《国家竞争优势》 【英】迈克尔.波特

DO NOT COPY The Competitive Advantage of Nations Michael E. Porter Harvard Business Review 90211 DO NOT COPY HBR MARCH±APRIL 1990 The Competitive Advantage of Nations Michael E. Porter National prosperity is created, not inherited. It does of the patterns of competitive success in ten leading trading nations, contradict the conventional wisdomnot grow out of a country's natural endowments, its labor pool, its interest rates, or its currency's value, that guides the thinking of many companies and na- tional governmentsÐand that is pervasive today inas classical economics insists. Anation'scompetitivenessdependsonthecapacity the United States. (For more about the study, see the insert ``Patterns of National Competitive Success.'')of its industry to innovate and upgrade. Companies gain advantage against the world's best competitors According to prevailing thinking, labor costs, inter- est rates, exchange rates, and economies of scale arebecause of pressure and challenge. They benefit from having strong domestic rivals, aggressive home-based the most potent determinants of competitiveness. In companies, the words of the day are merger, alliance,suppliers, and demanding local customers. In a world of increasingly global competition, na- strategic partnerships, collaboration, and suprana- tional globalization. Managers are pressing for moretions have become more, not less, important. As the basis of competition has shifted more and more to government support for particular industries. Among governments, there is a growing tendency to experi-the creation and assimilation of knowledge, the role of the nation has grown. Competitive advantage is ment with various policies intended to promote na- tional competitivenessÐfrom efforts to managecreated and sustained through a highly localized pro- cess. Differences in national values, culture, eco- exchange rates to new measures to manage trade to policies to relax antitrustÐwhich usually end upnomic structures, institutions, and histories all contribute to competitive success. There are striking only undermining it. (See the insert ``What Is Na- tional Competitiveness?'')differences in the patterns of competitiveness in every country; no nation can or will be competitive These approaches, now much in favor in both companies and governments, are flawed. They funda-in every or even most industries. Ultimately, nations succeed in particular industries because their home mentally misperceive the true sources of competi- tive advantage. Pursuing them, with all their short-environment is the most forward-looking, dynamic, and challenging. term appeal, will virtually guarantee that the United StatesÐor any other advanced nationÐneverThese conclusions, the product of a four-year study achieves real and sustainable competitive advantage. We need a new perspective and new toolsÐan ap- Harvard Business School professor Michael E. Porter is the author proach to competitiveness that grows directly out of of Competitive Strategy (Free Press, 1980) and Competitive Ad- an analysis of internationally successful industries,vantage (Free Press, 1985) and will publish The Competitive Ad- without regard for traditional ideology or current in-vantage of Nations (Free Press) in May 1990. tellectual fashion. We need to know, very simply,Author's note: Michael J. Enright, who served as project coordina- tor for this study, has contributed valuable suggestions. what works and why. Then we need to apply it. Copyright q 1990 by the President and Fellows of Harvard College. All rights reserved. DO NOT COPY Patterns of National Competitive Success To investigate why nations gain competitive advan- tries or industry groups for detailed study; we examined tage in particular industries and the implications for many more in less detail. We went back as far as neces- company strategy and national economies, I conducted sary to understand how and why the industry began in a four-year study of ten important trading nations: Den- the nation, how it grew, when and why companies from mark, Germany, Italy, Japan, Korea, Singapore, Sweden, the nation developed international competitive advan- Switzerland, the United Kingdom, and the United tage, and the process by which competitive advantage States. I was assisted by a team of more than 30 research- had been either sustained or lost. The resulting case ers, most of whom were natives of and based in the histories fall short of the work of a good historian in nation they studied. The researchers all used the same their level of detail, but they do provide insight into methodology. the development of both the industry and the nation's Three nationsÐthe United States, Japan, and Ger- economy. manyÐare the world's leading industrial powers. The We chose a sample of industries for each nation that other nations represent a variety of population sizes, represented the most important groups of competitive government policies toward industry, social philoso- industries in the economy. The industries studied ac- phies, geographical sizes, and locations. Together, the counted for a large share of total exports in each nation: ten nations accounted for fully 50% of total world ex- more than 20% of total exports in Japan, Germany, and ports in 1985, the base year for statistical analysis. Switzerland, for example, and more than 40% in South Most previous analyses of national competitiveness Korea. We studied some of the most famous and have focused on single nation or bilateral comparisons. important international success storiesÐGerman high- By studying nations with widely varying characteristics performance autos and chemicals, Japanese semi-con- and circumstances, this study sought to separate the ductors and VCRs, Swiss banking and pharmaceuticals, fundamental forces underlying national competitive ad- Italian footwear and textiles, U.S. commercial aircraft vantage from the idiosyncratic ones. and motion picturesÐand some relatively obscure but In each nation, the study consisted of two parts. The highly competitive industriesÐSouth Korean pianos, first identified all industries in which the nation's com- Italian ski boots, and British biscuits. We also added a panies were internationally successful, using available few industries because they appeared to be paradoxes: statistical data, supplementary published sources, and Japanese home demand for Western-character typewrit- field interviews. We defined a nation's industry as inter- ers is nearly nonexistent, for example, but Japan holds nationally successful if it possessed competitive advan- a strong export and foreign investment position in the tage relative to the best worldwide competitors. Many industry. We avoided industries that were highly depen- measures of competitive advantage, such as reported dent on natural resources: such industries do not form profitability, can be misleading. We chose as the best the backbone of advanced economies, and the capacity indicators the presence of substantial and sustained ex- to compete in them is more explicable using classical ports to a wide array of other nations and/or significant theory. We did, however, include a number of more outbound foreign investment based on skills and assets technologically intensive, natural-resource-related in- created in the home country. A nation was considered dustries such as newsprint and agricultural chemicals. the home base for a company if it was either a locally The sample of nations and industries offers a rich owned, indigenous enterprise or managed autono- empirical foundation for developing and testing the new mously although owned by a foreign company or invest- theory of how countries gain competitive advantage. ors. We then created a profile of all the industries in The accompanying article concentrates on the determi- which each nation was internationally successful at nants of competitive advantage in individual industries three points in time: 1971, 1978, and 1985. The pattern and also sketches out some of the study's overall impli- of competitive industries in each economy was far from cations for government policy and company strategy. A random: the task was to explain it and how it had fuller treatment in my book, The Competitive Advan- changed over time. Of particular interest were the con- tage of Nations, develops the theory and its implica- nections or relationships among the nation's competi- tions in greater depth and provides many additional tive industries. examples. It also contains detailed descriptions of the In the second part of the study, we examined the nations we studied and the future prospects for their history of competition in particular industries to under- economies. stand how competitive advantage was created. On the ÐMichael E. Porter basis of national profiles, we selected over 100 indus- 74 HARVARD BUSINESS REVIEW March±April 1990 DO NOT COPY cumbered by blinding assumptions or conventionalHow Companies Succeed in wisdom.International Markets This is why innovators are often outsiders from a different industry or a different country. Innovation may come from a new company, whose founder hasAround the world, companies that have achieved international leadership employ strategies that differ a nontraditional background or was simply not ap- preciated in an older, established company. Or thefrom each other in every respect. But while every successful company will employ its own particular capacity for innovation may come into an existing company through senior managers who are new tostrategy, the underlying mode of operationÐthe character and trajectory of all successful compa- the particular industry and thus more able to per- ceive opportunities and more likely to pursue them.niesÐis fundamentally the same. Companies achieve competitive advantage Or innovation may occur as a company diversifies, bringing new resources, skills, or perspectives to an-through acts of innovation. They approach innova- tion in its broadest sense, including both new other industry. Or innovations may come from another nation with different circumstances or dif-technologies and new ways of doing things. They perceive a new basis for competing or find better ferent ways of competing. With few exceptions, innovation is the result ofmeans for competing in old ways. Innovation can be manifested in a new product design, a new produc- unusual effort. The company that successfully im- plements a new or better way of competing pursuestion process, a new marketing approach, or a new way of conducting training. Much innovation is its approach with dogged determination, often in the face of harsh criticism and tough obstacles. In fact,mundane and incremental, depending more on a cu- mulation of small insights and advances than on a to succeed, innovation usually requires pressure, ne- cessity, and even adversity: the fear of loss oftensingle, major technological breakthrough. It often involves ideas that are not even ``new''Ðideas that proves more powerful than the hope of gain. Once a company achieves competitive advantagehave been around, but never vigorously pursued. It always involves investments in skill and knowledge, through an innovation, it can sustain it only through relentless improvement. Almost any advantageas well as in physical assets and brand reputations. Some innovations create competitive advantage by can be imitated. Korean companies have already matched the ability of their Japanese rivals to mass-perceiving an entirely new market opportunity or by serving a market segment that others have ignored. produce standard color televisions and VCRs; Brazil- ian companies have assembled technology andWhen competitors are slow to respond, such innova- tion yields competitive advantage. For instance, in designs comparable to Italian competitors in casual leather footwear.industries such as autos and home electronics, Japa- nese companies gained their initial advantage by em- Competitors will eventually and inevitably over- take any company that stops improving and innovat-phasizing smaller, more compact, lower capacity models that foreign competitors disdained as less ing. Sometimes early-mover advantages such as customer relationships, scale economies in existingprofitable, less important, and less attractive. In international markets, innovations that yield technologies, or the loyalty of distribution channels are enough to permit a stagnant company to retaincompetitive advantage anticipate both domestic and foreign needs. For example, as international concern its entrenched position for years or even decades. But sooner or later, more dynamic rivals will find a wayfor product safety has grown, Swedish companies like Volvo, Atlas Copco, and AGA have succeeded to innovate around these advantages or create a bet- ter or cheaper way of doing things. Italian applianceby anticipating the market opportunity in this area. On the other hand, innovations that respond to con- producers, which competed successfully on the basis of cost in selling midsize and compact appliancescerns or circumstances that are peculiar to the home market can actually retard international competitive through large retail chains, rested too long on this initial advantage. By developing more differentiatedsuccess. The lure of the huge U.S. defense market, for instance, has diverted the attention of U.S. materials products and creating strong brand franchises, Ger- man competitors have begun to gain ground.and machine-tool companies from attractive, global commercial markets. Ultimately, the only way to sustain a competitive advantage is to upgrade itÐto move to more sophisti-Information plays a large role in the process of innovation and improvementÐinformation that ei- cated types. This is precisely what Japanese auto- makers have done. They initially penetrated foreignther is not available to competitors or that they do not seek. Sometimes it comes from simple invest- markets with small, inexpensive compact cars of ad- equate quality and competed on the basis of lowerment in research and development or market re- search; more often, it comes from effort and from labor costs. Even while their labor-cost advantage persisted, however, the Japanese companies were up-openness and from looking in the right place unen- HARVARD BUSINESS REVIEW March±April 1990 75 DO NOT COPY What Is National Competitiveness? National competitiveness has become one of the cen- held view that powerful unions undermine competitive tral preoccupations of government and industry in every advantage, unions are strong in Germany and SwedenÐ nation. Yet for all the discussion, debate, and writing and both countries boast internationally preeminent on the topic, there is still no persuasive theory to explain companies. national competitiveness. What is more, there is not Clearly, none of these explanations is fully satisfac- even an accepted definition of the term ``competitive- tory; none is sufficient by itself to rationalize the com- ness'' as applied to a nation. While the notion of a com- petitive position of industries within a national border. petitive company is clear, the notion of a competitive Each contains some truth; but a broader, more complex nation is not. set of forces seems to be at work. Some see national competitiveness as a macroeco- The lack of a clear explanation signals an even more nomic phenomenon, driven by variables such as ex- fundamental question. What is a ``competitive'' nation change rates, interest rates, and government deficits. in the first place? Is a ``competitive'' nation one where But Japan, Italy, and South Korea have all enjoyed rap- every company or industry is competitive? No nation idly rising living standards despite budget deficits; Ger- meets this test. Even Japan has large sectors of its econ- many and Switzerland despite appreciating currencies; omy that fall far behind the world's best competitors. and Italy and Korea despite high interest rates. Is a ``competitive'' nation one whose exchange rate Others argue that competitiveness is a function of makes its goods price competitive in international mar- cheap and abundant labor. But Germany, Switzerland, kets? Both Germany and Japan have enjoyed remarkable and Sweden have all prospered even with high wages gains in their standards of livingÐand experienced sus- and labor shortages. Besides, shouldn't a nation seek tained periods of strong currency and rising prices. Is a higher wages for its workers as a goal of competitive- ``competitive'' nation one with a large positive balance ness? of trade? Switzerland has roughly balanced trade; Italy Another view connects competitiveness with bounti- has a chronic trade deficitÐboth nations enjoy strongly ful natural resources. But how, then, can one explain rising national income. Is a ``competitive'' nation one the success of Germany, Japan, Switzerland, Italy, and with low labor costs? India and Mexico both have low South KoreaÐcountries with limited natural resources? wages and low labor costsÐbut neither seems an attrac- More recently, the argument has gained favor that tive industrial model. competitiveness is driven by government policy: tar- The only meaningful concept of competitiveness at geting, protection, import promotion, and subsidies the national level is productivity. The principal goal of have propelled Japanese and South Korean auto, steel, a nation is to produce a high and rising standard of living shipbuilding, and semiconductor industries into global for its citizens. The ability to do so depends on the preeminence. But a closer look reveals a spotty record. productivity with which a nation's labor and capital In Italy, government intervention has been ineffectualÐ are employed. Productivity is the value of the output but Italy has experienced a boom in world export share produced by a unit of labor or capital. Productivity de- second only to Japan. In Germany, direct government pends on both the quality and features of products intervention in exporting industries is rare. And even (which determine the prices that they can command) in Japan and South Korea, government's role in such and the efficiency with which they are produced. Pro- important industries as facsimile machines, copiers, ro- ductivity is the prime determinant of a nation's long- botics, and advanced materials has been modest; some run standard of living; it is the root cause of national of the most frequently cited examples, such as sewing per capita income. The productivity of human resources machines, steel, and shipbuilding, are now quite dated. determines employee wages; the productivity with A final popular explanation for national competitive- which capital is employed determines the return it ness is differences in management practices, including earns for its holders. management-labor relations. The problem here, how- A nation's standard of living depends on the capacity ever, is that different industries require different ap- of its companies to achieve high levels of productivityÐ proaches to management. The successful management and to increase productivity over time. Sustained pro- practices governing small, private, and loosely orga- ductivity growth requires that an economy continually nized Italian family companies in footwear, textiles, upgrade itself. A nation's companies must relentlessly and jewelry, for example, would produce a management improve productivity in existing industries by raising disaster if applied to German chemical or auto compa- product quality, adding desirable features, improving nies, Swiss pharmaceutical makers, or American air- product technology, or boosting production efficiency. craft producers. Nor is it possible to generalize about They must develop the necessary capabilities to com- management-labor relations.