[HN Gopher] The Irrelevance of Porter's Five Forces for the B2B ... ___________________________________________________________________ The Irrelevance of Porter's Five Forces for the B2B Software Industry Author : djhope Score : 22 points Date : 2022-04-14 18:50 UTC (4 hours ago) (HTM) web link (jhcblog.juliehuntconsulting.com) (TXT) w3m dump (jhcblog.juliehuntconsulting.com) | mvkel wrote: | A competitor can be your customers' apathy, or resistance to | change. That doesn't throw out Porter's theories, (which still | hold very true imo). | __jf__ wrote: | Near the end of "Understanding Michael Porter", there is a Q&A | with him that touches on this subject: | | Q: "How do you do a five forces analysis if you're an | entrepreneur starting a new business in a completely new market | space? Is strategy even relevant when there's no existing | industry or when conditions are still so fluid that there is no | discernible industry structure and no direct competitors?" | | Porter: "Strategy is relevant for any organization at any point | in its trajectory. How to develop and sustain a competitive | advantage is the core question that every organization has to | answer if it's to be successful and to prosper. In emerging | industries there's a lot of experimentation. What will the | product ultimately look like? What will the distribution system | look like? Will the product or service scope produce a stand- | alone industry, or will this new idea become part of a larger or | existing industry? There's more uncertainty about the shape of | things, but the five forces exercise is fundamentally the same | with one big exception: instead of analyzing what already exists, | you're forecasting. And you probably know quite a lot about all | of the five forces but one. You know the customers you're | targeting. Are they likely to be price sensitive? You know who | your suppliers are or who they are likely to be. How powerful | will they become? You know the substitutes and can identify the | likely entry barriers. What you don't have yet are actual rivals. | That's where you need to think through who those might be. Will | the rivals most likely come from adjacent industries? Or from | companies that already exist in other countries? Or will the | likely rivals be new start-ups? How would each of these rivals be | likely to compete? So even when you're inventing new market | market space, you probably already know more about the five | forces than you realize. Doing such analysis is important because | if you're creating something that's truly valuable, don't kid | yourself that no one will follow you. There is no such thing as a | market where competition is irrelevant, as nice as that might | sound. The idea that innovation allows you to ignore competition | is a fairy tale. So you have to have a hypothesis for how the | industry might take shape once there is an industry. Early on, | there are many paths the evolution can take, many choices you can | make that will have an important impact on how attractive the | industry will become. Decisions you and others make over time | will begin to lock in the basic economics, making industry | structure less fluid. So it's crucial to see different paths for | how the industry might evolve, and to ask the basic questions | about the five forces, so that you can make choices that will put | the industry on the best possible path." | sunir wrote: | I loved the insight of the mistake of viewing the customer as | something to be conquered rather than a partner. | malshe wrote: | Yes but Porter never said that customers need to be conquered. | His framework says that if you have a choice, select the | customer who don't have a lot of bargaining power. | ghaff wrote: | All models are wrong. Some are useful. | | That said, I agree with at least some of the points. _Competitive | Strategy_ would seem like a very incomplete work today that (as | far as I know, it 's been years) probably doesn't pay a lot of | attention to coopetition--which may not even have been coined at | the time--and things like ecosystems. | | That said, we do still talk about competitive moats for | businesses and VCs are certainly willing to pay a lot of money to | help build those moats. | diegof79 wrote: | I compare the article with what I learned from the book | "Understanding Michael Porter", and I wonder if the article talks | about the same thing: | | > "Porter's aggressive modeling around "competition" has | misguided organizations into becoming obsessed with destroying | the competition." | | My understanding from Porter's model is that competitiveness is | defined by Product Value - Cost... a very simple concept that | doesn't involve "destroying the competition". | | A cheap computer manufacturer doesn't compete with Apple, because | the definition of product value depends on the audience. | | Now I wonder who got it wrong, me, the book, or the article. | xyzzy21 wrote: | Ah, NO... | | I'm in B2B and Porter is central to our product design and | marketing strategy. | | I'll just put it out there: the author has NEVER started a | company! | malshe wrote: | Michael Porter's article: https://hbr.org/1979/03/how- | competitive-forces-shape-strateg... ___________________________________________________________________ (page generated 2022-04-14 23:01 UTC)