From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This biographical article or section is written like a resume. Please help improve it by revising it to be neutral and encyclopedic.(December 2007)

Michael Eugene Porter is an American academic focused on management and economics. He is recognized as the key founder of The Monitor Group, a leading global strategy consulting firm.^[1] Porter has made important contributions to strategic management and strategy theory,^{[citation needed]} 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:

• 5 forces analysis
• strategic groups (also called strategic sets)
• the value chain
• the generic strategies of cost leadership, product differentiation, and focus
• the market positioning strategies of variety based, needs based, and access based market positions.
• Porter's clusters of competence for regional economic development

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).

• Porter, M. (1979) "How competitive forces shape strategy", Harvard business Review, March/April 1979.
• Porter, M. (1980) Competitive Strategy, Free Press, New York, 1980.
• Porter, M. (1985) Competitive Advantage, Free Press, New York, 1985.
• Porter, M. (1987) "From Competitive Advantage to Corporate Strategy", Harvard Business Review, May/June 1987, pp 43-59.
• Porter, M. (1996) "What is Strategy", Harvard Business Review, Nov/Dec 1996.
• Porter, M. (1998) On Competition, Boston: Harvard Business School, 1998.
• Porter, M. (2001) "Strategy and the Internet", Harvard Business Review, March 2001, pp. 62-78.
• Porter, Micheal E. and Kramer, Mark R. (2006) "Strategy and Society: The Link Between Competitive Advantage and Corporate Social Responsibility", Harvard Business Review, December 2006, pp. 78-92.

Porter has been criticised by some academics for inconsistent logical argument in his assertions.^[2] Critics have also labelled Porter's conclusions as lacking in empirical support and as justified with selective case studies.^{[3] [4] [5]}

• Techno cluster
• Economics
• Marketing strategies
• Strategic planning
• Strategic management
• Porter 5 forces analysis
• Cluster development
• National Diamond

• Summary Biography from Global Leaders

• Biography at Harvard Business School Faculty Pages

• Michael E. Porter and Mark R. Kramer's latest article and winner of the 2006 McKinsey Award for the Best Harvard Business Review Article

• Michael Porter Biography at nonprofit consulting firm that he co-founded

• Porter Prize (English)

1. ^ http://www.monitorgroup.com.cn/en/group/overview.asp
2. ^ 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.
3. ^ Speed, Richard J. (1989), "Oh Mr Porter! A Re-Appraisal of Competitive Strategy," Marketing Intelligence and Planning, 7 (5/6), 8-11.
4. ^ 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.
5. ^ Allio, Robert J. (1990), "Flaws in Porter's Competitive Diamond?," Planning Review, 18 (No. 5, September/October), 28-32.