Porter Five Forces Model
Essay Preview: Porter Five Forces Model
Report this essay
Porters Five Forces
A MODEL FOR INDUSTRY ANALYSIS
The model of pure competition implies that risk-adjusted rates of return should be constant across firms and industries. However, numerous economic studies have affirmed that different industries can sustain different levels of profitability; part of this difference is explained by industry structure.
Michael Porter provided a framework that models an industry as being influenced by five forces. The strategic business manager seeking to develop an edge over rival firms can use this model to better understand the industry context in which the firm operates.
Diagram of Porters 5 Forces
SUPPLIER POWER
Supplier concentration
Importance of volume to supplier
Differentiation of inputs
Impact of inputs on cost or differentiation
Switching costs of firms in the industry
Presence of substitute inputs
Threat of forward integration
Cost relative to total purchases in industry
BARRIERS
TO ENTRY
Absolute cost advantages
Proprietary learning curve
Access to inputs
Government policy
Economies of scale
Capital requirements
Brand identity
Switching costs
Access to distribution
Expected retaliation
Proprietary products
THREAT OF
SUBSTITUTES
-Switching costs
-Buyer inclination to
substitute
-Price-performance
trade-off of substitutes
BUYER POWER
Bargaining leverage
Buyer volume
Buyer information
Brand identity
Price sensitivity
Threat of backward integration
Product differentiation
Buyer concentration vs. industry
Substitutes available
Buyers incentives
DEGREE OF RIVALRY
-Exit barriers
-Industry concentration
-Fixed costs/Value added
-Industry growth
-Intermittent overcapacity
-Product differences
-Switching costs
-Brand identity
-Diversity of rivals
-Corporate stakes
I. Rivalry
In the traditional economic model, competition among rival firms drives profits to zero. But competition is not perfect and firms are not unsophisticated passive price takers. Rather, firms strive for a competitive advantage over their rivals. The intensity of rivalry among firms varies across industries, and strategic analysts are interested in these differences.
Economists measure rivalry by indicators of industry concentration. The Concentration Ratio (CR) is one such measure. The Bureau of Census periodically reports the CR for major Standard Industrial Classifications (SICs). The CR indicates the percent of market share held by the four largest firms (CRs for the largest 8, 25, and 50 firms in an industry also are available). A high concentration ratio indicates that a high concentration of market share is held by the largest firms – the industry is concentrated. With only a few firms holding a large market share, the competitive landscape is less competitive (closer to a monopoly). A low concentration ratio indicates that the industry is characterized by many rivals, none of which has a significant market share. These fragmented markets are said to be competitive. The concentration ratio is not the only available measure; the trend is to define industries in terms that convey more information than distribution of market share.
If rivalry among firms in an industry is low, the industry is considered to be disciplined. This discipline may result from the industrys history of competition, the role of a leading firm, or informal compliance with a generally understood code of conduct. Explicit collusion generally is illegal and not an option; in low-rivalry industries competitive moves must be constrained informally. However, a maverick firm seeking a competitive advantage can displace the otherwise disciplined market.
When a rival acts in a way that elicits a counter-response by other firms, rivalry intensifies. The intensity of rivalry commonly is referred to as being cutthroat, intense, moderate, or weak, based on the firms aggressiveness in attempting to gain an advantage.
In pursuing an advantage over its rivals, a firm can choose from several competitive moves:
Changing prices – raising or lowering prices to gain a temporary advantage.
Improving product differentiation – improving features, implementing innovations in the manufacturing process and in the product itself.
Creatively using channels of distribution – using vertical integration or using a distribution channel that is novel to the industry. For example, with high-end jewelry stores reluctant to carry its watches, Timex moved into drugstores and other non-traditional outlets and cornered the low to mid-price watch market.
Exploiting relationships with suppliers – for example, from the 1950s to the 1970s Sears, Roebuck and Co. dominated the retail household appliance market. Sears set