This article needs references that appear in reliable third-party publications. Primary sources or sources affiliated with the subject are generally not sufficient for a Wikipedia article. Please add more appropriate citations from reliable sources. (October 2009)

"Porter's five forces" is a framework for the industry analysis and business strategy development developed by Michael E. Porter of Harvard Business School in 1979. It uses concepts developing Industrial Organization (IO) economics to derive five forces that determine the competitive intensity and therefore attractiveness of a market. Attractiveness in this context refers to the overall industry profitability. An "unattractive" industry is one where the combination of forces acts to drive down overall profitability. A very unattractive industry would be one approaching "pure competition".

Porter referred to these forces as the micro environment, to contrast it with the more general term macro environment. They consist of those forces close to a company that affect its ability to serve its customers and make a profit. A change in any of the forces normally requires a company to re-assess the marketplace. The overall industry attractiveness does not imply that every firm in the industry will return the same profitability. Firms are able to apply their core competences, business model or network to achieve a profit above the industry average. A clear example of this is the airline industry. As an industry, profitability is low and yet individual companies, by applying unique business models, have been able to make a return in excess of the industry average.

Strategy consultants occasionally use Porter's five forces framework when making a qualitative evaluation of a firm's strategic position. However, for most consultants, the framework is only a starting point or "checklist" they might use. Like all general frameworks, an analysis that uses it to the exclusion of specifics about a particular situation is considered naive.

Porter's five force include three forces from 'horizontal' competition: threat of substitute products, the threat of established rivals, and the threat of new entrants; and two forces from 'vertical' competition: the bargaining power of suppliers and the bargaining power of customers.

According to Porter, the five forces model should be used at the industry level; it is not designed to be used at the industry group or industry sector level. An industry is defined at a lower, more basic level: a market in which similar or closely related products and/or services are sold to buyers. A firm that competes in a single industry should develop, at a minimum, one five forces analysis for its industry. Porter makes clear that for diversified companies, the first fundamental issue in corporate strategy is the selection of industries (lines of business) in which the company should compete; and each line of business should develop its own, industry-specific, five forces analysis. The average Global 1,000 company competes in approximately 52 industries (lines of business).

This five forces analysis is just one part of the complete Porter strategic models. The other elements are the value chain and the generic strategies.^{[citation needed]}

Contents 1 The Five Forces 1.1 The threat of substitute products 1.2 The threat of the entry of new competitors 1.3 The intensity of competitive rivalry 1.4 The bargaining power of customers 1.5 The bargaining power of suppliers 2 Criticisms of the 5 Forces model 3 See also 4 References

[edit] The Five Forces

[edit] The threat of substitute products

The existence of products outside of the realm of the common product boundaries increases the propensity of customers to switch to alternatives:

• Buyer propensity to substitute
• Relative price performance of substitutes
• Buyer switching costs
• Perceived level of product differentiation
• Number of substitute product available in the market

[edit] The threat of the entry of new competitors

Profitable markets that yield high returns will draw firms. This results in many new entrants, which eventually will decrease profitability. Unless the entry of new firms can be blocked by incumbents, the profit rate will fall towards a competitive level (perfect competition).

• The existence of barriers to entry (patents, rights, etc.)
• Economies of product differences
• Brand equity
• Switching costs or sunk costs
• Capital requirements
• Access to distribution
• Customer loyalty to established brands
• Absolute cost advantages
• Learning curve advantages
• Expected retaliation by incumbents
• Government policies

[edit] The intensity of competitive rivalry

For most industries, the intensity of competitive rivalry is the major determinant of the competitiveness of the industry.

• Sustainable competitive advantage through innovation.

How will competition react to a certain behavior by another firm?, Competitive rivalry is likely to be based on dimension such as price, quality, and innovation.

[edit] The bargaining power of customers

The bargaining power of customers is also described as the market of outputs: the ability of customers to put the firm under pressure, which also affects the customer's sensitivity to price changes.

• Buyer concentration to firm concentration ratio
• Degree of dependency upon existing channels of distribution
• Bargaining leverage, particularly in industries with high fixed costs
• Buyer volume
• Buyer switching costs relative to firm switching costs
• Buyer information availability
• Ability to backward integrate
• Availability of existing substitute products
• Buyer price sensitivity
• Differential advantage (uniqueness) of industry products
• RFM Analysis

Ex. If your making cookies and there is only one person to buy flour from you have to buy it from them. They have lots of power over your cookies

[edit] The bargaining power of suppliers

The bargaining power of suppliers is also described as the market of inputs. Suppliers of raw materials, components, labor, and services (such as expertise) to the firm can be a source of power over the firm. Suppliers may refuse to work with the firm, or, e.g., charge excessively high prices for unique resources.

• Supplier switching costs relative to firm switching costs
• Degree of differentiation of inputs
• Presence of substitute inputs
• Supplier concentration to firm concentration ratio
• Employee solidarity (e.g., labor unions)

Ex. If your making cookies and there is only one person to buy flour from you have to buy it from them. They have lots of power over your cookies

[edit] Criticisms of the 5 Forces model

Porter's framework has been challenged by other academics and strategists such as Stewart Neill. Similarly, the likes of Kevin P. Coyne and Somu Subramaniam have stated that three dubious assumptions underlie the five forces:

• That buyers, competitors, and suppliers are unrelated and do not interact and collude.
• That the source of value is structural advantage (creating barriers to entry).
• That uncertainty is low, allowing participants in a market to plan for and respond to competitive behavior.

An important extension to Porter was found in the work of Brandenburger and Nalebuff in the mid-1990s. Using game theory, they added the concept of complementors (also called "the 6th force"), helping to explain the reasoning behind strategic alliances. The idea that complementors are the sixth force has often been credited to Andrew Grove, former CEO of Intel Corporation. According to most references, the sixth force is government or the public. Martyn Richard Jones, whilst consulting at Groupe Bull, developed an augmented 5 forces model in Scotland in 1993. It is based on Porter's model and includes Government (national and regional) as well as Pressure Groups as the notional 6th force. This model was the result of work carried out as part of Group Bull's Knowledge Asset Management Organisation initiative.

It is also perhaps not feasible to evaluate the attractiveness of an industry independent of the resources a firm brings to that industry. It is thus argued that this theory be coupled with the Resource-Based View (RBV) in order for the firm to develop a much more sound strategy.

[edit] See also

• Delta Model
• Six Forces Model

[edit] References

• Porter, M.E. (1979) "How competitive forces shape strategy", Harvard business Review, March/April 1979.
• Porter, M.E. (1980) Competitive Strategy, Free Press, New York, 1980.
• Ireland, Hoskisson, "Understanding Business Strategy". SOUTH WESTERN.