Search

Search Results

• 1. [Article] Comparison of “The Strategic Marketing Model” and Porter’s “Cost Leadership and Differentiation Strategies Model” for Making Real‐World Strategic Planning & Analysis

  Michael Porter has been regarded as one of the icons of strategic planning for over three decades. In fact, two of his models, the Five Forces model (Porter, 2008), and the Three Generic Strategies model ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Comparison of “The Strategic Marketing Model” and Porter’s “Cost Leadership and Differentiation Strategies Model” for Making Real‐World Strategic Planning & Analysis Author: Zehr, Wilson Year: 2010 Michael Porter has been regarded as one of the icons of strategic planning for over three decades. In fact, two of his models, the Five Forces model (Porter, 2008), and the Three Generic Strategies model (Porter, 2000, 2005), are widely referenced and serve as bedrock for discussions of strategy and policy in many college textbooks today. However, industries and approaches to strategy have evolved significantly over the last 30 years. Key factors driving this change include: globalization of markets (products, resources, and labor), rapid and wide‐spread access to information, faster product cycles, increasing research and development costs, and more informed buyers. Based on these changes, and current trends “in industry” to be more “market” or “marketing” oriented, we will explore whether Porter’s Three Generic Strategies model can still be an effective tool for strategic planning or whether there is a more effective alternatives. In particular, the Strategic Marketing Model, developed by Cendix, has been used successfully to develop strategy for operating companies in dynamic operating environments. This paper will address the strengths and weaknesses of both models and judge the effectiveness for each as a problem solving tool. Title: Comparison of “The Strategic Marketing Model” and Porter’s “Cost Leadership and Differentiation Strategies Model” for Making Real‐World Strategic Planning & Analysis Author: Zehr, Wilson Year: 2010 Michael Porter has been regarded as one of the icons of strategic planning for over three decades. In fact, two of his models, the Five Forces model (Porter, 2008), and the Three Generic Strategies model (Porter, 2000, 2005), are widely referenced and serve as bedrock for discussions of strategy and policy in many college textbooks today. However, industries and approaches to strategy have evolved significantly over the last 30 years. Key factors driving this change include: globalization of markets (products, resources, and labor), rapid and wide‐spread access to information, faster product cycles, increasing research and development costs, and more informed buyers. Based on these changes, and current trends “in industry” to be more “market” or “marketing” oriented, we will explore whether Porter’s Three Generic Strategies model can still be an effective tool for strategic planning or whether there is a more effective alternatives. In particular, the Strategic Marketing Model, developed by Cendix, has been used successfully to develop strategy for operating companies in dynamic operating environments. This paper will address the strengths and weaknesses of both models and judge the effectiveness for each as a problem solving tool. Close