Two Fundamental Paradigms
In spite of the enormous proliferation of competing schemes in the business strategy literature, there are two fundamental paradigms that have emerged as the most influential in the last two decades. First, Competitive Positioning, as proposed by Michael Porter from the Harvard Business School in the 1980’s, and, second, the Resource-Based View of the firm that evolved during the 1990’s.
Porter’s arguments are drawn from the work of organizational economists who place the industry as the central focus of strategic attention. According to Porter’s framework, structural characteristics of a firm’s industry best explain variations in firm performance. In other words, Porters sees good industries, such as pharmaceuticals, where most players enjoy high margins; he also sees bad industries, such as trucking, where most participants suffer from low profitability.
In contrast, Arnoldo C. Hax and Dean L. Wilde II have developed a new strategy framework that they called the Delta Model – Delta being the Greek letter that stands for transformation and change.
They felt that the new technology surrounding the internet provides novel and effective ways to link to the customer and to the extended enterprise, opening up new sources of strategic positioning that should be properly evaluated.
They strongly belief that the Delta Model has the ability to complement the perspectives of Porter’s frameworks and the Resource-Based View of the Firm and provide the integrative glue that may result in one unified strategy framework.
I will now briefly describe the three frameworks which is not intended to be exhaustive. I will deal with the frameworks at a level sufficient for the reader to understand the implications of our claim regarding unification.
The%20Delta%20Model%20--%20Toward%20a%20Unified%20Framework.pdf
Comments