Porter identifies high market share with cost leadership, citing GM as a successful practitioner of this strategy. However, GM became a market share leader in the American automobile industry due to a strategy of mark...Porter identifies high market share with cost leadership, citing GM as a successful practitioner of this strategy. However, GM became a market share leader in the American automobile industry due to a strategy of market segmentation, differentiation and a broad scope shaped during the 1920s. Porter argues that cost leadership and differentiation offer an equally viable path to competitive success. Nevertheless, a differentiation strategy based on superior quality compared to competition is more profitable than cost leadership strategy. It can lead a business to become a market share leader, and consequently even a low-cost leader. Research indicates that differentiation and cost leadership can co-exist. However, Porter insists that each generic strategy requires a different culture and a totally different philosophy. The problem is that Porter＇s generic strategies are too broad. It is not his logic that is flawed, but his basic premise that prescribes cost leadership strategy as the only route to market share leadership, and presents a narrow view of differentiation with a unique product--sold at a premium price--on the one hand, and a ＂standard, or no-frills＂ product on the other. Mintzburg （1988） says Porter＇s cost leadership strategy should be called ＂price differentiation＂： a strategy that is based on a lower price than that of the competition. He suggests that business strategy has two dimensions： differentiation and scope. Thus, setting scope aside, competitive strategy has only one component： differentiation. So, the key question is not whether to differentiate, but how？ First, make customer-perceived quality as the foundation of competitive strategy because it is far more critical to long-term success than any other factor. Second, serve the middle class by competing in the mid-price segment, offering better quality than the competition at a somewhat higher price. It is this path that can lead to market share leadership--a strategy that can be both profitable--and sustainable.展开更多
Implementing effective cost management approaches has recently gained momentum due to intense competition and increasing customer demands. Moreover, effective cost management approaches have contributed to firms＇ com...Implementing effective cost management approaches has recently gained momentum due to intense competition and increasing customer demands. Moreover, effective cost management approaches have contributed to firms＇ competitive advantage in relation to cost leadership strategy. Consequently, firms have implemented contemporary cost management systems, such as activity-based management, business process re-engineering, life-cycle costing, target costing, and theory of constraint （TOC）, to enable them to become low-cost producers and compete effectively and sustain their performance. Furthermore, focusing on cost management to improve profitability has led to the integration of activity-based costing （ABC） and TOC. Therefore, the aim of this study is to review literature and discuss how integration of ABC and TOC can result in improved and sustained cost management. While these methods have different approaches in addressing cost management, treating them as complementary cost management approaches can result in improved cost management due to improved product costing, improved cost reporting, improved product-mix decisions, and improved cycle-time management. Improvement in cost management will then result in sustained cost management. Sustained cost management is further enhanced with the investment in information customer and shareholder value technology that supports cross-functional decision making to continue creating to remain competitive in the market.展开更多
文摘Porter identifies high market share with cost leadership, citing GM as a successful practitioner of this strategy. However, GM became a market share leader in the American automobile industry due to a strategy of market segmentation, differentiation and a broad scope shaped during the 1920s. Porter argues that cost leadership and differentiation offer an equally viable path to competitive success. Nevertheless, a differentiation strategy based on superior quality compared to competition is more profitable than cost leadership strategy. It can lead a business to become a market share leader, and consequently even a low-cost leader. Research indicates that differentiation and cost leadership can co-exist. However, Porter insists that each generic strategy requires a different culture and a totally different philosophy. The problem is that Porter＇s generic strategies are too broad. It is not his logic that is flawed, but his basic premise that prescribes cost leadership strategy as the only route to market share leadership, and presents a narrow view of differentiation with a unique product--sold at a premium price--on the one hand, and a ＂standard, or no-frills＂ product on the other. Mintzburg （1988） says Porter＇s cost leadership strategy should be called ＂price differentiation＂： a strategy that is based on a lower price than that of the competition. He suggests that business strategy has two dimensions： differentiation and scope. Thus, setting scope aside, competitive strategy has only one component： differentiation. So, the key question is not whether to differentiate, but how？ First, make customer-perceived quality as the foundation of competitive strategy because it is far more critical to long-term success than any other factor. Second, serve the middle class by competing in the mid-price segment, offering better quality than the competition at a somewhat higher price. It is this path that can lead to market share leadership--a strategy that can be both profitable--and sustainable.
文摘Implementing effective cost management approaches has recently gained momentum due to intense competition and increasing customer demands. Moreover, effective cost management approaches have contributed to firms＇ competitive advantage in relation to cost leadership strategy. Consequently, firms have implemented contemporary cost management systems, such as activity-based management, business process re-engineering, life-cycle costing, target costing, and theory of constraint （TOC）, to enable them to become low-cost producers and compete effectively and sustain their performance. Furthermore, focusing on cost management to improve profitability has led to the integration of activity-based costing （ABC） and TOC. Therefore, the aim of this study is to review literature and discuss how integration of ABC and TOC can result in improved and sustained cost management. While these methods have different approaches in addressing cost management, treating them as complementary cost management approaches can result in improved cost management due to improved product costing, improved cost reporting, improved product-mix decisions, and improved cycle-time management. Improvement in cost management will then result in sustained cost management. Sustained cost management is further enhanced with the investment in information customer and shareholder value technology that supports cross-functional decision making to continue creating to remain competitive in the market.
