Porter's Five Forces

Diagram of Porter’s Five Forces Framework showing five competitive forces: Threat of New Entrants, Threat of Substitutes, Bargaining Power of Suppliers, Bargaining Power of Buyers, and Competitive Rivalry at the center. Each force includes example factors such as entry barriers, switching costs, supplier concentration, buyer power, price sensitivity, and market intensity.
Porter's Five Forces primarily addresses strategic friction by helping businesses understand the competitive landscape. It focuses on factors impacting profitability and guides strategic decisions related to market positioning and long-term viability. This framework helps address unclear direction and lack of market alignment.

Developed by Michael E. Porter in 1979, Porter's Five Forces framework is used to analyze the competitive forces that shape every industry, and helps determine an industry's weaknesses and strengths. The framework focuses on five forces that determine the competitive intensity and therefore attractiveness of a market. These forces are: competitive rivalry, threat of new entrants, threat of substitute products, bargaining power of buyers, and bargaining power of suppliers. This analysis is crucial for developing strategic positioning and understanding the competitive landscape.

Steps / Detailed Description

Identify competitive rivalry within the industry. | Analyze the threat of new entrants to the market. | Evaluate the threat of substitute products or services. | Assess the bargaining power of buyers. | Determine the bargaining power of suppliers.

Best Practices

Regularly update the analysis to reflect market changes. | Combine with other strategic tools for comprehensive insights. | Customize analysis to specific industry characteristics.

Pros

Provides a thorough understanding of industry structure. | Helps in strategic planning and market positioning. | Facilitates assessment of potential profitability in an industry.

Cons

May oversimplify the complexities of some industries. | Can be less effective in rapidly changing markets. | Focuses mainly on external factors, ignoring internal dynamics.

When to Use

When entering a new market. | When considering business expansion or diversification.

When Not to Use

In highly volatile industries where data changes frequently. | When internal factors are more significant than external ones.

Related Frameworks

Categories

Lifecycle

Not tied to a specific lifecycle stage

Scope

Scope not defined

Maturity Level

Maturity level not specified

Time to Implement

2–4 Weeks
3–6 Months
1–2 Weeks
3–6 Months
1–2 Months
3–6 Months
1–2 Weeks
Less Than 1 Day
1–2 Weeks
Longer Than 6 Months
1–2 Weeks
Longer Than 6 Months
1–2 Weeks
3–6 Months
1–2 Weeks
1–2 Weeks
1–2 Weeks
1–2 Weeks
1–2 Days
1–2 Weeks
1–2 Weeks
1–2 Weeks
1–2 Weeks
1–2 Weeks
1–2 Weeks
3–6 Months
1–2 Weeks
1–2 Weeks
1–2 Weeks
3–6 Months
1–2 Weeks
1–2 Weeks
2–4 Weeks
1–2 Weeks
1–2 Days
1–2 Weeks
Longer Than 6 Months
Longer Than 6 Months
3–6 Months
Longer Than 6 Months
Longer Than 6 Months
Longer Than 6 Months
1–2 Weeks
Longer Than 6 Months
3–6 Months
Less Than 1 Day
3–6 Months
1–2 Months
3–6 Months
Longer Than 6 Months
3–6 Months
Less Than 1 Day
1–2 Weeks
3–6 Months
3–6 Months
1–2 Weeks
3–6 Months
1–2 Weeks
1–2 Weeks
1–2 Days
1–2 Weeks
1–2 Months
Longer Than 6 Months
1–2 Weeks
Longer Than 6 Months
1–2 Weeks
3–6 Months
1–2 Weeks
Less Than 1 Day
1–2 Weeks
3–6 Months
1–2 Weeks
3–6 Months
1–2 Weeks
1–2 Weeks
Longer Than 6 Months
Less Than 1 Day
3–6 Months
Longer Than 6 Months
1–2 Months
1–2 Weeks
Longer Than 6 Months
1–2 Weeks
3–6 Months
1–2 Weeks
1–2 Weeks
3–6 Months
Less Than 1 Day
1–2 Weeks
1–2 Weeks
3–6 Months
3–6 Months
Less Than 1 Day
1–2 Weeks
Longer Than 6 Months
1–2 Months
1–2 Weeks
1–2 Weeks
1–2 Weeks
Longer Than 6 Months

Copyright Information

Autor:
Michael Porter
1979
Publication:
Harvard Business Review