Hbr Article on Strategy by Porter (1996)

HBR article on strategy by Porter (1996).

What does Professor Porter mean by stating that many popular management tools (such as re-engineering, change management, or total quality management) have in many cases taken the place of strategy?

Porter respects to this fact that management tools help companies to rise up their efficiency and performance, but he indicate that these popular management tools (or it is better we called them “managements routines”) could be imitated. Porter emphasize that strategy is an individual property that could not be imitated by other rivals. He describe that strategic positioning means perform differently, in activity or ways of activity. So strategy is not a generic approach that variant competitors could do it like each other. All of management tools are technics that could be done by different companies those are rivals. Porter distinguishes strategy from “management routines” such as Total Quality Management (TQM), Just in Time (JIT) or Kaizen.

Why does Porter state that Japanese companies rarely have strategies?

Most of “popular management tools” or “management routines” (such as Total Quality Management (TQM), Just in Time (JIT) or Kaizen) was introduced by Japanese companies. These tools were the main factor in growth of quality and performance of Japanese companies in 1970s, 80s and 90s decades. Management tools helped them to be well-known multinational enterprise in the world.

Success in market was based on high performance of Japanese companies, that are impact of management tools; but by Porter words, these technics are not strategy, because could be copied and imitated by others. Transfer of these tools makes all of rivals like other one. So by Porter words Japanese companies rarely have strategy.

    What kind of examples does Porter give on companies that have sound strategies and why?

Disability to choose: disability to choose right decision in right time, make companies to take sound strategies. This failure roots are in misunderstanding of changes, internally in the company or externally in the environment. Changes comes from emerging technology could change the environment, competitiveness situation and advantages.

Blur strategies:  This failure sometimes is rising from blur strategies those could not say “No” to some choices and options. Sometimes managers don’t want to choose and postpone their decision making.  

The Growth: Managers’ big ambitious make companies failure. Extending product lines, expanding scope of activity, products or services, increasing features of products and targeting variant customers are all examples of growth trap.

How do the authors claim that smart, connected products gradually change the competitive setting in almost any industry?

Smart, connected products, that are symbols of “internet of Things” (IOT) concept, have new capabilities that each one of these bellows capabilities changes competitive setting in different industries: