Abstract

AbstractStrategic market opportunities arise either because a firm is exceptionally well placed competitively or because it recognizes the opportunity, on the basis of private information, before others. Strategic market analysis must reflect these two possible routes to attractive opportunities. Both the approaches developed by the Strategic Planning Institute (SPI) through its Profit Impact of Market Strategy (PIMS) and the Boston Consulting Group's (BCG) growth/share matrix fail to reflect the full impact of competitive expectations and risk. Analysis of PIMS data should be directed more towards generalities of limited direct economic significance whereas the BCG approach should be used mostly in the context of experience curve effects. Neither approach should dominate a full analysis of the specific nature and critical ambiguities in any strategic option.

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.