Within Industries, Some Competitors Perform Better

than Others.
Differences in Profitability W ithin Selected Industries

S e m ic o n d u c to r In d u s tr y

InteROE
l - Pharmaceutical Industry 1989

60%Te xa s Ins trum e nts

50% M o to ro la

AMD
40%

A na lo g D e vic e s
30%
N a tio na l S e m ic o nd uc to r
20%
-5 0 5 10 15 20 25
10%
O p e rating inc o m e / as s e ts , 1 9 8 8 -9 5 (% )

0%
Amgen AMP Eli Lilly Merck Mylan Pfizer
S ource: P ankaj Ghem aw at and Jan W . R ivkin, “C reating C om petitive Adva ntage ”

© 2005 Mara Lederm an, R otm an Schoo l of Ma nagem ent

1
 The U.S. Auto Industry’s Profit Pool

Exhibit 5.7 The U.S. Auto Industry’s Profit Pool

Source: Adapted by permission of Harvard Business Review. Exhibit from “A Fresh Look at Strategy” by O. Gadiesh
and J. L. Gilbert, Harvard Business Review 76, no. 3 (1998), pp. 139-48. Copyright © 1998 by the Harvard Business
School ©Publishing
Copyright Corporation,
2005 by The McGraw-Hill all rights
Companies, Inc.reserved.
All rights reserved. 2
5-22
S tru c tu re -C o n d u c t-P e rfo rm a n c e

In d u s try S tru c tu re F ir m C o n d u c t P e rfo rm a n c e

• N u m b e r o f b u y e rs • P r ic in g • E c o n p r o f it s
a n d s e lle r s • A d v e r t is in g • A c c o u n t in g
• D e g re e o f p ro d u ct • R & D p r o f it s ( r a t io s )
d if f e r e n t ia t io n • I n v e s t m e n t in
• B a r r ie r s t o e n t r y p la n t a n d • N P V /D C F
• C o s t s tru c tu re s e q u ip m e n t
• V e r t ic a l in t e g r a t io n • M V A /E V A
• A llia n c e s • T o b in ’s Q

3
The Structure-Conduct-
Performance Paradigm
• The Causal View
Market Conduct Performance
Structure

The Feedback Critique

 No one-way causal link.
 Conduct can affect market structure.
 Market performance can affect
conduct as well as market structure.

Clarke Modifications of Baye Chapter 7 4

4
 Industry, Firm, and Other Effects
Explaining Firm Performance

Exhibit 3.2

© McGraw Hill
 The Five Forces Model

The following five forces determine the profit potential of an

industry and shape a firm’s competitive strategy:

Exhibit 3.3
SOURCE: Michael E. Porter, “The five competitive forces that shape strategy,” Harvard Business
Review, January 2008.
Copyright © 2017 by McGraw-Hill Education. This is proprietary material solely for authorized instructor use. Not authorized for sale or distribution
in any manner. This document may not be copied, scanned, duplicated, forwarded, distributed, or posted on a website, in whole or part.
 Competitive Forces and Firm Strategy

• The Five Forces Model

 The classic industry analysis model --- designed to explain
variance in industry-level performance.

• Threat of Entry/Barriers to Entry

 Note: High barriers to entry means threat of new entry is low

• Power of Suppliers

• Power of Buyers

• Threat of Substitutes

• Rivalry Among Existing Competitors 3–7

 A Taxonomy of Barriers to Entry

• (1) Economies of Scale

 Product-specific economies of scale

 Lower setup costs as a percentage of total costs

 More specialized machinery and tooling (e.g., Honda)
 Minimum efficient scale (MES) is high

 Plant-specific economies of scale

 Engineers’ 2/3 rule: Since the area of a sphere or cylinder varies as

two-thirds power of volume, the cost of constructing process industry
plants can be expected to rise as two thirds power of their output
capacity. (This rule applies to petroleum refining, cement making,
iron ore reduction and steel conversion). 3–8
 A Taxonomy of Barriers to Entry

• Economies of Scale

 Multi-product economies of scale

(“economies of scope”)
 Example: Cost (Iron, Steel) < Cost (Iron) + Cost (Steel)
 Key idea: Shareable input (In this case, thermal
economies in the production of iron and steel)
 Modern examples: Aircraft, Automobiles,
Consumer electronics, Household Appliances;
Personal Computers, Software, Power Tools

 Multi-plant economies of scale

 Economies of multi-plant production, investment, and
physical distribution.
3–9
 Examples of Economies of Scope
• Aircraft: Common wing, nose, and tail components allow
several models to be leveraged using different numbers of
fuselage modules to create aircraft of different lengths and
passenger capacities by Boeing and Airbus Industries.

• Automobiles: The Honda platform was leveraged to provide

the basis for The Honda Civic sedans and the CR-V minivans.

• Consumer Electronics: Over 160 variations of the Sony

Walkman were leveraged by “mixing and matching” modular
components in a few basic system designs. (“Legos”).

10