1.
The biggest surprise about the reading was by
far the amount of strategy used in order to determine competition. Its crazy to
think of all of these different things when going into a brand new market.
2.
The part of the reading that was not explained
very well was the section on influencing balance. It merely states that a
company must come up with an offensive strategy but still remain in the
balance. Yet it doesn’t explain at all anything else.
3.
The first question I would ask the author is
about what different offensive strategies would lead to the best result while
still staying in the balance because as I stated earlier it was not explained
well. The second question I would ask is
why multifaceted rivalry has a huge debate about it even 50 years from the 1960
HBR article.
4.
The one place I would say the author was
mistaken was the park about barriers to entry. I do believe that many of these
aspect should be considered but if you did have a market changing idea I would
believe that a lot of these aspects would not apply
No comments:
Post a Comment