead-
change strategy is best whenever the firm has the resources to pursue this approach, on
occasion even the strongest firms in turbulent industries have to employ the react-to-the-
market strategy and the anticipate-the-market strategy.
The central strategy making challenge in this kind of an environment is managing change.
Reacting to change
Adjust to the monetary and legal policies of the government.
Launch better products in the market in response to competitors' offerings.
Respond quick to unexpected changes in buyers' needs and preferences.
Strategists react and respond quickly to problems that arise.
Anticipating change
Perform market research to study buyers' behaviour, needs and expectations to get an insight
on how the market will evolve and then reacting to change.
Opens up the doors for new opportunities and hence is a better way to manage change than
simply react to the change.
Analyze opportunities for going global.
Monitors technological developments to design product's future path.
Adapt strategies such as strong distribution channel, add/adopt resources and competitive
capabilities, improving the existing product line.
Leading the change
Set standards in the industry.
Pioneer new and updated technology.
Introduce new and innovative products that open up a new market or even spur the creation
of a whole new industry.
Invest aggressively in R&D to improve product capability and drive the change with
technology.
Develop and maintain organizational capabilities quickly ahead of the rivals.
Rely on strategic partnership with outside suppliers and with companies making tie in
products for which first the company needs to strengthen its internal resources base.
Companies in depth expertise, speed, adaptation to change, innovativeness, opportunism
and resources flexibility is critical for organizational capabilities in order to keep the products
and services fresh and exciting enough to change taking place.
Force the rivals to follow.
Set changes in the industry place.
Influence the rules of the game in market.
 Strategies for competing in emerging industries of the future

Emerging industries are the early formative stage of a company. The features of companies
in this industry are latest technology, adding human resource, acquiring constructing
facilities, broadening distribution and marketing channels, gearing up operating facilities and
gaining buyer acceptance. Emerging industries face issues such as product design problem
and technological problems that remain to be sorted out.
Market is new and has an unproven track record and so there is an uncertainty of how the
market will behave, how fast it will grow and how big it will get.
Strategists should be aware of the new technological development in product design and in
the production of products and services.
Strategic managers study the factors like competitors, demand, market, technology and
socio-cultural, political and legal environment.
Companies strong in resources tend to emerge as winners in the segment.
Strategy manager should adopt generic strategies to keep costs and price of expenditure low.
Marketers' task is to induce initial purchase and to overcome customers concerns over the
product features and performance reliability.
Utilize potential buyers' feedback as they always try to improve the quality of the product and
services of the company.
Strategic managers are required to have ample suppliers to offset uncertainty in supply by
certain suppliers.
In case of under capitalization, managers must look to tie up with capital rich firms or look to
being acquired by financially strong firms.
How to succeed in an emerging industry
Perfect in technology to improve product quality and to develop attractive performance
features in the product and service.
Acquire or form alliance with companies strong in technology to out compete rivals.
Adapt to the change in technology market.
Win the early race for industrial leadership by taking bold moves in creating strategies and
with risk taking entrepreneurship.
Make it easy and cheap for first time buyers to try the industry as first gen product.
 Strategies for competing in mature market

This type of industry moves from rapid growth to significantly slower growth. The industry is
said to have become mature when all the potential buyers' are already users of the industry's
products and services. An industry is said to be matured when there is a need for
technologically advanced factors, product innovation factors and marketing driven factors
such as demand for products and services, combination of the 4Ps.
Indulge in price-cutting policy for products and services, increased advertising and other
aggressive methods to gain market share.
Sophisticated buyers' indulge in evaluating different brands and use their knowledge to
negotiate a better deal with sellers. This will help them in repeated purchases.
Buyers prefer to purchase quality products with the best combination of price and service.
The company's cash flow is affected by too much advertising but rapidly declining sales.
Difficult to find future users for the existing products.
Penetrate in to foreign market for the domestic market is matured.
Indulge in mergers and acquisition or else be prepared to get the axe.
Adapt cost leadership, market leadership, generic strategies and new technologies there by
mergers and acquisition to develop competitive market.
Characteristics of maturing industry
Pruning marginal products and models
The industry introduces many product versions which work against achieving growth and
increased manufacturing costs. Pruning marginal products opens the doors for cost savings
and permits more concentration on items whose margins are high and where the firm attains
a competitive advantage.
Emphasize value chain innovation
Industries that adopt innovation provide better products and service at lower costs even
quality and introduce new versions to market. Manufacturers' can mechanize innovation in
terms of high cost activities, redesign of production lines in order to improve labour efficiency
and build a flexible manufacturing process. Hence, customized products can be produced with
increased use of advance technology.
Strong focus on cost reduction

Companies can select suppliers to supply materials at competitive prices, implement a tighter
supply chain system to keep costs low by trimming out cost consuming processes, develop
economical product designs, re-engineering, use of e-commerce in internal and external
processes and create an economical distribution channel.
Increasing sales to present customers

Companies can take responsibility in expanding its sales to its existing customer base. Mature
companies provide complementary items and ancillary service such as sales after sales and
studying more ways for customers to use their company's products.
Purchasing rival firms at bargain price

Purchasing of rival firms at bargain prices can help to create low cost positioning if
opportunities are present for greater operating efficiency. It also helps the acquiring company
to gain access to the customer base of the acquired company enhancing and enlarging the
market share against rival concerns.
Globalisation
Since the domestic market is matured, companies may look to penetrate in to other countries
using the domestic firm's skill reputation. Mature industries in time become strong in
resources like market, finance, HR, distribution channels, alliance, mergers and technology.
Building capabilities that are flexible
It is adding new competencies or capabilities that depending existing competence makes
them harder to initiate or strive to make core competencies more adaptable to changing
customer requirements and expectations.
 Strategies for firms in decline markets

Focusing on the growth market segment within the industry
The first competitive approach of strategies for firms in declining industries is to focus on
growth market segments. Declining markets are composed of a number of segments or
niches, say, one or more of these segments are growing rapidly despite the stagnation of the
industry. An astute competitor who focuses on fast growing segments in industries and does
a clean job of meeting the needs of the buyers which comprises these segments can often
escape stagnation sales and profits and even gain decided competitive advantage in the
industry.
Differentiating on the basis of quality and frequency of product innovation

This strategy either enhances quality or innovation thereby rejuvenating demand by creating
important new growth segments or inducing buyers to trade up in the industry. Successful
product innovation opens up avenues for competing besides meeting or beating rivals' price
of product in the market. Being successful in differentiating with upgraded innovation has an
added advantage. It becomes difficult for firms to imitate as it is expensive.
Become a low cost producer

Companies in declining industries can improve profit margins and RoI by pursuing innovative
cost reduction techniques. The potential ways to save costs are -
Cut down on marginally beneficial activities in the value chain
Outsource those activities that can be performed cheaply by sub contractors or other firms in
the business
Using e-commerce technology to redesign internal business processes to save costs
Consolidate underutilized production facilities
Widen distribution channels to ensure the unit volume needed for low cost production in
factory
Close down low volume, high cost retail outlets
Pruning marginal products from the firm is offering
Daftar Pustaka
Porter, Michael E. (1980). Competitive Strategy. Free Press. ISBN 0-684-84148-7.

^ Jump up to: a b Porter, Michael E. (1985). Competitive Advantage. Free Press. ISBN 0-684-
84146-0.
Jump up ^ Kiechel, Walter (2010). The Lords of Strategy. Harvard Business Press. ISBN 978-1-
59139-782-3.
Jump up ^ Wright, Peter, Kroll, Mark, Kedia, Ben, and Pringle, Charles. 1990. Strategic Profiles,
Market Share, and Business Performance. Industrial Management, May 1, pp23-28.
^ Jump up to: a b c d Wright, P, "A refinement of Porter's strategies."
Jump up ^ Gamble, Arthur A. Thompson, Jr., A.J. Strickland III, John E. (2010). Crafting and
executing strategy : the quest for competitive advantage : concepts and cases (17th ed.
ed.). Boston: McGraw-Hill/Irwin. p. 149. ISBN 9780073530420.
Jump up ^ William E. Fruhan, Jr., "The NPV Model of Strategy—The Shareholder Value
Model," in Financial Strategy: Studies in the Creation, Transfer, and Destruction of
Shareholder Value (Homewood, IL: Richard D. Irwin, 1979)
^ Jump up to: a b Porter, M.E., "Competitive Strategy: Techniques for analyzing industries and
competitors" New York: The Free Press (1980)
Jump up ^ Panayides, "Unknown" (2003)
^ Jump up to: a b Miller, D., "The generic strategy trap" in The Journal of Business Strategy
13(1):37-41 1992)
Jump up ^ Hambrick, D, "An empirical typology of mature industrial product environments"
Academy of Management Journal, 26: 213-230. (1983)
Jump up ^ Murray, A.I. "A contingency view of Porter's "generic strategies." Academy of
Management Review, 13: 390-400. (1988)
Jump up ^ Wright, P, "A refinement of Porter's strategies." Strategic Management Journal, 8:
93-101.(1987).
http://www.ukessays.com/essays/marketing/strategies-for-competing-in-various-types-of-
industries-marketing-essay.php#ixzz3a1ylIxrL

Modul MIchael Potter Five Generic Strategy

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Исходное описание:

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Modul MIchael Potter Five Generic Strategy

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

MODUL PERKULIAHAN

Michael potter’s five generic strategies

Fakultas Program Studi Tatap Muka Kode MK Disusun Oleh

Cost leadership strategy

Variants on the Differentiation Strategy

Criticisms of generic strategies

However, contrarily to the rationalisation of Porter, contemporary research has shown

Strategies for competing in various types of industries

Strategies for Competing in Turbulent, High-Velocity Markets

 Strategies for competing in emerging industries of the future

 Strategies for competing in mature market

Strong focus on cost reduction

Increasing sales to present customers

Purchasing rival firms at bargain price

 Strategies for firms in decline markets

Differentiating on the basis of quality and frequency of product innovation

Become a low cost producer

Porter, Michael E. (1980). Competitive Strategy. Free Press. ISBN 0-684-84148-7.

Вам также может понравиться