［PDF］［徐二明］企业战略管理全套讲义

最新回复

• 小熊猫 (2008-6-01 20:35:59)

  全套讲义下载：

  企业战略管理中文讲义PPT

  企业战略管理讲义PPT（中）.part1.rar
  (2008-06-01 20:40:14, Size: 3.3 MB, Downloads: 16)

   

  企业战略管理讲义PPT（中）.part2.rar
  (2008-06-01 20:41:57, Size: 2.91 MB, Downloads: 8)

   

  企业战略管理英文讲义PPT

  企业战略管理讲义PPT（英）.part1.rar
  (2008-06-01 20:35:59, Size: 3.3 MB, Downloads: 5)

   

  企业战略管理讲义PPT（英）.part2.rar
  (2008-06-01 20:38:01, Size: 3.25 MB, Downloads: 5)

   

  企业战略管理讲义（讲稿提纲）

  企业战略管理 徐二明.rar
  (2008-06-01 20:44:37, Size: 94.1 KB, Downloads: 7)

• 小熊猫 (2008-6-01 20:51:54)

  ※<第一章 战略管理导论>
  第一章 战略管理导论

  
  　　作好管理工作本质上需要战略思想是这本书给我们的的启示。今日的管理者必须战略性地思考他们公司的地位和变化着的条件的影响。他们不得不密切地监控公司的外部环境和内部环境以便知道什么时候制定战略改革。他们不得不熟知业务以便能够决定发起何种战略改革。简单说来，战略管理基本上需要驱动整套方案去管理组织。一个成功企业的首席执行官很好地阐述它，他说：

  　　总体来说，我们的竞争对手熟知相同的基本概念、技术和我们所执行的方案，他们也能像我们一样自如地运行他们。然而，他们成功和我们成功水平的区别在于我们和他们在发展和执行我们为未来制定的战略时相对的彻底性和自我约束能力。

  　　第一流的战略性思想和有意识的策略管理的优势（和空转、即兴创作、希望好运气相反）
  　　包括（1）为整个组织在“我们想做什么”这个关键点提供更好的引导；
  　　　　（2）使管理者和组织成员对新的机遇和挑战的发展更加敏感
  　　　　（3）协助组织一致
  　　　　（4）创造更积极的管理姿态
  　　　　（5）促使一个持续发展的商业模式来为企业制造可支撑的底线的成功
  　　　　（6） 为管理者提供一个重新评估竞争预算需要的理论基础，这个理论基础掌舵资源进入到战略支持，产出结果的领域。

  　　Tralblazing战略是到达更好的长期绩效的关键。商业历史表明高绩效的企业经常主动出击和领先，而不是反应和防备。他们发动侵略性的战略更新改革，操纵对手，保证可持续的竞争优势，然后利用他们的市场利刃达成更优的财务业绩，一有创造性，机会主义策略的积极追逐能推进公司进入领导地位为他的产品和服务变成工业标准作准备。高成就的企业几乎总是机敏管理的产物，而不是偶尔运气好或者好运气的长期有效。

  　　在下一章，我们将更深入探究经理的战略相关的任务和战略分析的方法。当你看到书末的结尾，你将看到两个因素将最好的管理组织和其他分别开来：
  　　（1） 优秀的策略和企业家精神
  　　（2） 有效实施和执行选择的战略
  　　（3） 不可忽略一个事实那就是：战略制定和战略实施的质量对组织的绩效有显著影响。
  　　一个公司缺乏明确的方向，目标含糊，有迷糊和有缺陷的目标或者似乎不能有效的执行他的战略，这样的公司的业绩是正在遭受痛苦的。他的经营遭受长期风险，他是缺乏管理的。简言之，一个公司的战略构思的越好 ，它的执行就越有效率，这个公司成为领头羊的机会就越大，它真正应该得到天才管理的美誉。

   

  关键概念和原则

  
  基础概念

  　　一个公司的战略包括竞争活动和管理者手段的结合。这些手段用来取悦顾客、成功竞争、并达到组织目标。

  　　一个公司的商业模式涉及到这个公司作为整体来说，它的战略中的经济收入、成本、利润是否表明企业的生存能力。
  　　完美战略的完美实施是完美管理的最好的检测，也是最可靠的组织成功的秘诀。

  　　期间战略管理指的是一系列的管理过程：制定战略远景，设定目标，精心制作战略，执行和实施，然后主动在远景、目标、战略、实施中做合适的纠正性调整。

  　　一个公司的战略性远景为企业的将来具体指明有关技术和顾客集中，追踪的地理和产品市场，要发展的能力等方向和管理试图创立的公司种类。

  　　一个公司的使命说明书一般集中于他目前的经营范围，“我们是谁，我们要干什么”，使命书广泛的描述了组织目前的能力，用户集中，活动和商业补充。

  　　战略目标涉及到加强一个组织的整体商业地位和竞争持久性的产出；财务目标涉及到管理层为组织设定要达到的财务指标。

  　　一个公司的战略包括竞争性努力和管理者用来取悦顾客、成功竞争和达成指定的组织目标的商业手段。

  　　战略既事先详细考虑也是具有适应性的。

  　　公司战略部分可见，不可见。

  　　战略制定基本上由市场驱动和顾客驱动。企业家才能——是一种能抓住逐渐出现的市场机会以及顾客需要的演变的天赋，对创新和创造力情有独衷，一种谨慎对待风险的态度，对我们需要做什么来增长和加强我们的生意有敏锐的感觉

  　　外部和内部发展要匹配表明了一个公司的战略过一段时间就要改变和革新，这种情况使得战略制定是一个持续的的过程，而不是一劳永逸。

  　　战略规划包括组织的远景和将来的方向，近期远期的行为指标和战略。

  　　一个公司的内部和外部环境变化的越快，组织的短期和长期战略计划就要修改和更新的越频繁。一年一次未必足够。当今世界，战略生命周期越来越短，而非越长。

  　　战略执行关系到推行一个新选定的战略的管理实践，而实施关系到监督随后的战略运行，提高它执行的能力，和在达成指定结果表现出可测量的进步。

  　　战略实施基本上是行为导向，让它发生的一个过程——关键任务是发展能力，作预算、政策制定、激励和文化建设一个公司的远景、目标 、战略、和实施方法永无至尽，重估绩效、检测环境变化、制定调整是战略管理过程中正常和必要的部分。

  　　战略管理是一个精密的过程；5个任务之间的界限是概念上的，而不是阻挡其中某些或全部混在一起的篱笆。

  　　每个公司管理者都要扮演战略制定和战略实施的角色——把战略管理看成是高级行政长官的职责是错误的想法。

  　　广泛的参与公司战略创新活动经常是有大收获的。

  　　公司依靠中层和低层管理者以及发现新的商业机会，发展、追踪和创造战略计划的队伍。

  　　四个基本的战略制定方案都有他们的优点和缺点，每个都能在适当的条件下生效。

  　　董事会在战略管理过程中的中心角色是：
  　　（1）精密地评估和考核战略实施计划
  　　（2）评估CEO和其他候选人的战略领导技能。

  
  Chapter Summary

  
  The Benefits of a Strategic Approach to Managing

  
  The message of this book is that doing a good job of managing inherently requires good strategic thinking. Today's managers have to think strategically about their company's position and about the impact of changing conditions. They have to monitor the company's external environment and internal capabilities closely enough to know when to institute strategy changes. They have to know the business well enough to determine what kinds of strategic changes to initiate. Simply said, the fundamentals of strategic management need to drive the whole approach to managing organizations. The chief executive officer of one successful company put it well when he said:

  
  In the main, our competitors are acquainted with the same fundamental concepts and techniques and approaches that we follow, and they are as free to pursue them as we are. More often than not, the difference between their level of success and ours lies in the relative thoroughness and self-discipline with which we and they develop and execute our strategies for the future.

  
  The advantages of first-rate strategic thinking and conscious strategy management (as opposed to freewheeling improvisation, gut feel, and hoping for good luck) include (1) providing better guidance to the entire organization on the crucial point of "what it is we are trying to do," (2) making managers and organizational members more alert to new opportunities and threatening developments, (3) helping to unify the organization, (4) creating a more proactive management posture, (5) promoting the development of a constantly evolving business model that will produce sustained bottom-line success for the enterprise, and (6) providing managers with a rationale for evaluating competing budget requests—a rationale that argues strongly for steering resources into strategy-supportive, results-producing areas.

  
  Trailblazing strategies can be the key to better long-term performance. Business history shows that high-performing enterprises often initiate and lead, not just react and defend. They launch strategic offensives to out-innovate and out-maneuver rivals and secure sustainable competitive advantage, then use their market edge to achieve superior financial performance. Aggressive pursuit of a creative, opportunistic strategy can propel a firm into a leadership position, paving the way for its products and services to become the industry standard. High-achieving enterprises are nearly always the product of astute, proactive management, rather than the result of lucky breaks or a long run of good fortune.

  
  In the chapters to come, we will probe the strategy-related tasks of managers and the methods of strategic analysis much more intensively. When you get to the end of the book, we think you will see that two factors separate the best-managed organizations from the rest: (1) superior strategy making and entrepreneurship, and (2) competent implementation and execution of the chosen strategy. There's no escaping the fact that the quality of managerial strategy making and strategy implementing has a significant impact on organization performance. A company that lacks clear-cut direction, has vague or undemanding objectives, has a muddled or flawed strategy, or can't seem to execute its strategy competently is a company whose performance is probably suffering, whose business is at long-term risk, and whose management is lacking. In short, the better conceived a company's strategy and the more proficient its execution, the greater the chances the company will be a leading performer in its markets and truly deserve a reputation for talented management.

  　

  　

  Key Concepts & Principles

  
  Basic Concept

  
  A company's strategy consists of the combination of competitive moves and business approaches that managers employ to please customers, compete successfully, and achieve organizational objectives.

  
  Basic Concept

  
  A company's business model deals with whether the revenue-cost-profit economics of its strategy demonstrate the viability of the enterprise as a whole. 

  
  Excellent execution of an excellent strategy is the best test of managerial excellence—and the most reliable recipe for organizational success.

  
  Basic Concept

  
  The term strategic management refers to the managerial process of forming a strategic vision, setting objectives, crafting a strategy, implementing and executing the strategy, and then over time initiating whatever corrective adjustments in the vision, objectives, strategy, and execution are deemed appropriate.

  
  Basic Concept

  
  A strategic vision is a roadmap of a company's future—providing specifics about technology and customer focus, the geographic and product markets to be pursued, the capabilities it plans to develop, and the kind of company that management is trying to create. 

  
  Basic Concept 

  
  A company's mission statement is typically focused on its present business scope—"who we are and what we do"; mission statements broadly describe an organization's present capabilities, customer focus, activities, and business makeup. 

  
  Basic Concept

  
  Objectives are an organization's performance targets—the results and outcomes it wants to achieve. They function as yardsticks for tracking an organization's performance and progress.

  
  Basic Concept

  
  Strategic objectives relate to outcomes that strengthen an organization's overall business position and competitive vitality; Financial objectives relate to the financial performance targets management has established for the organization to achieve. 

  
  Basic Concept

  
  A company's strategy consists of the competitive efforts and business approaches that managers employ to please customers, compete successfully, and achieve organizational objectives. 

  
  Strategy is both proactive (intended and deliberate) and reactive (adaptive).

  
  Company strategies are partly visible and partly hidden to outside view.

  
  Strategy making is fundamentally a market-driven and customer-driven entrepreneurial activity—the essential qualities are a talent for capitalizing on emerging market opportunities and evolving customer needs, a bias for innovation and creativity, an appetite for prudent risk taking, and a strong sense of what needs to be done to grow and strengthen the business.

  
  Basic Concept

  
  The march of external and internal developments dictate that a company's strategy change and evolve over time—a condition that makes strategy making an ongoing process, not a one-time event.

  
  Basic Concept

  
  A strategic plan consists of an organization's mission and future direction, near-term and long-term performance targets, and strategy.

  
  The faster a company's external and internal environment changes, the more frequently that its short-run and long-run strategic plans have to be revised and updated—annual changes may not be adequate. In today's world strategy life cycles are growing shorter, not longer.

  
  Basic Concept

  
  Strategy implementation concerns the managerial exercise of putting a freshly chosen strategy into place. Strategy execution deals with the managerial exercise of supervising the ongoing pursuit of strategy, making it work, improving the competence with which it is executed, and showing measurable progress in achieving the targeted results.

  
  Strategy execution is fundamentally an action-oriented, make-it-happen process—the key tasks are developing competencies and capabilities, budgeting, policy making, motivating, culture-building, and leadership.

  
  A company's vision, objectives, strategy, and approach to implementation are never final; evaluating performance, reviewing changes in the surrounding environment, and making adjustments are normal and necessary parts of the strategic management process.

  
  Strategic management is a tightly-knit process; the boundaries between the five tasks are conceptual, not fences that prevent some or all of them being done together.

  
  Every company manager has a strategy-making/strategy-implementing role—it is flawed thinking to view strategic management as solely the province of senior executives.

  
  Broad participation in a company's strategy-creating exercises is usually a strong plus.

  
  Corporate intrapreneuring relies upon middle and lower-level managers and teams to spot new business opportunities, develop strategic plans to pursue them, and create new businesses.

  
  Each of the four basic strategy-making approaches has strengths and weaknesses, and each is workable in the "right" situation. 

  
  Strategic Management Principle

  
  The central role of the board of directors in the strategic management process is (1) to critically appraise and ultimately approve strategic action plans and (2) to evaluate the strategic leadership skills of the CEO and others in line to succeed the incumbent CEO. 

  　

  
  Suggested Readings 

  
  Abell, Derek F. "Competing Today While Preparing for Tomorrow." Sloan Management Review 40, no. 3 (Spring 1999), pp. 73–81. 

  
  Burgelman, Robert A. Strategy Is Destiny. New York: The Free Press, 2000.

  
  Collins, James C., and Jerry I. Porras. "Building Your Company's Vision." Harvard Business Review 74, no. 5 (September–October 1996), pp. 65–77.

  
  Farkas, Charles M., and Suzy Wetlaufer. "The Ways Chief Executive Officers Lead." Harvard Business Review 74, no. 3 (May–June 1996), pp. 110–122.

  
  Hamel, Gary. "Strategy as Revolution." Harvard Business Review 74, no. 4 (July–August 1996), pp. 69–82.

  
  Lipton, Mark. "Demystifying the Development of an Organizational Vision." Sloan Management Review, Summer 1996, pp. 83–92.

  
  Markides, Constantinos C. "A Dynamic View of Strategy." Sloan Management Review 40, no. 3 (Spring 1999), pp. 55–63.

  
  Mintzberg, Henry. "Crafting Strategy." Harvard Business Review 65, no. 4 (July–August 1987), pp. 66–75.

  
  Mintzberg, Henry. Bruce Ahlstrand; and Joseph Lampel. Strategy Safari: A Guided Tour through the Wilds of Strategic Management. New York: Free Press, 1998. 

  
  Moncrieff, James. "Is Strategy Making a Difference?" Long Range Planning 32, no. 2 (April 1999), pp. 273–76.

  
  Porter, Michael E. "What Is Strategy?" Harvard Business Review 74, no. 6 (November– December 1996), pp. 61–78.

  
  Shaw, Gordon; Robert Brown; and Philip Bromiley. "Strategic Stories: How 3M Is Rewriting Business Planning." Harvard Business Review 76, no. 3 (May–June 1998), pp. 41–50.

  　

  Quotes

  
  "Cheshire Puss," she [Alice] began . . . "would you tell me, please, which way I ought to go from here?"

  
  That depends a good deal on where you want to get to," said the Cat.

  
  —Lewis Carroll

  
  Without a strategy the organization is like a ship without a rudder.

  
  —Joel Ross and Michael Kami

  
  Strategic management is not a box of tricks or a bundle of techniques. It is analytical thinking and commitment of resources to action.

  
  —Peter Drucker

  
  The Internet Age implies Internet speed, a different pace and a greater sense of urgency. Clearly we need to invigorate things here.

  
  —Carly Fiorina, CEO, Hewlett-Packard Co.

• 小熊猫 (2008-6-01 20:52:50)

  第二章 战略制定的三项任务：展望 目标 战略

  
  　　管理的方向设定任务包括：（1）规划公司未来的战略路径，（2）设定目标，（3）制定战略。在早期的方向设定过程中，管理者需要搞清“我们的业务是什么，它将会是什么”，关于组织未来路线的管理观点和结论，它应该占据的市场定位，以及公司从事的组成战略远景
  的业务活动。战略远景表明了管理层对组织的期望，提供了关于“我们想从事的业务，我们的前进方向，和我们公司想试图建立的公司类型”这些问题的全局观念。它清楚的说明了方向，描述了要到达的目的地。有效的远景是清晰明了的，有挑战性而激动人心的；它们使公
  司为未来作准备，并且它们对市场也很有意义。一个考虑周全的，描述完备的使命/远景陈述能够成为企业长期方向的灯塔，帮助管理者的实施管理服务，帮助引导组织努力和战略创新沿着路径管理的方向前进，建立对组织识别系统和组织目的的强烈认知，并且引致雇员的
  大量买进。

  　　方向设定的第二个任务是为公司建立要达到的战略和金融目标。目标使使命陈述和战略远景转化成具体的行动目标。协商一致的目标清楚准确的说明了什么时候它们需要将公司的目标延伸至组织的各个阶层，每个阶层的目标应该是多少。

  　　目标设定的第三步是要为组织的每个领域的目标制定一个战略。达到经营水平的目标需要经营战略；达到业务部门的行动目标需要业务战略；达到为每个职能部门设定的行动目标就需要职能目标；达到为每个经营和地理部门设定的目标就需要经营层的战略。实际上，组织的战略计划是一系列统一的连锁的战略的集合。特别的，战略制定的任务更倾向于自上而下，而不是自下而上。低层战略应该对高层的公司范围的目标做出贡献。

  　　战略的形成同时基于外部和内部的考虑。主要的外部考虑包括社会的，政策的，规则的和社团因素；竞争环境和整体产业吸引力；以及公司的市场机遇和威胁。主要的内部考虑因素有：公司实力，劣势和竞争力，经理个人的志向，世界观和伦理观；以及公司文化和价值观。一个好的战略应该和环境很好的配合。除此之外，好战略还必须引导公司形成持续的竞争优势，改进公司的行为方式。

  关键概念和原理：
  　　战略管理原理
  　　始于对于公司所朝向的远景的有效的战略制定需要
  　　使命书所扮演的角色之一是给公司提供它拥有的特殊的身份，业务重点和发展途径――与其他类似公司不同的有特色的
  　　公司的业务通过它所要满足的东西来确定，即目标客户群是哪些，它所使用的技术和特长以及它所采取的行动技术，特长和行动对于确定公司的业务很重要，因为他们表明了公司的经营范围。
  　　好的使命陈述对于组织所要发展的领域来说是高度个性化的
  　　多样化经营的公司比单一经营的公司拥有更广的使命和业务范围定义
  　　企业家在发展战略远景时的挑战是能创造性的思考如何为公司的未来作准备
  　　战略远景的形成是机敏的企业家的实际行动，而不是一时的白日梦或关于公司未来的幻想
  　　许多成功的组织需要改变方向，不是为了幸存而是为了维持他们的成就
  　　一个组装完美的战略远景能激发实施管理层已规划好的路线的激情，并是组织成员都参与其中。
  　　一个描述完美的远景陈述清晰的阐述了公司前进的方向

  基本概念
  　　目标表示了在具体时间内达到具体行为目标的管理委托事项――这也是对与公司战略远景和核心价值观直接相连系的结果的需求
  　　任何公司都同时需要战略目标和金融目标
  　　战略目标应是竞争者导向的，应致力于打败行业内在特殊领域中公认为是最好的竞争者
  　　相对于提高短期利润率，建立一个更强的长期的竞争地位对于股东来说有持久的利益
  　　当公司拼命追求雄心勃勃的战略目标，并为了达到目标集中所有的竞争活动和精力于其上时，公司展示的是其战略目的。
  　　公司的行动目标要求组织性延伸
  　　为了指导低层管理者和组织部门达到支持整体业务和公司目标的结果，目标的设立应当更多的自下而上的进行，而非自上而下。
  　　组织的战略解决如何为公司的现实制定管理的战略远景的问题――这指出了将公司转向有吸引力的业务领域并建立持续的竞争优势的规划。
  　　公司真实的战略通常要么高于要么低于计划中的战略，因为往往会加入新战略的特色或者在新出现的状况下有一些会被去除
  　　经营战略涉及：多样化经营的公司如何计划在不同的行业能确立商业地位，以及在公司涉及的领域内改进表现的行为和方式
  　　业务战略包括：管理者在某一项具体业务中成功表现的行动和方式；中心战略事项是解决如何建立一个更强的长期竞争地位的问题。
  　　如果公司战略能导致合适和持续的竞争优势，则战略将是强有力的；如果导致竞争劣势，则战略将是脆弱的
  　　拥有好的内部资源优势和竞争能力是打败竞争对手的重要途径
  　　职能战略包括运行主要职能活动的管理规划，或者在业务研发，生产，营销客户服务，物流，金融，人力资源等等范围之内进行的管理规划；一项业务需要与其主要业务活动一样多的职能战略。
  　　执行战略包括如何在一项业务范围内（设备，销售区域，物流中心）管理一线组织部门，以及如何在战略上执行主要任务（原材料采购，存货控制，日常费用，运输，广告运动）。
  　　一线管理者是组织战略制定的重要部分，因为许多执行部门有关键的战略行动目标并且为了达到这些目标需要有战略性的行动计划。
  　　一个公司的战略只有当其许多部分联合起来才能发挥全部的潜力。
  　　在组织层级中从底到顶整合起来的目标和战略不是来自于非直接的过程，这种非直接过程中每个管理者都拥有设定目标和制定战略的自治权。交叉部门和自上至下的合作是最基本的。
  　　公司的战略应该针对产业和竞争环境量身定做。
  　　一个设想周全的战略就要抓住公司最有利的增长机遇，而且要防御对其安全和未来行动构成威胁的外部力量。
  　　成功的战略应该致力于抓住公司的资源优势，同时克服其资源的不足
  　　管理者的个人志向，商业观念和伦理观念通常会体现在他们设想的战略中。
  　　公司的价值观，政策，实践和文化能统领它所采取或拒绝的战略步骤。
  　　公司采取的任何战略步骤都应该符合伦理。
  　　公司一般对其所有者，雇员，客户，供应商，其所在社区和社会公众应承担道德义务。
  　　公司的战略越是符合其内部和外部环境，公司越是建立持续的竞争优势并提高公司的行为，它就越具有成为一个优胜者的潜力。

  
  Chapter Summary

  Management's direction-setting tasks involve (1) charting a company's future strategic path, (2) setting objectives, and (3) crafting a strategy. Early on in the direction-setting process, managers need to address the question "What is our business and what will it be?" Management's views and conclusions about the organization's future course, the market position it should try to occupy, and the business activities to be pursued constitute a strategic vision for the company. A strategic vision indicates
  management's aspirations for the organization, providing a panoramic view of "what businesses we want to be in, where we are headed, and the kind of company we are trying to create." It spells out a direction and describes the destination. Effective visions are clear, challenging, and inspiring; they prepare a firm for the future, and they make sense in the marketplace. A well-conceived, well-worded mission/vision statement helps managers manage-serving as a beacon of the enterprise's long-term direction, helping channel organizational efforts and strategic initiatives along the path management has committed to following, building a strong sense of organizational identity and purpose, and creating employee buy-in.

  The second direction-setting task is to establish strategic and financial objectives for the organization to achieve. Objectives convert the mission statement and strategic vision into specific performance targets. The agreed-on objectives need to spell out precisely how much by when, and they need to require a significant amount of organizational stretch. Objectives are needed at all organizational levels.

  The third direction-setting step entails crafting a strategy to achieve the objectives set in each area of the organization. A corporate strategy is needed to achieve corporate-level objectives; business strategies are needed to achieve business-unit performance objectives; functional strategies are needed to achieve the performance targets set for each functional department; and operating-level strategies are needed to achieve the objectives set in each operating and geographic unit. In effect, an organization's strategic plan is a collection of unified and interlocking strategies. Typically, the strategy-making task is more top-down than bottom-up. Lower-level strategies should contribute to the achievement of higher-level, companywide objectives.

  Strategy is shaped by both external and internal considerations. The major external considerations are societal, political, regulatory, and community factors; competitive conditions and overall industry attractiveness; and the company's market opportunities and threats. The primary internal considerations are company strengths, weaknesses, and competitive capabilities; managers' personal ambitions, philosophies, and ethics; and the company's culture and shared values. A good strategy must be well matched to all these situational considerations. In addition, a good strategy must lead to sustainable competitive advantage and improved company performance.

  
  Key Concepts & Principles

  Strategic Management Principle
  Effective strategy making begins with a vision of where the organization needs to head.

  One of the roles of a mission statement is to give the organization its own special identity, business emphasis, and path for development—one that typically sets it apart from other similarly situated companies.

  A company's business is defined by what needs it is trying to satisfy, by which customer groups it is targeting, and by the technologies and competencies it uses and the activities it performs.

  Technology, competencies, and activities are important to defining a company's business because they indicate the boundaries on its operations.

  Good mission statements are highly personalized—unique to the organization for which they are developed. 

  Diversified companies have broader missions and business definitions than single-business enterprises.

  The entrepreneurial challenge in developing a strategic vision is to think creatively about how to prepare a company for the future.

  Forming a strategic vision is an exercise in astute entrepreneurship, not a time for pipedreams or fantasies about the company's future.

  Many successful organizations need to change direction not in order to survive but in order to maintain their success.

  A well-articulated strategic vision creates enthusiasm for the course management has charted and engages members of the organization.

  The best-worded vision statements clearly and crisply illuminate the direction in which an organization is headed.

  Basic Concept

  Objectives represent a managerial commitment to achieving specific performance targets within a specific time frame—they are a call for results that connect directly to the company's strategic vision and core values. 

  Strategic Management Principle

  Every company needs both strategic objectives and financial objectives.Strategic objectives need to be competitor-focused, often aiming at unseating a competitor considered to be the industry's best in a particular category.

  Strategic Management Principle

  Building a stronger long-term competitive position benefits shareholders more lastingly than improving short-term profitability.

  Basic Concept

  A company exhibits strategic intent when it relentlessly pursues an ambitious strategic objective and concentrates its competitive actions and energies on achieving that objective.
  Company performance targets should require organizational stretch.

  Strategic Management Principle

  Objective setting needs to be more of a top-down than a bottom-up process in order to guide lower-level managers and organizational units toward outcomes that support the achievement of overall business and company objectives.

  Basic Concept

  An organization's strategy deals with how to make management's strategic vision for the company a reality—it represents the game plan for moving the company into an attractive business position and building a sustainable competitive advantage.

  A company's actual strategy usually turns out to be both more and less than the planned strategy as new strategy features are added and others are deleted in response to newly emerging conditions.

  Basic Concept

  Corporate strategy concerns how a diversified company intends to establish business positions in different industries and the actions and approaches employed to improve the performance of the group of businesses the company has diversified into.

  Basic Concept

  Business strategy concerns the actions and the approaches crafted by management to produce successful performance in one specific line of business; the central business strategy issue is how to build a stronger long-term competitive position.

  A business strategy is powerful if it produces a sizable and sustainable competitive advantage; it is weak if it results in competitive disadvantage.

  Having superior internal resource strengths and competitive capabilities is an important way to outcompete rivals.

  Basic Concept

  Functional strategy concerns the managerial game plan for running a major functional activity or process within a business—R&D, production, marketing, customer service, distribution, finance, human resources, and so on; a business needs as many functional strategies as it has major activities.

  Basic Concept

  Operating strategy concerns how to manage front-line organizational units within a business (plants, sales districts, distribution centers) and how to perform strategically significant operating tasks (materials purchasing, inventory control, maintenance, shipping, advertising campaigns).

  Front-line managers are an important part of an organization's strategy-making team because many operating units have strategy-critical performance targets and need to have strategic action plans in place to achieve them. 

  A company's strategy is at full power only when its many pieces are united.Objectives and strategies that are unified from top-to-bottom of the organizational hierarchy do not come from an undirected process where managers at each level have objective-setting and strategy-making autonomy. Cross-unit and top-down coordination is essential.

  Strategic Management Principle

  A company's strategy should be tailored to fit industry and competitive conditions.

  Strategic Management Principle

  A well-conceived strategy aims at capturing a company's best growth opportunities and defending against external threats to its well-being and future performance.

  Strategic Management Principle

  Winning strategies aim at capitalizing on a company's resource strengths and at neutralizing its resource deficiencies.

  The personal ambitions, business philosophies, and ethical beliefs of managers are usually stamped on the strategies they craft.

  A company's values, policies, practices, and culture can dominate the kinds of strategic moves it considers or rejects.

  Every strategic action a company takes should be ethical.

  A company has ethical duties to owners, employees, customers, suppliers, the communities where it operates, and the public at large.

  Strategic Management Principle

  The more a strategy fits the enterprise's external and internal situation, builds sustainable competitive advantage, and improves company performance, the more it qualifies as a winner.

  
  Suggested Readings 

  Badaracco, Joseph L. "The Discipline of Building Character," Harvard Business Review 76, no. 2 (March–April 1998), pp. 115–24.

  Brown, Shona L., and Kathleen M. Eisenhardt. Competing on the Edge: Strategy as Structured Chaos. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press, 1998.

  Campbell, Andrew, and Laura Nash. A Sense of Mission: Defining Direction for the Large Corporation. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1993.

  Collins, James C., and Jerry I. Porras. "Building Your Company's Vision." Harvard Business Review 74, no. 5 (September–October 1996), pp. 65–77.

  Collins, Jim. "Turning Goals into Results: The Power of Catalytic Mechanisms." Harvard Business Review 77, no. 4 (July–August 1999), pp. 70–82.

  Drucker, Peter. "The Theory of the Business." Harvard Business Review 72, no. 5 (September–October 1994), pp. 95–104.

  Hamel, Gary. "Strategy as Revolution." Harvard Business Review 74 no. 4 (July–August 1996), pp. 69–82.

  Hamel, Gary, and C. K. Prahalad. "Strategic Intent." Harvard Business Review 67, no. 3 (May–June 1989), pp. 63–76.

  ———. "Strategy as Stretch and Leverage." Harvard Business Review 71, no. 2 (March–April 1993), pp. 75–84.

  Hammer, Michael, and James Champy. Reengineering the Corporation. New York: Harper Business, 1993, chapter 9.

  Ireland, R. Duane, and Michael A. Hitt. "Mission Statements: Importance, Challenge, and Recommendations for Development." Business Horizons (May–June 1992), pp. 34–42.

  Kahaner, Larry. "What You Can Learn from Your Competitors' Mission Statements." Competitive Intelligence Review 6, no. 4 (Winter 1995), pp. 35–40.

  Kaplan, Robert S., and David P. Norton. "The Balanced Scorecard—Measures That Drive Performance." Harvard Business Review 70, no. 1 (January–February 1992), pp. 71–79.

  Lipton, Mark. "Demystifying the Development of an Organizational Vision." Sloan Management Review, Summer 1996, pp. 83–92.

  McTavish, Ron. "One More Time: What Business Are You In?" Long Range Planning 28, no. 2 (April 1995), pp. 49–60.

  Mintzberg, Henry. "Crafting Strategy." Harvard Business Review 65, no. 4 (July–August 1987), pp. 66–77.

  Mintzberg, Henry; Bruce Ahlstrand; and Joseph Lampel. Strategy Safari: A Guided Tour through the Wilds of Strategic Management. New York: Free Press, 1998. 

  Porter, Michael E. "Clusters and the New Economics of Competition," Harvard Business Review 76, no. 6 (November–December 1998), pp. 77–90.

  ———. "What Is Strategy?" Harvard Business Review 74, no. 6 (November–December 1996), pp. 65–67.

  Shaw, Gordon; Robert Brown; and Philip Bromiley."Strategic Stories: How 3M Is Rewriting Business Planning." Harvard Business Review 76, no. 3 (May–June 1998), pp. 41–50.

  Tichy, N. M.; A. R. McGill; and L. St. Clair. Corporate Global Citizenship. San Francisco: New Lexington Press, 1997.

  Wilson, Ian. "Realizing the Power of Strategic Vision." Long Range Planning 25, no. 5 (1992), pp. 18–28.

  Quotes

  The last thing IBM needs right now is a vision. (July 1993)
  What IBM needs most right now is a vision. (March 1996)
  —Louis V. Gerstner Jr., CEO, IBM Corporation
  How can you lead if you don't know where you are going?
  —George Newman, The Conference Board
  Management's job is not to see the company as it is . . . but as it can become.
  —John W. Teets, CEO, Greyhound Corporation
  A strategy is a commitment to undertake one set of actions rather than another.
  —Sharon M. Oster, Professor, Yale University

• 小熊猫 (2008-6-01 20:53:12)

  第三章 行业及竞争分析

  
  关键概念和原理
  　　经理们只有等到他们对公司的战略环境有敏锐的理解时，才会准备去给公司作长期的定位或制定战略。这些战略环境有——行业确切的本质特征，公司面对的竞争条件，这些条件与公司的资源和能力的匹配状况。
  　　一个行业的经济特性有助于确定公司可采取的战略途径的框架。
  　　当较强的学习或经验效应使单位成本随累积产量增加而下降时，一个战略就是：成为产量最大的制造商，成为行业中成本最低生产商，从而获得竞争优势。

  竞争性市场的原则：
  　　当进入壁垒低，进入者数目多，现有厂商不能或不愿采取有力措施抵抗新进入者企图在市场上找到立足之地的努力，新进入者能获得预期的利润时，进入威胁会较强。
  　　当替代品已经出现且被制定了有吸引力的价格，购买者认为替代品具有相当或更好的特性，购买者的转移成本低时，替代品的威胁会较强。
  　　当某个竞争性厂商群体的供应商有足够的讨价还价能力时，会使这个群体中的某些厂商在要求的价格、供应品的质量及其他方面，或是在交货的可靠性等方面处于竞争劣势时，供应商会是一种较强的竞争力。
  　　当购买者能就价格、质量、服务等销售条款和条件进行讨价还价时，购买者会是一种较强的竞争力。
  　　高的转移成本使购买者被固定下来，同时会降低他们的讨价还价能力。
  　　一个公司的竞争战略变得更有效，它就能有力地抵御五种竞争力，有利地转移竞争压力，并有助于获得竞争优势。

  基本概念：
  　　当一些重要的因素使行业参与者（竞争厂商、顾客、供应商）改变行动时，行业状况就会相应地改变；行业驱动力是改变行业和竞争条件的最主要的潜在因素。
  　　驱动力分析的任务是把行业变化的主要原因与次要原因分离出来；驱动力因素通常不会超过三到四个。
  　　经理们通过环境监视能够发现可能发展成新的驱动力的那些潜在的变化趋势和线索。
  　　战略群体图是展现行业中的竞争厂商的不同竞争地位的一种方法。
  　　把行业的成员分列到战略群体中有助于行业分析者更好地弄清复杂行业中的竞争模式，并准确描述一个公司的最相近的竞争者。
  　　由于驱动力和竞争压力对每个战略群体的影响不尽相同，而且由于基于市场地位相对吸引力的利润前景不一样，一些战略群体会处于更有利的位置。
  　　成功的战略家想方设法收集竞争对手的战略情报，监视其行动，评估其优裂势，根据所了解的情况预测竞争对手下一步可能采取的行动。
  　　如果你对竞争对手的了解比他们对你的了解要多，那么它对你颇有裨益。
  　　当其他方面相同时，那些总是拥有更多更好的关于竞争的信息的公司会更有优势。
  　　那些没有仔细研究竞争对手的经理会有被竞争对手出其不意的行动打击的风险。
  　　关键成功因素涉及到产品特性、能力、竞争能力以及对公司盈利性有最重要性的引导意义的市场结果。

  战略管理原则：
  　　一个正确的战略应既努力获得所有的行业关键成功因素又使公司至少在一个关键成功因素方面很优秀。
  　　在某种条件下，在一个可能没什么吸引力的行业中独特地良好定位的公司依然可能获得可观的利润。

  　

  本章小结

  
  战略性地思考公司的战略情境会涉及到为以下7个方面问题寻找答案：
  1、 行业的主要经济特性是什么？
  　　行业与行业之间在以下几个方面会有显著的不同：市场规模，增长率，竞争的地理范围，竞争者数量，购买者和销售者的数量和相对规模，进入与退出壁垒，卖方的纵向一体化程度，基础技术变化的快慢，经济规模和经验曲线效应的程度，产品的标准化与差异化，行业的平均利润率等。行业的经济特性很重要，因为它们对战略的形成有重要意义。

  
  2、 竞争如何？五种竞争力的强度如何？
  　　竞争的强度是有五种力量构成的：行业中现有竞争厂商；有吸引力的替代品的存在；可能的新进入者；由供应商合作与讨价还价引起的竞争压力；由购买者合作与讨价还价引起的竞争压力。竞争分析的任务是：弄清与每一种竞争力相联的竞争压力；判断这些压力是否使市场上的竞争力增强或减弱；然后战略性地思考在给定的行业竞争规则条件下企业的竞争战略，此时，企业需要：a、尽可能使企业不受五种竞争力的影响；b、改写竞争规则，使有利于企业本身；c、获得竞争优势。

  
  3、 正在使行业竞争结构和经营环境发生变化的因素是什么？
  　　行业和竞争状况之所以发生改变是由于竞争力变化刺的激或压力。最常见的驱动力是由于互联网和如雨后春笋般出现的电子商务引起的行业变化；行业竞争的全球化；行业长期增长率的变化；购买者构成的变化；产品创新；大厂商的进入或退出；成本与效率的变化；消费者偏好正由差异化的产品或服务转移到标准化的产品或服务；管制影响和政府政策的变化；正在改变的社会和生活方式；不确定性和经营风险的降低。正确地对行业驱动力及其对行业的意义进行分析是制定正确的战略的先决条件。

  
  4、 最强/最弱的公司有哪些？
  　　战略群体图对于弄清市场上的竞争者内在的相似处与不同处以及优势与劣势来说，即使不是必须的，也至少是一种很有价值的方法。在相同或相邻的战略群体中的公司是紧密的竞争者，而在相距较远的战略群体中的公司只有很少或没有迫切的威胁。

  
  5、 竞争对手下一步可能采取何种战略行动？
  　　这一分析步骤涉及到：识别竞争者的战略；判断哪些竞争对手会成为可能的强势竞争者或弱势竞争者；评价它们的战略选择，预测它们下一步可能采取的行动。监视竞争对手，预测它们的行动，有助于企业制定有效的对抗措施（也许甚至能使竞争对手一蹶不振），而且使经理在制定本公司的行动过程时能充分考虑竞争对手可能的行动。那些没有仔细研究竞争对手的经理会有被对手出其不意的行动打击的风险。一个公司如果不监视竞争对手的行动和预测它们下一步可能的行动，那么它就很难以策略制胜。

  
  6、 竞争成功的关键因素是什么？
  　　一个行业的关键成功因素（KSFs）是特定的战略元素，产品特性，竞争能力以及能够表明盈利或亏损而且最终表明竞争成功或失败的经营结果。行业关键成功因素从本质上说是如此的重要以至于行业中所有的公司都必须给予它们足够的重视——它们是成功的先决条件，或者，从另一个角度来讲，它们是决定一个企业获得财务和竞争成效的规则。
  　　通常，通过基于关键成功因素的战略制定以及投入资源以使自己在这些因素方面比竞争对手要成功，一个企业可以获得持续的竞争优势。那些不能或者只能朦胧地察觉到对长期的竞争成功具有关键作用的因素的企业一般不可能有制胜性的战略。

  
  7、 行业是否有吸引力？此行业获得超额利润率的前景如何？
  　　对这个问题的回答是企业战略主要驱动因素。一项关于行业和竞争环境很有吸引力的评估会促使企业采取加强竞争地位的战略，扩大销售规模，当必要时投资增加设备和设施。如果一个行业相对来说缺乏吸引力，外部厂商可能会考虑不进入并寻求其他的机会，较弱的企业可能会被竞争对手合并或收购，较强的企业可能限制进一步的投资并采用成本降低战略或产品创新战略以推进长期的竞争性和保护赢利性。偶尔，一个从总体上来说不具有吸引力的行业，对于一个拥有抢占弱势竞争对手的业务的技能和资源的有利定位的企业来说依然是有吸引力的。
  　　好的行业和竞争分析是制定好的战略的先决条件。一份有力的行业和竞争分析能给出清晰而易于理解的企业外部环境陈述，它使企业弄清自己的宏观环境，而这对于如何使战略与外部环境相匹配是必需的。

  　

  
  Chapter Summary

  Thinking strategically about a company's external situation involves probing for answers to the following seven questions:
  1. What are the industry's dominant economic features? Industries differ significantly on such factors as market size and growth rate, the geographic scope of competitive rivalry, the number and relative sizes of both buyers and sellers, ease of entry and exit, whether sellers are vertically integrated, how fast basic technology is changing, the extent of scale economies and experience curve effects, whether the products of rival sellers are standardized or differentiated, and overall profitability. An industry's economic characteristics are important because of the implications they have for crafting strategy.

  2. What is competition like and how strong are each of the five competitive forces? The strength of competition is a composite of five forces: the rivalry among competing sellers, the presence of attractive substitutes, the potential for new entry, the competitive pressures stemming from supplier–seller collaboration and bargaining, and the competitive pressures stemming from seller–buyer collaboration and bargaining. The task of competition analysis is to understand the competitive pressures associated with each force; determine whether these pressures add up to a strong or weak competitive force in the marketplace, and then think strategically about what sort of competitive strategy, given the rules of competition in the industry, the company will need to employ to (a) insulate the firm as much as possible from the five competitive forces, (b) influence the industry's competitive rules in the company's favor, and (c) gain a competitive edge.

  3. What is causing the industry's competitive structure and business environment to change? Industry and competitive conditions change because forces are in motion that create incentives or pressures for change. The most common driving forces are the industry changes being wrought by the Internet and mushrooming e-commerce transactions, globalization of competition in the industry, changes in the long-term industry growth rate, changes in buyer composition, product innovation, entry or exit of major firms, changes in cost and efficiency, changing buyer preferences for standardized versus differentiated products or services, regulatory influences and government policy changes, changing societal and lifestyle factors, and reductions in uncertainty and business risk. Sound analysis of driving forces and their implications for the industry is a prerequisite to sound strategy making.

  4. Which companies are in the strongest/weakest positions? Strategic group mapping is a valuable, if not necessary, tool for understanding the similarities, differences, strengths, and weaknesses inherent in the market positions of rival companies. Rivals in the same or nearby strategic groups are close competitors, whereas companies in distant strategic groups usually pose little or no immediate threat.

  5. What strategic moves are rivals likely to make next? This analytical step involves identifying competitors' strategies, deciding which rivals are likely to be strong contenders and which weak contenders, evaluating their competitive options, and predicting what moves they are likely to make next. Scouting competitors well enough to anticipate their actions can help a company prepare effective countermoves (perhaps even beat a rival to the punch) and allows managers to take rivals' probable actions into account in designing their own company's best course of action. Managers who fail to study competitors closely risk being blindsided by surprise actions on the part of rivals. A company can't expect to outmaneuver its rivals without monitoring their actions and anticipating their next moves.

  6. What are the key factors for competitive success? An industry's key success factors (KSFs) are the particular strategy elements, product attributes, competitive capabilities, and business outcomes that spell the difference between profit and loss and, ultimately, between competitive success or failure. KSFs by their very nature are so important that all firms in the industry must pay close attention to them—they are the prerequisites for industry success or, to put it another way, KSFs are the rules that shape whether a company will be financially and competitively successful. Frequently, a company can gain sustainable competitive advantage by training its strategy on industry KSFs and devoting its energies to being distinctively better than rivals at succeeding on these factors. Companies that only dimly or incompletely perceive what factors are truly crucial to long-term competitive success are less likely to have winning strategies.

  7. Is the industry attractive and what are its prospects for above-average profitability? The answer to this question is a major driver of company strategy. An assessment that the industry and competitive environment is fundamentally attractive typically suggests employing a strategy calculated to build a stronger competitive position in the business, expanding sales efforts and investing in additional facilities and equipment as needed. If the industry is relatively unattractive, outsiders considering entry may decide against it and look elsewhere for opportunities, weak companies in the industry may merge with or be acquired by a rival, and strong companies
  may restrict further investments and employ cost-reduction strategies or product innovation strategies to boost long-term competitiveness and protect their profitability. On occasion, an industry that is unattractive overall is still very attractive to a favorably situated company with the skills and resources to take business away from weaker rivals.

  Good industry and competitive analysis is a prerequisite to good strategy making. A competently done industry and competitive analysis tells a clear, easily understood story about the company's external environment. It provides the understanding of a company's macroenvironment needed for shrewdly matching strategy to the company's external situation.

  
  Key Concepts & Principles

  Managers are not prepared to decide on a long-term direction or a strategy until they have a keen understanding of the company's strategic situation-the exact nature of the industry and competitive conditions it faces and how these conditions match up with its resources and capabilities.

  An industry's economic features help frame the window of strategic approaches a company can pursue.

  When strong economies of learning and experience result in declining unit costs as cumulative production volume builds, a strategy to become the largest-volume manufacturer can yield the competitive advantage of being the industry's lowest-cost producer.

  Principle of Competitive Markets

  Competitive jockeying among rival firms is a dynamic, ever-changing process as new offensive and defensive moves are initiated and emphasis swings from one blend of competitive weapons and tactics to another.

  Principle of Competitive Markets

  The threat of entry is stronger when entry barriers are low, when there's a sizable pool of entry candidates, when incumbent firms are unable or unwilling to vigorously contest a newcomer's efforts to gain a market foothold, and when a newcomer can expect to earn attractive profits.

  Principle of Competitive Markets

  The competitive threat posed by substitute products is strong when substitutes are readily available and attractively priced, buyers believe substitutes have comparable or better features, and buyers' switching costs are low.

  Principle of Competitive Markets

  The suppliers to a group of rival firms are a strong competitive force whenever they have sufficient bargaining power to put certain rivals at a competitive disadvantage based on the prices they can command, the quality and performance of the items they supply, or the reliability of their deliveries.

  Principle of Competitive Markets

  Buyers are a strong competitive force when they are able to exercise bargaining leverage over price, quality, service, or other terms of sale.High switching costs create buyer lock-in and weaken a buyer's bargaining power.

  A company's competitive strategy is increasingly effective the more it provides good defenses against the five competitive forces, shifts competitive pressures in ways that favor the company, and helps create sustainable competitive advantage.

  Basic Concept

  Industry conditions change because important forces are driving industry participants (competitors, customers, or suppliers) to alter their actions; the driving forces in an industry are the major underlying causes of changing industry and competitive conditions.

  The task of driving-forces analysis is to separate the major causes of industry change from the minor ones; usually no more than three or four factors qualify as driving forces.

  Managers can use environmental scanning to spot budding trends and clues of change that could develop into new driving forces.

  Basic Concept

  Strategic group mapping is a technique for displaying the different competitive positions that rival firms occupy in the industry.

  Dividing industry members into strategic groups allows industry analysts to better understand the pattern of competition in complex industries and to pinpoint a firm's closest competitors.

  Some strategic groups are usually more favorably positioned than other strategic groups because driving forces and competitive pressures do not affect each group evenly and because profit prospects vary among groups based on the relative attractiveness of their market positions.

  Successful strategists take great pains in gathering competitive intelligence about competitors' strategies, monitoring their actions, sizing up their strengths and weaknesses, and using what they have learned to anticipate what moves rivals are likely to make next.

  It is advantageous to know more about your competitors than they know about you.

  The company that consistently has more and better information about its competitors is better positioned to prevail, other things being equal. Managers who fail to study competitors closely risk being blindsided by surprise actions on the part of rivals.

  Basic Concept

  Key success factors concern the product attributes, competencies, competitive capabilities, and market achievements with the greatest direct bearing on company profitability.

  Strategic Management Principle

  A sound strategy incorporates efforts to be competent on all industry key success factors and to excel on at least one factor.

  A company that is uniquely well-situated in an otherwise unattractive industry can, under certain circumstances, still earn unusually good profits

  Suggested Readings

  D'Aveni, Richard A. Hypercompetition. New York: Free Press, 1994, chapters 5 and 6.

  Ghemawat, Pankaj. "Building Strategy on the Experience Curve." Harvard Business Review 64, no. 2 (March–April 1985), pp. 143–49.

  Kahaner, Larry. "What You Can Learn from Your Competitors' Mission Statements." Competitive Intelligence Review 6 no. 4 (Winter 1995), pp. 35–40.

  Langley, Ann. "Between 'Paralysis by Analysis' and 'Extinction by Instinct.'" Sloan Management Review (Spring 1995), pp. 63–75.

  Linneman, Robert E., and Harold E. Klein. "Using Scenarios in Strategic Decision Making." Business Horizons 28, no. 1 (January–February 1985), pp. 64–74.

  Porter, Michael E. Competitive Strategy: Techniques for Analyzing Industries and Competitors. New York: Free Press, 1980, chapter 1.

  ———. Competitive Advantage. New York: Free Press, 1985, Chapter 2.

  ———. "Clusters and the New Economics of Competition." Harvard

  Business Review 76, no. 6 (November–December 1998), pp. 77–90.

  Thomas, Howard; Timothy Pollock; and Philip Gorman. "Global Strategic Analyses: Frameworks and Approaches." Academy of Management Executive 13, no.1 (February 1999), pp. 70–82.

  Zahra, Shaker A., and Sherry S. Chaples. "Blind Spots in Competitive Analysis." Academy of Management Executive 7, no. 2 (May 1993), pp. 7–28.

  Quotes
  Analysis is the critical starting point of strategic thinking.
  —Kenichi Ohmae
  Things are always different—the art is figuring out which differences matter.
  —Laszlo Birinyi
  Awareness of the environment is not a special project to be undertaken only when warning of change becomes deafening.
  —Kenneth R. Andrews
  It is not the strongest of the species that survive, nor the most intelligent, but the one most responsive to change.
  —Charles Darwin

• 小熊猫 (2008-6-01 20:53:38)

  第四章 评估公司的资源和竞争能力

   

  
  进行企业环境分析需要考虑以下五个重要的问题
  1．现在的战略发挥了多大的作用？
  这包括从定性的角度（完整性、内部一致性、基本原则、环境适应性）和定量的角度（战略实施的具体经济和战略效益）来评价战略。企业现在的整体表现越好，它对战略作根本性的改变的可能性越小，如果企业的经营状况较差，而且外部环境化又很快，那么就有很大可能考虑改变战略。

  2．企业的资源优势和劣势，以及它的外部机会和威胁是什么？
  　　SWOT分析为了解企业所处的具体情势提供了一个全面的概览，而且它对于制定切合企业实际的战略，是必不可少的一个组成部分。企业的资源优势，竞争能力是十分重要的，因为在构筑战略方面，它们是最合逻辑，最具吸引力的组成部份；当然，明确劣势也是很重要的，因为它反映了企业脆弱的一面，也是需要纠正的一面。最后，之所以要分析外部机会和威胁是因为一个好的战略必须旨在帮助企业抓住最具引吸力的机会和抵御外来威胁确保企业的安全运行。

  3．企业的价格和成本是否具有竞争力？
  　　判断一个企业的竞争地位是否稳固的一个明显标志就是它的价格和成本对于竞争者是否具有竞争力。对于将企业自身的成本和价格与竞争者进行基准比较，判断企业在完成一些特定的职能或活动时成本上是否有效率，了解企业成本是否低于竞争者，以及决定哪些内部活动和流程需要改进，战略成本分析和价值链分析都是不可缺少的有力工具。价值链分析能使企业了解相对于对手，自己对价值链的管理状况如何，这对于建立企业有价值的竞争能力和优势进而转化为企业可持续发展的竞争优势是至关重要的。

  4．企业所处的竞争地位如何？
  　　回答这个问题，要进行的重要评估包括：①如果继续现行战略，企业的竞争地位将会加强还是削弱。②与主要竞争者相比，企业在行业关键成功因素（KSF）和其它对竞争取胜起着重要作用的因素方面的状况如何。③以及企业是否具有竞争优势或劣势，它为什么具有这样的优势或劣势.竞争优势的定量评估方法（见表4、4）使我了解公司具体的竞争优劣势所在，并为提升企业保持和加强市场地位的能力提供一定的建议。作为规律，企业的竞争战略应建立在它的竞争优势之上，并且还旨在支持企业在竞争上处于劣势的领域。当然，企业拥有优势而竞争者处于劣势的领域是最适合向对手发起新一轮进攻的。

  5．企业面临的战略问题是什么？
  　　这一步分析的目的在于把企业在未来获取成功道路上面临的战略性障碍扫除掉。包括运用企业环境分析和行业竞争分析的结果来明确管理者需要面临和解决的问题。这样做是为了明确管理上最需要注意的事情是什么。只有确定了企业在未来获取经济上和竞争上的成功所要克服的困难和要解决的问题，才能勾画出企业管理需要实施的战略计划。

  　　和完善的行业竞争分析一样，准确的企业形势分析(situation analysis)，是制定出好战略的重要前提。对企业资源和能力的完善评估，使人们明确的了解企业当前战略的优缺点，企业具有的优劣势，企业保持和强加竞争地位的能力，以及对手的竞争优势。管理者需要了解所有这一切来为企业制定出适合其自身情况的战略。

  
  重要概念和原理

  
  　　企业拥有越的财务表现和越强的市场地位，它就越有可能拥有一个定良好并且实施良好的战略。

  　　如果企业拥足够具有竞争价值的资源，它则具有了成功的先天条件

  　　企业的资源优势代表它的竞争资产（competitive assets），它的资源劣势代表它的竞争负债（competitive liabilities）

  　　企业的核心的竞争力是相对于企业的其它内部经营活动和能力来讲的而特殊竞争力是相对其他竞争者来讲的。

  　　成功的战略家总是设法利用企业最善长的乐西——他的技术专长，资源优势和最强的竞争能力。

  　　成功的战略家着眼于抓住企业最好的成长机会，抵御影响企业市场竞争地位和未来经营的外部威胁。简单的列出优势、劣势、机会和威胁是远远不够的，要想使SWOT分析真正起作用，应该仔细的评估分析这四个部分，并最后得出一些有价值的结论。评估企业的在成本方面相对于竞争者是否具备优势是企业环境分析的重要组成部份。

  　　竞争性市场的原则：企业相对于竞争对手的成本越高，在竞争上它就越处于劣势地位。

  　　战略成本分析需要将企业在某一经营活动中的单位成本与竞争者在相应经营活动中的单位成本相比较，从而明确哪些内部经营活动处于成本优势或劣势地位。

  　　企业的价值链能明确最能为顾客创造价值的活动以及其它相关的支持活动。

  　　企业的成本竞争优势不仅仅来源于它自身的内部活动（它自己的价值链），还取决于它的供销商以下游分销商价值链中的成本。将企业的成本与竞争者的成本进行基准比较，能为显示出企业的成本竞争优势。

  　　对于了解哪个企业在从事某项特定经营活动时最具优势,标高超越法是公认的有力工具。进而企业可以学习利用他们的技术（或“最佳方法”）以改进自己内部活动的成本和效益。用战略行动去消除成本劣势，需要着力解决在价值链中产生成本差异的地方所有在的问题

  　　采用能为企业带来胜出竞争者的能力的方式来从事价值链的生产经营活动是一个竞争优势的来源较高的竞争力排名表明企业处于较强的竞争地位，拥有竞争优势，较低的排名表明处于竞争弱势。加权竞争力分析优于非加权的竞争分析，因为后者的缺点在于把所有的因素视为同等重要相对于竞争者如果企业拥有较高的竞争力排名和得分，表明企业拥有在较长时期内进一步加强自己市场地位的机会良好的战略应寻找机会把企业的能力切实转化为竞争优势。通常的做法是用自己拥有优势的能力去进攻对于处于竞争劣势的地方明确企业所面临的战略问题是制定有效战略的前提，它包括列出一个涉及一系列战略挑战的“担忧表”（Worry list）

  　　杰出的战略应包括所有战略问题的解决方法，这些战略问题是企业在未来获取在经济和竞争上成功所要面临的

  
  Chapter Summary

  There are five key questions to consider in performing company situation analysis:

  1. How well is the present strategy working? This involves evaluating the strategy from a qualitative standpoint (completeness, internal consistency, rationale, and suitability to the situation) and also from a quantitative standpoint (the strategic and financial results the strategy is producing). The stronger a company's current overall performance, the less likely the need for radical strategy changes. The weaker a company's performance and/or the faster the changes in its external situation (which can be gleaned from industry and competitive analysis), the more its current strategy must be questioned.

  2. What are the company's resource strengths and weaknesses and its external opportunities and threats? A SWOT analysis provides an overview of a firm's situation and is an essential component of crafting a strategy tightly matched to the company's situation. A company's resource strengths, competencies, and competitive capabilities are important because they are the most logical and appealing building blocks for strategy; resource weaknesses are important because they may represent vulnerabilities that need correction. External opportunities and threats come into play because a good strategy necessarily aims at capturing a company's most attractive opportunities and at defending against threats to its well-being.

  3. Are the company's prices and costs competitive? One telling sign of whether a company's situation is strong or precarious is whether its prices and costs are competitive with industry rivals. Strategic cost analysis and value chain analysis are essential tools in benchmarking a company's prices and costs against rivals, determining whether the company is performing particular functions and activities cost effectively, learning whether its costs are in line with competitors, and deciding which internal activities and business processes need to be scrutinized for improvement. Value chain analysis teaches that how competently a company manages its value chain activities relative to rivals is a key to building valuable competencies and competitive capabilities and then leveraging them into sustainable competitive advantage.

  4. How strong is the company's competitive position? The key appraisals here involve whether the company's position is likely to improve or deteriorate if the present strategy is continued, how the company matches up against key rivals on industry key success factors and other chief determinants of competitive success, and whether and why the company has a competitive advantage or disadvantage. Quantitative competitive strength assessments, using the methodology presented in Table 4.4, indicate where a company is competitively strong and weak and provide insight into the company's ability to defend or enhance its market position. As a rule a company's competitive strategy should be built around its competitive strengths and should aim at shoring up areas where it is competitively vulnerable. Also, the areas where company strengths match
  up against competitor weaknesses represent the best potential for new offensive initiatives.

  5. What strategic issues does the company face? The purpose of this analytical step is to zero in on the strategic challenges that stand as obstacles to the company's future success. It involves using the results of both company situation analysis and industry and competitive analysis to identify the issues and problems that management needs to address. The objective is to pinpoint the things that management needs to worry about
  most. Identifying what challenges have to be overcome and what issues have to be resolved in order for the company to be financially and competitively successful in the years ahead frames the strategic agenda that management needs to act on.

  Good company situation analysis, like good industry and competitive analysis, is a crucial prerequisite to good strategy-making. A competently done evaluation of a company's resources and competencies exposes strong and weak points in the present strategy, company capabilities and vulnerabilities, and the company's ability to protect or improve its competitive position in light of driving forces, competitive pressures, and the competitive strength of rivals. Managers need such understanding to craft a strategy that fits the company's situation well. 

  　

  Key Concepts & Principles

  The stronger a company's financial performance and market position, the more likely it has a well-conceived, well-executed strategy. 

  Basic Concept 

  A company is positioned to succeed if it has a competitively valuable complement of resources at its command. 

  Basic Concept 

  A company's resource strengths represent competitive assets; its resource weaknesses represent competitive liabilities. 

  Basic Concept 

  A company competence is the product of learning and experience and represents real proficiency in performing an internal activity. 

  Basic Concept 

  A core competence is something that a company does well relative to other internal activities; a distinctive competence is something a company does well relative to competitors. 

  Strategic Management Principle 

  A distinctive competence empowers a company to build competitive advantage. 

  Strategic Management Principle 

  Successful strategists seek to capitalize on what a company does best-its expertise, resource strengths, and strongest competitive capabilities. 

  Strategic Management Principle 

  Successful strategists aim at capturing a company's best growth opportunities and creating defenses against external threats to its competitive position and future performance. 

  Simply listing a company's strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats is not enough; the payoff of SWOT analysis comes from the evaluations and conclusions that flow from the four lists. Assessing whether a company's costs are competitive with those of its close rivals is a necessary part of company situation analysis. 

  Principle of Competitive Markets
  The higher a company's costs are above those of close rivals, the more competitively vulnerable it becomes. 

  Basic Concept 

  Strategic cost analysis 

  involves comparing how a company's unit costs stack up against the unit costs of key competitors activity by activity, thereby pinpointing which internal activities are a source of cost advantage or disadvantage. 

  Basic Concept 

  A company's value chain identifies the primary activities that create value for customers and the related support activities. 

  A company's cost competitiveness depends not only on the costs of internally performed activities (its own value chain) but also on costs in the value chains of suppliers and forward channel allies. 

  Benchmarking the costs of company activities against rivals provides hard evidence of a company's cost competitiveness. 

  Basic Concept 

  Benchmarking
  has proven to be a potent tool for learning which companies are best at performing particular activities and then utilizing their techniques (or "best practices") to improve the cost and effectiveness of a company's own internal activities. 

  Strategic actions to eliminate a cost disadvantage need to be linked to the location in the value chain where the cost differences originate. 

  Strategic Management Principle 

  Performing value chain activities in ways that give a company the capabilities to outmatch rivals is a source of competitive advantage. 

  High competitive strength ratings signal a strong competitive position and possession of competitive advantage; low ratings signal a weak position and competitive disadvantage. 

  A weighted competitive strength analysis is conceptually stronger than an unweighted analysis because of the inherent weakness in assuming that all the strength measures are equally important. 

  High competitive strength ratings vis-à-vis competitors signal opportunity for a company to improve its long-term market position. 

  Good strategy entails looking for opportunities to leverage company strengths into competitive advantage, often by using company strengths to attack the competitive weaknesses of rivals. 

  Identifying the strategic issues a company faces is a prerequisite to effective strategy making. It involves developing a "worry list" of strategic challenges concerning "how to . . .", whether to . . .", and "what to do about . . ."

  Strategic Management Principle

  A good strategy must contain ways to deal with all the strategic issues that stand in the way of the company's financial and competitive success in the years ahead. 

  
  Suggested Readings

  Badaracco, Joseph L. "The Discipline of Building Character," Harvard Business Review 76, no. 2 (March–April 1998), pp. 115–24.

  Brown, Shona L., and Kathleen M. Eisenhardt. Competing on the Edge: Strategy as Structured Chaos. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press, 1998.

  Campbell, Andrew, and Laura Nash. A Sense of Mission: Defining Direction for the Large Corporation. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1993.

  Collins, James C., and Jerry I. Porras. "Building Your Company's Vision." Harvard Business Review 74, no. 5 (September–October 1996), pp. 65–77.

  Collins, Jim. "Turning Goals into Results: The Power of Catalytic Mechanisms." Harvard Business Review 77, no. 4 (July–August 1999), pp. 70–82.

  Drucker, Peter. "The Theory of the Business." Harvard Business Review 72, no. 5 (September–October 1994), pp. 95–104.

  Hamel, Gary. "Strategy as Revolution." Harvard Business Review 74 no. 4 (July–August 1996), pp. 69–82.

  Hamel, Gary, and C. K. Prahalad. "Strategic Intent." Harvard Business Review 67, no. 3 (May–June 1989), pp. 63–76.

  ———. "Strategy as Stretch and Leverage." Harvard Business Review 71, no. 2 (March–April 1993), pp. 75–84.

  Hammer, Michael, and James Champy. Reengineering the Corporation. New York: Harper Business, 1993, chapter 9.

  Ireland, R. Duane, and Michael A. Hitt. "Mission Statements: Importance, Challenge, and Recommendations for Development." Business Horizons (May–June 1992), pp. 34–42.

  Kahaner, Larry. "What You Can Learn from Your Competitors' Mission Statements." Competitive Intelligence Review 6, no. 4 (Winter 1995), pp. 35–40.

  Kaplan, Robert S., and David P. Norton. "The Balanced Scorecard—Measures That Drive Performance." Harvard Business Review 70, no. 1(January–February 1992), pp. 71–79.

  Lipton, Mark. "Demystifying the Development of an Organizational Vision." Sloan Management Review, Summer 1996, pp. 83–92.

  McTavish, Ron. "One More Time: What Business Are You In?" Long Range Planning 28, no. 2 (April 1995), pp. 49–60.

  Mintzberg, Henry. "Crafting Strategy." Harvard Business Review 65, no. 4 (July–August 1987), pp. 66–77.

  Mintzberg, Henry; Bruce Ahlstrand; and Joseph Lampel. Strategy Safari: A Guided Tour through the Wilds of Strategic Management. New York: Free Press, 1998. 

  Porter, Michael E. "Clusters and the New Economics of Competition," Harvard Business Review 76, no. 6 (November–December 1998), pp. 77–90.

  ———. "What Is Strategy?" Harvard Business Review 74, no. 6 (November–December 1996), pp. 65–67.

  Shaw, Gordon; Robert Brown; and Philip Bromiley."Strategic Stories: How 3M Is Rewriting Business Planning." Harvard Business Review 76, no. 3 (May–June 1998), pp. 41–50.

  Tichy, N. M.; A. R. McGill; and L. St. Clair. Corporate Global Citizenship. 

  San Francisco: New Lexington Press, 1997.

  Wilson, Ian. "Realizing the Power of Strategic Vision." Long Range Planning 25, no. 5 (1992), pp. 18–28.

  Quotes

  The real question isn't how well you're doing today against your own history, but how you're doing against your competitors.

  —Donald Kress

  Organizations succeed in a competitive marketplace over the long run because they can do certain things their customers value better than can their competitors.

  —Robert Hayes, Gary Pisano, and David Upton

  The greatest mistake managers make when evaluating their resources is failing to assess them relative to competitors'.

  —David J. Collis and Cynthia A. Montgomery

  If a company is not "best in world" at a critical activity, it is sacrificing competitive advantage by performing that activity with its existing technique.

  —James Brian Quinn

  Only firms who are able to continually build new strategic assets faster and cheaper than their competitors will earn superior returns over the long term.

  —C. C. Markides and P. J. Williamson

• 小熊猫 (2008-6-01 20:54:25)

  第五章 战略和竞争优势

   

  
  　　竞争战略的挑战——无论是低成本、广泛差别化、最优成本、聚焦低成本、还是聚焦差别化——是为公司创造竞争优势。将公司准确地定位于市场，从而公司在处理竞争力量
  和吸引购买这方面具有一定的优势时，公司就获得了竞争优势。
  低成本供应商战略在下列情况下能发挥最好的效应
  　1．行业中各个买方厂商之间的产品基本是一样的（品牌差异小）
  　2．很多购买者都是对价格敏感的顾客，他们都购买最便宜的产品
  　3．取得对购买者有很大价值的产品差别化其方式只有少数几种
  　4．绝大多数购买者使用产品方式一样，从而具有相同的用户要求
  　5．购买者在品牌之间进行转换的成本很小（甚至为零）
  　6．购买者很大，具有相当大的价格谈判能力

  　　想要获得低成本优势，公司必须在管理成本驱动因素方面更加娴熟或发掘出创造性的成本节约方式来改造公司的价值链。成功的低成本供应商通常是通过有创造力和不懈地在整个价值链当中寻找成本节约的环节来获得其成本优势的。他们有很擅长于将成本从他们的业务中“驱赶出去”。差别化战略追求得知通过在公司的产品和服务中包括竞争对手没有的属性和特色，或者通过开发购买者看中但是竞争对手有没有的能力，来创造竞争优势。一家公司能够创造购买者价值的任何东西都是差别化的潜在基础。成功的差别化其基调通常定在：降低购买者使用成本、提高购买者所能够得到的性能、提高购买者心理满意度。差别化想要持久，通常就必须要同独特的内部技能，核心能力，以及能给公司带来竞争对手很难匹敌的竞争能力的资源紧密相连。仅仅同独特的游行特色相连的差别化几乎不会长久，因为资源丰富的竞争对手几乎对任何一种能吸引购买者的特色或特点都非常擅长于模仿、改善或推出替代品。
  　　最优成本供应商战略综合了两个重点：低成本；不仅仅是最低限度的质量、服务、特色、和性能。其目的在于通过给顾客提供比所付出费用更多的价值来创造竞争优势；要做到这一点，就必须在关键的质量、服务、特色、性能属性上与竞争对手相抗衡，然后再将这些属性引入产品中并产生成本方面的优势将竞争对手击垮。事实最优成本供应商要想取得成功的话，公司必须要有独特的专有技能，能够以比竞争对手地的成本推出高级的产品或服务的属性；公司必须要有一定的成本管理能力，降低单位成本同时提高产品或服务质量。
  　　聚焦的竞争优势及可以通过降低服务目标溪分校市场的成本或的，也可以通过开发某种能为购买者提供不同于竞争对手又有吸引力的产品而获得——换言之，可以成本为基础也可以差别化为基础。在下列情况下，聚焦战略可以取得很好成效：
  　1．购买者对商品的需求五花八门
  　2．没有其他竞争场上奋力在同样的细分市场上进行专业化服务
  　3．一家公司缺乏追求整个市场上更广一点的市场
  　4．购买者所形成的细分市场在规模、增长速度、盈利水平以及物种竞争力量上的
  　　
  　　强度有着很大的差异，从而使得其中的一些细分市场具有更大的吸引力。只有在向前或向后垂直一体化能够通过降低成本或者创造以差别化为基础的竞争优势而加强公司地位时，这种前向或后向垂直一体化才有战略意义。否则，垂直一体化的缺点（投资增加、商业风险增加、对技术变革脆弱性赠机、产品变动的灵活性减少）就会大于垂直一体化的优势（在价值链的各个阶段能够更好地协调产品流和技术诀窍、能够对内部生产运作进行更好控制、可以使产品的生产和营销及销售匹配起来）。有一些方式可以在获得垂直一体化的同时不遭遇垂直一体化的缺点。可以用来保证和取得竞争优势的进攻性行动有很多。战略性进攻行动可以竞争对手的强势为目标也可以竞争对手的弱势为目标；它们可以采用终结性行动也可以多面出击；可以是游击行动也可以是先买性行动；而且进攻的目标可以是领导者、二流厂商、也可以是行业中最弱小的厂商。防御公司地位的战略途径通常包括：采取行动加强公司现有地位；使竞争厂商瞄准的是移动靶，以避免“过时”的脆弱性；劝阻竞争对手进攻。
  　　战略行动的时机选择具有很重要意义。首先行动者在有些情况下可以获得战略优势，而在有些情况下，如技术发展很快时，跟进比开拓要容易一些，也要便宜一些。

  
  Chapter Summary

  The challenge of competitive strategy—whether it be overall low-cost, broad differentiation, best-cost, focused low-cost, or focused differentiation—is to create a competitive advantage for the firm. Competitive advantage comes from positioning a firm in the marketplace so it has an edge in coping with competitive forces and in attracting buyers.A strategy of trying to be the low-cost provider works well in situations
  where:

  ● The industry's product is essentially the same from seller to seller (brand differences are minor).

  ● Many buyers are price-sensitive and shop for the lowest price.

  ● There are only a few ways to achieve product differentiation that have much value to buyers.

  ● Most buyers use the product in the same ways and thus have common user requirements.

  ● Buyers' costs in switching from one seller or brand to another are low or even zero.

  ● Buyers are large and have significant power to negotiate pricing terms.

  To achieve a low-cost advantage, a company must become more skilled than rivals in controlling structural and executional cost drivers and/or it must find innovative cost-saving ways to revamp its value chain. 

  Successful low-cost providers usually achieve their cost advantages by imaginatively and persistently ferreting out cost savings throughout the value chain. They are good at finding ways to drive costs out of their businesses.

  Differentiation strategies seek to produce a competitive edge by incorporating attributes and features into a company's product/service offering that rivals don't have. Anything a firm can do to create buyer value represents a potential basis for differentiation. Successful differentiation is usually keyed to lowering the buyer's cost of using the item, raising the performance the buyer gets, or boosting a buyer's psychological satisfaction. To be sustainable, differentiation usually has to be linked to unique internal expertise, core competencies, and resources that give a company capabilities its rivals can't easily match. Differentiation tied just to unique physical features seldom is lasting because resourceful competitors are adept at cloning, improving on, or finding substitutes for almost any feature that appeals to buyers.

  Best-cost provider strategies combine a strategic emphasis on low cost with a strategic emphasis on more than minimal quality, service, features, or performance. The aim is to create competitive advantage by giving buyers more value for the money; this is done by matching close rivals on key quality-service-features-performance attributes and beating
  them on the costs of incorporating such attributes into the product or service. To be successful with a best-cost provider strategy, a company must have unique expertise in incorporating upscale product or service attributes at a lower cost than rivals; it must have the capability to manage unit costs down and product/ service caliber up simultaneously.

  The competitive advantage of focusing is earned either by achieving lower costs in serving the target market niche or by developing an ability to offer niche buyers something different from rival competitors—in other words, it is either cost-based or differentiation-based. A focused strategy based either on low cost or differentiation becomes increasingly attractive as more of the following conditions are met:

  ● The target market niche is big enough to be profitable and offers good growth potential.

  ● Industry leaders do not see that having a presence in the niche is crucial to their own success—a condition that reduces rivalry from major competitiors.

  ● It is costly or difficult for multisegment competitors to put capabilities in place to meet the specialized needs of the target market niche and, at the same time, satisfy the expectations of their mainstream customers.

  ● The industry has many different niches and segments, thereby allowing a focuser to pick a competitively attractive niche suited to its resource strengths and capabilities.

  ● Few, if any, other rivals are attempting to specialize in the same target segment—a condition that reduces the risk of segment overcrowding.

  ● The focuser can compete effectively against challengers based on the capabilities and resources it has to serve the targeted niche and the customer goodwill it may have built up.

  Many companies are turning to strategic alliances and collaborative partnerships as ways to help them in the global race to build a market presence in many different national markets and in the technology race to capitalize on today's technological and information age revolution. Even large and financially strong companies have concluded that simultaneously running both races requires more diverse and expansive skills, resources, technological expertise, and competitive capabilities than they can assemble and manage alone. Strategic alliances are an attractive, flexible, and often cost-effective means for companies to gain access to missing technology, expertise, and business capabilities. The competitive attraction of alliances is to bundle competences and resources that are more valuable in a joint effort than when kept separate.

  Competitive advantage emerges when a company acquires valuable resources and capabilities through alliances that it could not otherwise obtain on its own and that give it an edge over rivals. 

  Mergers and acquisitions are another attractive strategy for strengthening a firm's competitiveness. Companies racing for global market leadership frequently make acquisitions to build a market presence in countries where they currently do not compete. Similarly, companies racing to establish attractive positions in the industries of the future merge or make acquisitions to fill in resource or technological gaps, build important technological capabilities, and move into position to launch next-wave products and services. Mergers and acquisitions allow a company to fill resource gaps or correct competitive deficiencies; combining operations can result in lower costs, stronger technological skills, more or better competitive capabilities, a more attractive lineup of products and services, wider geographic coverage, and/or greater financial resources with which to invest in R&D, add capacity, or expand into new
  areas. 

  Vertically integrating forward or backward makes strategic sense only if it strengthens a company's position via either cost reduction or creation of a differentiation-based advantage. Otherwise, the drawbacks of vertical integration (increased investment, greater business risk, increased vulnerability to technological changes, and less flexibility in making product changes) outweigh the advantages (better coordination of production flows and technological know-how from stage to stage, more specialized use of technology, greater internal control over operations, greater scale economies, and matching production with sales and marketing). There are ways to achieve the advantages of vertical integration without encountering the drawbacks.

  Outsourcing pieces of the value chain formerly performed in-house makes strategic sense whenever (1) an activity can be performed better or more cheaply by outside specialists; (2) the activity is not crucial to the firm's ability to achieve sustainable competitive advantage and won't hollow out its core competencies, capabilities, or technical know-how; (3) it reduces the company's risk exposure to changing technology and/or changing buyer preferences; (4) it streamlines company operations in ways that improve organizational flexibility, cut cycle time, speed decision-making, and reduce coordination costs; and/or (5) it allows a company to concentrate on its core business and do what it does best. In many situations outsourcing is a superior strategic alternative to vertical integration.

  A variety of offensive strategic moves can be used to secure a competitive advantage. Strategic offensives can be aimed either at competitors' strengths or at their weaknesses; they can involve end runs or grand offensives on many fronts; they can be designed as guerrilla actions or as preemptive strikes; and the target of the offensive can be a market leader, a runner-up firm, or the smallest and/or weakest firms in the industry.

  Defensive strategies to protect a company's position usually take the form of making moves that put obstacles in the path of would-be challengers and fortify the company's present position while undertaking actions to dissuade rivals from even trying to attack (by signaling that the resulting battle will be more costly to the challenger than it is worth).

  The timing of strategic moves is important. First-movers sometimes gain strategic advantage; at other times, it can be cheaper and easier to be a fast follower than a pioneering leader.

  
  Key Concepts & Principles

  Investing aggressively in creating sustainable competitive advantage is a company's single most dependable contributor to above-average profitability. 

  The objective of competitive strategy is to knock the socks off rival companies by doing a significantly better job of providing what buyers are looking for. 

  A low-cost leader's basis for competitive advantage is lower overall costs than competitors. Successful low-cost leaders are exceptionally good at finding ways to drive costs out of their businesses. 

  Outperforming rivals in controlling the factors that drive costs is a very demanding managerial exercise. 

  Success in achieving cost advantages over rivals comes from exploring all avenues for reducing costs and pressing for continuous cost reductions across all aspects of the company's operations year after year after year. 

  In markets where rivals compete mainly on price, low cost relative to competitors is the only competitive advantage that matters. 

  A low-cost leader is in the strongest position to win the business of price-sensitive buyers, set the floor on market price, and still earn a profit. 

  A low-cost provider's product offering must always contain enough attributes to be attractive to prospective buyers-low price, by itself, is not always appealing to buyers. 

  The essence of a differentiation strategy is to be unique in ways that are valuable to customers and that can be sustained. 

  Easy-to-copy differentiating features cannot produce sustainable competitive advantage. 

  A differentiator's basis for competitive advantage is either a product/service offering whose attributes differ significantly from the offerings of rivals or a set of capabilities for delivering customer value that rivals don't have or can't quite match. 

  A firm whose differentiation strategy delivers only modest extra value but clearly signals that extra value may command a higher price than a firm that actually delivers higher value but signals it poorly. 

  Any differentiating element that works well tends to draw imitators. The most successful best-cost producers have competencies and capabilities to simultaneously manage unit costs down and product caliber up. 

  The most powerful competitive strategy of all is relentlessly striving to become a lower-and-lower-cost provider of a higher-and-higher-caliber product. The closer a firm can get to the ultimate of being the industry's absolute lowest-cost provider and, simultaneously, the provider of the industry's overall best product, the less vulnerable it becomes to rivals' actions. 

  Even though a focuser may be small, it still may have substantial competitve strength because of the attractiveness of its product offering and its strong expertise and capabilities in meeting the needs and expectations of niche members. 

  Alliances and partnerships are a necessity in racing against rivals to build a strong global presence and/or to stake out a position in the industries of the future. 

  Alliances and cooperative arrangements, whether they bring together companies from different parts of the industry value chain or different parts of the world, are a fact of life in business today. 

  Growing use of alliances is shifting the basis of competition to groups of companies against groups of companies. 

  The competitive attraction of alliances is to bundle competences and resources that are more valuable in a joint effort than when kept separate. 

  Alliances are highly beneficial in racing against rivals for global market leadership. 

  Alliances are also highly beneficial in racing against rivals to build the expertise and market position needed to win a strong position in the industries of the future. 

  While a few firms can pursue their strategies alone, it is becoming increasingly common for companies to pursue their strategies in collaboration with suppliers, distributors, makers of complementary products, and sometimes even select competitors. 

  Many alliances fail and break apart, never reaching their intended potential, because of frictions and conflicts among the allies. 

  No company can afford to ignore the strategic and competitive benefits of acquiring or merging with another company to strenghten its market position and open up avenues of new opportunity. 

  A vertical integration strategy has appeal only if it significantly strengthens a firm's competitive position. 

  The big disadvantage of vertical integration is that it locks a firm deeper into the industry; unless operating across more stages in the industry's value chain builds competitive advantage, it is a questionable strategic move. 

  Outsourcing makes good strategic sense in a number of instances. Using outsourcing to narrow a company's business boundaries offers significant advantages. 

  Competitive advantage is usually acquired by employing a creative offensive strategy that isn't easily thwarted by rivals. 

  Competent, resourceful rivals will exert strong efforts to overcome any competitive disadvantage they face-they won't be out- competed without a fight. 

  One of the most powerful offensive strategies is to challenge rivals with an equally good or better product at a lower price. 

  Challenging larger, entrenched competitors with aggressive price cutting is foolhardy unless the aggressor has either a cost advantage or greater financial strength. 

  A successful end-run offensive allows a company to gain a significant first-mover advantage in a new arena and force competitors to play catch-up. 

  Guerrillas are a thorn in the side of larger competitors, quick to take advantage of whatever opportunities come their way yet careful not to provoke concerted competitive retaliation. 

  Successful preemptive strikes relegate rivals to competing for second-best positions. 

  At the very least, an offensive must be tied to a firm's resource strengths; more optimally, it is grounded in competitive advantage. 

  The foremost purpose of defensive strategy is to protect competitive advantage and fortify the firm's competitive position. 

  There are many ways to throw obstacles in the path of would-be challengers. Because of first-mover advantages and disadvantages, competitive advantage is often attached to when a move is made as well as to what move is made. 

  
  Suggested Readings 

  Barney, Jay B. Gaining and Sustaining Competitive Advantage. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1997, especially chapters 6, 7, 9, 10, and 14.

  D'Aveni, Richard A. Hypercompetition: The Dynamics of Strategic Maneuvering (New York: Free Press, 1994), chapters 1, 2, 3, and 4.

  Dess, Gregory G., and Joseph C. Picken. "Creating Competitive (Dis)advantage: Learning from Food Lion's Freefall." Academy of Management Executive 13, no. 3 (August 1999), pp. 97–111. 

  Hamel, Gary. "Strategy as Revolution." Harvard Business Review 74, no. 4 (July–August 1996), pp. 69–82.

  Hayes, Robert H.; Gary P. Pisano; and David M. Upton. Strategic Operations: Competing Through Capabilities (New York: Free Press, 1996).

  Porter, Michael E. Competitive Advantage (New York: Free Press, 1985), chapters 3, 4, 5, 7, 14, and 15.

  ———. "What Is Strategy?" Harvard Business Review 74, no. 6 (November–December 1996), pp. 61–78.

  Schnarrs, Steven P. Managing Imitation Strategies: How Later Entrants Seize Markets from Pioneers. New York: Free Press, 1994.

  Stuckey, John, and David White. "When and When Not to Vertically Integrate." Sloan Management Review (Spring 1993), pp. 71–83.

  Venkatesan, Ravi. "Strategic Outsourcing: To Make or Not to Make." Harvard Business Review 70, no. 6 (November–December 1992), pp. 98–107.

  Yoffie, David B., and Michael A. Cusumano. "Judo Strategy: The Competitive Dynamics of Internet Time." Harvard Business Review 77, no. 1 (January–February 1999), pp. 71–81.

  Quotes

  Successful business strategy is about actively shaping the game you play, not just playing the game you find.

  —Adam M. Brandenburger and Barry J. Nalebuff

  The essence of strategy lies in creating tomorrow's competitive advantages faster than competitors mimic the ones you possess today.

  —Gary Hamel and C. K. Prahalad

  Competitive strategy is about being different. It means deliberately choosing to perform activities differently or to perform different activities than rivals to deliver a unique mix of value.

  —Michael E. Porter

  Strategies for taking the hill won't necessarily hold it.

  —Amar Bhide

  Nothing focuses the mind better than the constant sight of a competitor who wants to wipe you off the map. 

  —Wayne Calloway, Former CEO, PepsiCo

  [S]trategic partnerships have become central to competitive success in fast changing global markets.

  —Yves L. Doz and Gary Hamel

• 小熊猫 (2008-6-01 20:55:26)

  第六章 全球市场竞争战略

   

  
  　　公司要向其本地市场以外扩张往往是处于以下的四个原因：能够更接近他们产品和服务的顾客，获得更低的成本和更有竞争力的价格，加强起核心竞争力，在更广阔的市场范围内分散其商业风险。如果一个公司只在少数几个国外市场参与竞争，那么他就是一个国际的或多国的竞争者。而如果他在世界上几乎所有的较大国家中占据市场地位，那么他就是一个全球化的竞争者。

  　　一个参与国外市场竞争的公司，在制定战略时必须受到具体的情况所驱动。在世界上的不同国家，文化、人口和市场条件都存在显著的差异。在国外市场上参与竞争，公司最关注的一个问题就是：究竟是调整自己的产品以迎合各个不同国家市场中的消费者的品味和偏好，还是在全世界范围内提供几乎是标准化的产品。关注本地消费者的偏好，可以使公司的产品更具有吸引力，但是这种要分别满足不同国家的顾客需要，由于产品设计和合成方面的差异化过大，较短的产品流，以及增加库存处理和分销物流的复杂性，从而使产品的制造和分销成本增加。然而，在另一方面，公司产品较高的标准化会使公司更容易获得规模经济和经验曲线效应，更容易获得低成本优势。在满足顾客需求的市场压力和适应竞争的低成本压力之间进行权衡，是公司进入外国市场必须要解决的战略问题。

  　　当一个国家市场的竞争独立于另一个国家市场的竞争的时候，跨国（或跨地区）的竞争就会出现。此时，并不存在所谓的“国际市场”，而仅仅是各个相互独立的国家市场的集合。当各个不同国家的竞争条件紧密联系形成一种真正的国际市场的时候，当各个竞争者不得不在许多不同的国家正面竞争的时候，就会出现全球化的竞争。多国战略在那些主要是多国竞争的行业中比较适合，而全球战略则在那些存在全球化竞争或正在全球化的市场中才能起到很好的作用。其他的参与全球竞争战略选择还包括：在本国生产，向外国市场出口产品；授权外国企业使用本公司的技术或生产和分销本公司的产品；利用特许经营战略；利用战略联盟和合作伙伴来进入外国市场或加强本公司在全球市场上的竞争力。

  　　近些年来，全球范围内的战略联盟，合资企业，以及各种经济合作的数量飞速的增长。与国外的合作伙伴进行合作之所以具有吸引力可以从以下几个角度来观察：可以与有吸引力的市场进行更广泛的接触，在产品生产和市场营销方面获得规模经济效应，弥补在技术专长和对当地市场的信息方面的缺陷，通过共享分销机构和经销商网络来节约成本，帮助在重要的技术标准方面达成协议，对抗竞争对手建立的联盟的不利影响。跨越国界的战略联盟正在迅速的改变着全球市场的竞争情况，使其变成了一个全球的公司战略联盟与另一个全球的公司战略联盟的之间的竞争。

  　　在国际市场上，一个企业有三种方式来获得竞争优势（或缓解本地经营的劣势）。一种方式就是在不同的国家安排其价值链活动，以实现更低的成本或更大的产品差异化。第二种方法就是提高把企业相对有价值的竞争力和能力从本地市场向国外市场转移的能力和效率。最后一种方法就是，提高一个跨国或全球的竞争者的能够以在单个国家经营的竞争者无法实现的方式来深化和扩展公司资源的能力。

  　　“利润圣所”（profit sanctuary）是一个公司由于起强大的市场地位从而获得大量利润的国家市场。他是一种很有价值的竞争资源。对于那些还需要其他市场才能获得资源和利润的市场来说，“利润圣所”(profit sanctuary)可以提供强大的资金支持，并帮助企业在全球市场上获得领导地位。由于多元化的“利润圣所”(profit sanctuary)所提供的一种交叉补贴能力，赋予了全球或多国竞争者一个强有力的进攻性武器。对于那些具有较大的并受到很好保护的“利润圣所”（profit sanctuary）的公司来说，要比那些没有受到保护的“利润圣所”(profit sanctuary)的公司更具竞争优势。对于那些具有多种“利润圣所”(profit sanctuary)的公司，要比那些只具有单一“利润圣所”(profit sanctuary)的公司更具竞争力。

  　　对于那些争夺全球市场的领导地位的公司来说，必须要考虑到那些像中国，印度、巴西、印度尼西亚、和墨西哥等新兴的市场。虽然商业的经营风险很大，但是增长的机会也同样很大。要想在这些市场上获得成功，往往要提供很低的价格和较好的产品。这种方式显然与在其他国家所采取的战略有很大的不同。但是，在这种国家培育自己产品的市场是一个长期的过程，需要大量的投资来改变消费者的购买习惯和品味，需要对他们进行教育。获利不可能很快就轻易的出现。

  　　对于那些在新兴市场国中，希望能够在与那些进入的世界巨头的竞争中存活的本地企业来说，他们的前景也并不是那么惨淡。最理想的战略选择就取决于公司的竞争资源是只适应国内市场还是能够向国外转移，和他们参与全球竞争的行业压力是强还是弱。本地公司可以通过以下几种方式与那些新进入者展开竞争：（1）依赖本地的优势展开防御。（2）把他们的技术专长转移到其他国家市场中。（3）通过转型到新的商业和市场模式来避开那些较大的竞争对手（4）他们自己主动在全球范围内展开竞争。

   

  关键概念和原则

  
  　　如果一个公司只在有选择的少数几个国外市场参与竞争，那么他就是一个国际的（或多国的）竞争者。如果他在几乎所有的大陆和世界上几乎所有的主要国家参与竞争，那么他就是一个全球化的竞争者。在那些具有明显的不同国家文化、人口和市场条件的外国市场上参与竞争，要比单独在国内参与竞争在战略制定方面，存在更大的挑战性。面对不同的国家文化，不同的人口以及不同的市场条件，会使得参与世界市场领域竞争的工作变的更加复杂。他的挑战就在于要平衡应对各个国家当地情况的压力和降低成本与价格的压力。一个公司由于其合理的分布其国外业务而获得竞争优势的潜力，或者是由于竞争对手所在地区拥有更低的成本而使公司处于不利的地位，两种情况都是公司的在制定战略时十分关注的因素。

  　　当一个国家市场的竞争独立于另一个国家市场的竞争的时候，跨国（或跨地区）的竞争就会出现。此时，并不存在所谓的“国际市场”，而仅仅是各个相互独立的国家市场的集合。

  　　当各个不同国家的竞争条件紧密联系形成一种真正的国际市场的时候，当各个竞争者不得不在许多不同的国家正面竞争的时候，就会出现全球化的竞争。在多国竞争中，竞争对手是为了争夺国家市场的领导地位，而在全球化的竞争行业中，竞争对手是为了争夺全球范围内的领导地位。一个公司要想在国外市场上获得成功，他的战略制定必须要考虑到各个国家不同的商业和竞争环境。那些将其业务活动分布在最具优势的国家的公司，可以获得全球市场的竞争优势；而那些只在地区内运营的公司就没有这样的机会。

  　　对于那些具有较大的并受到很好保护的“利润圣所”（profit sanctuary）的公司来说，要比那些没有受到保护的“利润圣所”(profit sanctuary)的公司更具竞争优势。对于那些具有多种“利润圣所”(profit sanctuary)的公司，要比那些只具有单一“利润圣所”(profit sanctuary)的公司更具竞争力。

  　　在一个市场中如果资源和利润还需要在其他市场运做才能获取，那么具有交叉市场补贴支持的竞争性进攻就是一种强有力的竞争武器。战略联盟可以帮助公司在全球化的竞争行业中加强其竞争地位，同时还可以保持其独立性。战略联盟在全球市场出现新的机会要首先建立一个“滩头堡”时，要比在达到和维持全球领导地位时更有效率。在一个新兴的国家市场上，获利很少会马上轻易地就出现。一个新进入者必须关注当地的情况，而且要对他们产品的长期市场开发进行投资，并耐心等待获利。

  
  Chapter Summary

  Companies opt to expand outside their domestic market for any of four major reasons: to gain access to new customers for their products or services, to achieve lower costs and become more competitive on price, to leverage its core competencies, and to spread its business risk across a wider market base. A company is an international or multinational competitor when it competes in several foreign markets; it is a global competitor when it has or is pursuing a market presence in virtually all of the world's major countries.

  The strategies a company uses to compete in foreign markets have to be situation-driven—cultural, demographic, and market conditions vary significantly among the countries of the world. One of the biggest concerns of competing in foreign markets is whether to customize the company's offerings to cater to the tastes and preferences of local buyers in each different country market or whether to offer a mostly standardized product worldwide. While being responsive to local tastes makes a company's products more appealing to local buyers, customizing a company's products country-by-country may have the effect of raising production and distribution costs due to the greater variety of designs and components, shorter production runs, and the complications of added inventory handling and distribution logistics. Greater standardization of the company's product offering, on the other hand, enhances the capture of scale economies and experience curve effects, contributing to the achievement of a low-cost advantage. The tension between the market pressures to customize and the competitive pressures to lower costs is one of the big strategic issues that participants in foreign markets have to resolve.

  Multicountry (or multidomestic) competition exists when competition in one national market is independent of competition in another national market—there is no "international market," just a collection of self-contained country markets. Global competition exists when competitive conditions across national markets are linked strongly enough to form a true international market and when leading competitors compete head-to-head in many different countries. A multicountry strategy is appropriate for industries where multicountry competition dominates, but a global strategy works best in markets that are globally competitive or beginning to globalize. Other strategy options for competing in world markets include maintaining a national (one-country) production base and exporting goods to foreign markets, licensing foreign firms to use the company's technology or produce and distribute the company's products, employing a franchising strategy, and using strategic alliances and collaborative partnerships to enter a foreign market or strengthen a firm's competitiveness in world markets.

  The number of global strategic alliances, joint ventures, and collaborative arrangements has exploded in recent years. Cooperative arrangements with foreign partners have strategic appeal from several angles: gaining wider access to attractive country markets, allowing capture of economies of scale in production and/or marketing, filling gaps in technical expertise and/or knowledge of local markets, saving on costs by sharing distribution facilities and dealer networks, helping gain agreement on important technical standards, and helping combat the impact of alliances that rivals have formed. Cross-border strategic alliances are fast reshaping competition in world markets, pitting one group of allied global companies against other groups of allied global companies.

  There are three ways in which a firm can gain competitive advantage (or offset domestic disadvantages) in global markets. One way involves locating various value chain activities among nations in a manner that lowers costs or achieves greater product differentiation. A second way involves efficient and effective transfer of competitively valuable competencies and capabilities from its domestic markets to foreign markets. A third way draws on a multinational or global competitor's ability to deepen or broaden its resource strengths and capabilities and to coordinate its dispersed activities in ways that a domestic-only competitor cannot.

  Profit sanctuaries are country markets in which a company derives substantial profits because of its strong or protected market position. They are valuable competitive assets, providing the financial strength to support competitive offensives in one market with resources and profits diverted from operations in other markets, and aid a company's race for global market leadership. The cross-subsidization capabilities provided by multiple profit sanctuaries gives a global or multinational competitor a powerful offensive weapon. Companies with large, protected profit sanctuaries have competitive advantage over companies that don't have a protected sanctuary. Companies with multiple profit sanctuaries have a competitive advantage over companies with a single sanctuary.

  Companies racing for global leadership have to consider competing in emerging-country markets like China, India, Brazil, Indonesia, and Mexico—countries where the business risks are considerable but the opportunities for growth are huge. To succeed in these markets, it is usually necessary to attract buyers with bargain prices as well as better
  products—an approach that can entail a radical departure from the strategy used in other parts of the world. Moreover, building a market for the company's products in these markets is likely to be a long-term process, involving the investment of sizable sums to alter buying habits and tastes and reeducate consumers. Profitability is unlikely to come quickly or easily.

  The outlook for local companies in emerging-country markets wishing to survive against the entry of global giants is by no means grim. The optimal strategic approach hinges on whether a firm's competitive assets are suitable only for the home market or can be transferred abroad and whether industry pressures to move toward global competition are strong or weak. Local companies can compete against global newcomers by (1) defending on the basis of home-field advantages, (2) transferring their expertise to cross-border markets, (3) dodging large rivals by shifting to a new business model or market niche, or (4) launching initiatives to compete on a global level themselves.

  
  Key Concepts & Principles

  Basic Concept

  A company is an international (or multinational) competitor when it competes in a select few foreign markets. It is a global competitor when it has or is pursuing a market presence on most continents and in virtually all of the world's major countries. Competing in foreign markets where there are significant cross-country variations in cultural, demographic, and market conditions poses a much bigger strategy-making challenge than just competing at home. Being responsive to cross-country differences in cultural, demographic, and market conditions complicates the task of competing in the world market arena. The challenge is to balance pressures to be responsive to local situations in each country against pressures for lower costs and prices. A company's potential for gaining competitive advantage based on where it locates its foreign activities or being at a disadvantage because rivals have lower-cost locations is a matter of considerable strategic concern.

  Basic Concept

  Multicountry (or multidomestic) competition exists when competition in one national market is independent of competition in another national market—there is no "international market," just a collection of self-contained country markets.

  Basic Concept

  Global competition exists when competitive conditions across national markets are linked strongly enough to form a true international market and when leading competitors compete head to head in many different countries. In multicountry competition, rival firms vie for national market leadership. In globally competitive industries, rival firms vie for worldwide leadership. For a company to be successful in foreign markets, its strategy must take varying country-to-country business and competitive environments into account. Companies can pursue competitive advantage in world markets by locating activities in the most advantageous nations; a domestic-only competitor has no such opportunities.

  Basic Concept

  Companies with large, protected profit sanctuaries have competitive advantage over companies that don't have a protected sanctuary. Companies with multiple profit sanctuaries have a competitive advantage over companies with a single sanctuary.

  Basic Concept

  Cross-market subsidization—supporting competitive offensives in one market with resources and profits diverted from operations in other markets—is a powerful competitive weapon. Strategic alliances can help companies in globally competitive industries strengthen their competitive positions while still preserving their independence. Strategic alliances are more effective in helping establish a beachhead of new opportunity in world markets than in achieving and sustaining global leadership. Profitability in emerging country markets rarely comes quickly or easily—new entrants have to be very sensitive to local conditions, be willing to invest in developing the market for their products over the long term, and be patient in earning a profit.

  
  Suggested Readings

  Arnold, David J., and John A. Quelch. "New Strategies in Emerging Markets." Sloan Management Review 40, no. 1 (Fall 1998), pp. 7–20.

  Bolt, James F. "Global Competitors: Some Criteria for Success." Business Horizons 31, no. 1 (January–February 1988), pp. 34–41.

  Das, T. K., and Bing-Sheng Teng. "Managing Risks in Strategic Alliances." Academy of Management Executive 13, no. 4 (November 1999), pp. 50–62.

  Dawar, Niraj, and Tony Frost. "Competing with Giants: Survival Strategies for Local Companies in Emerging Markets." Harvard Business Review 77, no. 2 (March–April 1999), pp. 119–29.

  Doz, Yves L., and Gary Hamel. Alliance Advantage: The Art of Creating Value through Partnering. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press, 1998.

  Ger, Guliz. "Localizing in the Global Village: Local Firms Competing in Global Markets." California Management Review 41, no. 4 (Summer 1999), pp. 64–84. 

  Inkpen, Andrew C. "Learning and Knowledge Acquisition through International Strategic Alliances." Academy of Management Executive 12, no. 4 (November 1998), pp. 69–81.

  Kanter, Rosabeth Moss, and Thomas D. Dretler. " 'Global Strategy' and Its Impact on Local Operations: Lessons from Gillette Singapore." Academy of Management Executive 12, no. 4 (November 1998), pp. 60–68.

  Lei, David. "Strategies for Global Competition." Long Range Planning 22, no. 1 (February 1989), pp. 102–9.

  Ohmae, Kenichi. "The Global Logic of Strategic Alliances." Harvard Business Review 67, no. 2 (March–April 1989), pp. 143–54.

  Parkhe, Arvind. "Building Trust in International Alliances." Journal of World Business 33, no. 4 (Winter 1998), pp. 417–37.

  Rackham, Neil; Lawrence Friedman; and Richard Ruff. Getting Partnering Right: How Market Leaders Are Creating Long-Term Competitive Advantage. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1996.

  Sugiura, Hideo. "How Honda Localizes Its Global Strategy." Sloan Management Review 33 (Fall 1990), pp. 77–82.

  Thomas, Howard; Timothy Pollock; and Philip Gorman. "Global Strategic Analyses: Frameworks and Approaches." Academy of Management Executive 13, no. 1 (February 1999), pp. 70–82.

  Zahra, Shaker A., and Hugh M. O'Neill. "Charting the Landscape of Global Competition." Academy of Management Executive 12, no. 4 (November 1998), pp. 36–42.

  Quotes

  You have no choice but to operate in a world shaped by globalization and the information revolution. There are two options: Adapt or die.

  —Andrew S. Grove, Chairman, Intel Corporation

  You do not choose to become global. The market chooses for you; it forces your hand.

  —Alain Gomez, CEO, Thomson, S.A.

  [T]here's no purely domestic industry anymore.

  —Robert Pelosky and Morgan Stanley

  [I]ndustries actually vary a great deal in the pressures they put on a company to sell internationally.

  —Niraj Dawar and Tony Frost, Professors, Richard Ivey School of Business

• 小熊猫 (2008-6-01 20:55:49)

  第七章 网络经济中的新经营模式与战略

   

  
  　　因特网是由服务器、高速计算机、数字转换器、路由器、通信设备和线路以及用户个人计算机集合在一起组成的网络.构成网络经济供应方的主要的电子商务公司群组包括:专业化的信息沟通部件、信息沟通设备和信息沟通服务的供应商、计算机元部件、硬件供应商、专业软件开发商、BtoB批发商、BtoC销售商、媒体公司和内容提供商.

  　　对电子商务的应用使企业的竞争力发生 了重大的转移:加剧了竞争、增强了进入一个行业的威胁、改变了供应商和零售商、零售商和顾客之间的讨价还价的能力,给各类型的供应商和零售商、零售商和顾客之间的合作提供了一个新的基础,还具有改变企业价值链和改变一个企业资源强势和弱势的作用.技术、市场、环境和竞争压力向着未知的方向迅速改变.;电子商务世界是高节奏、快速度的环境,企业被迫快速行动,行动缓慢者将被淘汰.为了抓住网络经济提供的机会,企业加速采用新的具有创意的商业模式来赚钱,采用截然不同的竞争战略.电子商务成功的一个关键就是商业模式的创新.网络经济不同类型的参与者在商业模式战略上相差巨大.生产与网络密切相关的通信设备、PC硬件和元部件的制造商采用比较传统的商业模式:以高于远远成本的价格把产品销售给顾客.信息服务的供应商把商业模式建立在以一个能够建立在每月使用频