Pim's Principles


Since 1972 the PIMS (Profit Impact of Market Strategy) Program, working with an extraordinary data base of 450 companies and 3,000 business units, has developed a set of principles for business strategy so effective and consistent that they must now be considered part of the basic education of managers in a free-enterprise system. In this important new book, authors Buzzell and Gale summarize and explain PIMS methodology and applications in by far the most comprehensive and penetrating look at PIMS yet published,...
See more details below
Available through our Marketplace sellers.
Other sellers (Hardcover)
  • All (22) from $1.99   
  • New (2) from $69.36   
  • Used (20) from $1.99   
Sort by
Page 1 of 1
Showing All
Note: Marketplace items are not eligible for any BN.com coupons and promotions
Seller since 2008

Feedback rating:



New — never opened or used in original packaging.

Like New — packaging may have been opened. A "Like New" item is suitable to give as a gift.

Very Good — may have minor signs of wear on packaging but item works perfectly and has no damage.

Good — item is in good condition but packaging may have signs of shelf wear/aging or torn packaging. All specific defects should be noted in the Comments section associated with each item.

Acceptable — item is in working order but may show signs of wear such as scratches or torn packaging. All specific defects should be noted in the Comments section associated with each item.

Used — An item that has been opened and may show signs of wear. All specific defects should be noted in the Comments section associated with each item.

Refurbished — A used item that has been renewed or updated and verified to be in proper working condition. Not necessarily completed by the original manufacturer.

0029044308 New. Has the slightest of shelf wear (like you might see in a major bookstore chain). Looks like an interesting title! We provide domestic tracking upon request, ... provide personalized customer service and want you to have a great experience purchasing from us. 100% satisfaction guaranteed and thank you for your consideration. Read more Show Less

Ships from: Chicago, IL

Usually ships in 1-2 business days

  • Standard, 48 States
  • Standard (AK, HI)
Seller since 2008

Feedback rating:


Condition: New

Ships from: Chicago, IL

Usually ships in 1-2 business days

  • Standard, 48 States
  • Standard (AK, HI)
Page 1 of 1
Showing All
Sort by
Sending request ...


Since 1972 the PIMS (Profit Impact of Market Strategy) Program, working with an extraordinary data base of 450 companies and 3,000 business units, has developed a set of principles for business strategy so effective and consistent that they must now be considered part of the basic education of managers in a free-enterprise system. In this important new book, authors Buzzell and Gale summarize and explain PIMS methodology and applications in by far the most comprehensive and penetrating look at PIMS yet published, to help managers understand and predict how strategic choices and market conditions will affect business performance.

The use of PIMS to explore the general relationship between strategy and performance is accepted worldwide as a proven method to produce greater effectiveness for individual firms and the economy as a whole. Taking into account three kinds of information -- market conditions, competitive position, and financial and operating performance -- PIMS rejects the notion that there are "formulas" for management decision-making or that "easy wins" can be had by applying general rules to specific problems. Instead, the PIMS approach is based on studies of the actual experiences of businesses that have been documented in a unique data base. The principles drawn from this data base provide a solid foundation for the situation-specific analysis that managers must perform to arrive at good decisions.

Unlike Portfolio Planning methods, PIMS explores many possible dimensions of strategy and market environment, such as investment intensity, product or service quality, labor productivity, and vertical integration, all of which have powerful effects on business performance.For example, PIMS shows how the quality edge boosts performance two ways and earns superior profit margins. It verifies how market share and profitability are strongly related but also shows why that does not mean that every business can or should strive to increase its share, as demonstrated by the disastrous "kamikaze attack" launched in the early 1980s by Yamaha on the market leader Honda. Most important, it analyzes why forecasts of cash flow based solely on the growth-share matrix are often misleading and why, in fact, many so-called "dog" and "question mark" businesses actually generate cash, while many "cash cows" are dry.

Finally, Buzzell and Gale discuss the PIMS measure of "long-term value enhancement," which has been applied to more than 600 businesses in the PIMS data base over seven or more years, to uncover any conflicts between maximizing current profitability and building long-term values. Whether it's looking at market leaders or followers, picking profitable markets, or developing well-positioned business clusters whose synergy creates advantages for lasting shareholder value, PIMS is made simple and understandable in this incisive, comprehensive volume that is an invaluable addition to every personal and business library.

A guide to the powerful, proven method of strategic planning for top profitability. Illustrated.

Read More Show Less

Product Details

  • ISBN-13: 9780029044308
  • Publisher: Free Press
  • Publication date: 8/10/1987
  • Edition description: New Edition
  • Pages: 322
  • Product dimensions: 6.48 (w) x 9.54 (h) x 1.12 (d)

Table of Contents



1. Are There Any General Strategy Principles?
2. Linking Strategies to Performance
3. Learning from Experience: The PIMS Approach
4. Picking Profitable Markets
5. Market Position and Profitability
6. Quality Is King
7. Capital Intensity Can Upset the Applecart
8. When Does Vertical Integration Pay Off?
9. Strategies for Market Leaders and Followers
10. Market Evolution and Competitive Strategy
11. Managing for Tomorrow
12. Integrating Strategies for Clusters of Businesses
Appendix A: The PIMS Data Bases
Appendix B: Statistical Methods
Notes and References
Select Bibliography of Publications Dealing with PIMS
Name Index
Subject Index

Read More Show Less

First Chapter

Chapter 1 Are There Any General Strategy Principles?

The central theme of this book is that we can relate business strategies to performance by studying past experience. Every manager, of course, learns from his or her own experience, from that of associates, and by studying competitors' actions. Besides learning from these direct sources, we believe that general relationships between strategy and performance can also be found by analyzing the experience of many companies across a wide variety of industries. This is the kind of research that we and our colleagues at the Strategic Planning Institute have been doing since The PIMS Profit Impact of Market Strategy Program was initiated in 1972. Since that time, more than 450 companies have contributed information to us, documenting the strategies and financial results of nearly 3,000 strategic business units SBUs for periods that range from 2 to 12 years. The data base available for study covers large and small companies, markets in North America, Europe, and elsewhere, and a wide variety of products and services, ranging from candy to heavy capital goods to financial services.

By exploring the actual experiences of this vast array of businesses, we believe that we and our co-workers have succeeded in showing important linkages between strategies and results in different market and competitive settings. In this book, we summarize the principal lessons that have been learned from the PIMS research, and from its application since the early 1970s to hundreds of real-life situations. We have also tried to integrate our PIMS-based work with the ideas and research findings of others, including such authorities as Peter Drucker and Michael Porter and the empirical investigations of the Federal Trade Commission's Line of Business research program.

We believe that the general principles of strategy outlined in this book should be included in the basic education of managers in free-enterprise economies. These principles do not provide formulas for resolving specific business issues, any more than the general principles of hydraulics or thermodynamics do for specific engineering projects. But they can provide a foundation for the situation-specific analysis that is always needed to arrive at good decisions. In this way, we believe that our explorations of general relationships between strategy and performance can contribute to greater effectiveness for individual firms and for the economy as a whole.

The PIMS Approach

How can "strategy principles" be discovered? The approach we have used in the PIMS Program has been that of documenting the actual experiences of many businesses, operating in many different kinds of market and competitive settings. For each of these businesses we have collected three kinds of information:

* A description of the market conditions in which the business operates. These include such things as the distribution channels used by the SBU, the number of its customers, and their size, and rates of market growth and inflation.

* The business unit's competitive position in its marketplace. Measures of competitive position include market share, relative quality, prices and costs relative to competition, and degree of vertical integration relative to competition.

* Measures of the SBU's financial and operating performance, on an annual basis, over periods ranging from 2 to 12 years.

By analyzing these kinds of information for a sufficiently large number of business units, we can find common patterns in the relationships among them. To cite a simple example: if we compare businesses that typically sell to their customers in large average transaction amounts over $1,000 with those that sell in smaller amounts, we find a substantial difference in average profitability. Businesses in the first group have an average pretax rate of return on investment ROI of about 21%, while the average ROI of those with smaller average transactions is 27%.

It is not enough, however, to simply observe a difference in the profitability of two groups of businesses. We must also ask whether the difference makes sense. Why should profitability be higher when sales are made in small amounts? In this instance, the reason is fairly obvious: when customers buy big-ticket products, or large quantities of products, they are likely to bargain more aggressively, and to shop around, because the potential savings are worth some effort. For small purchases, buyers are more likely to follow some kind of purchasing routine, such as sticking with the same supplier or selecting a known brand. Compare your own last purchase of an automobile with your last purchase of batteries. The impact of purchase amount and other aspects of customer buying patterns on performance are discussed in more detail in Chapter 4.

Our effort to discover and document strategy principles, then, involves both statistical analysis and the application of logic to find differences in business performance that are both significant and sensible. Sometimes the rationale for a principle is derived from economic theory: we investigated the linkage between market share and profitability, for example, because theory led us to expect that economies of scale would influence performance in most situations. In addition to formal economic theory, we have been guided by the judgments and beliefs of the many experienced managers who have participated in the design of The PIMS Program and the work that preceded it in the 1960s at the General Electric Company.

Key Differences Between PIMS and Portfolio Planning

Many business executives, management consultants, and academics in the field of strategic management view PIMS as a variant of portfolio planning. From this perspective, a PIMS-based appraisal of a business or collection of businesses is an alternative -- or sometimes a supplement -- to an evaluation in which businesses are classified according to their positions in a portfolio matrix or grid.

Portfolio classification systems come in a variety of shapes and sizes. The simplest one is the Growth-Share matrix popularized by the Boston Consulting Group in the early 1970s. Others include the so-called General Electric/McKinsey Attractiveness-Position matrix and the Competitive Position-Life Cycle classification scheme developed by Arthur D. Little, Inc. While there are important differences among these and other portfolio systems, the same rationale underlies all of them. As summarized by Richard Bettis and William Hall, the basic idea of assigning businesses to portfolio categories is that:

"...the position or box that a business occupies within the matrix should determine the strategic mission and the general characteristics of the strategy for the business."

In one form or another, portfolio planning methods are now widely used by corporations, especially by large and diversified ones, in the United States and other industrialized countries. According to a 1980 survey of large American companies by Phillipe Haspeslagh, more than half of them used portfolio planning systems. Over the years, the process of discussing, using, and appraising the portfolio approach has generated a new vocabulary for managers, consultants, and business school students, one that features such now-familiar metaphors as "dogs," "cash cows," and "milking strategies."

The logic of the approach we and our associates have used in assembling and analyzing the PIMS data base is similar to that of the popular portfolio approaches in one basic and important respect. We all take as a common starting point the notion that reasonable financial objectives for a business, and at least some of the general characteristics of the strategy it should adopt, depend on 1 its strategic position, and 2 the characteristics of its marketplace.

There are, however, some vital differences between the PIMS approach and portfolio classification systems. For one thing, portfolio systems attempt to explain business performance in terms of just a few key factors. The Growth-Share matrix, as its name implies, assigns businesses to one of four groups based on only two characteristics: market growth rate and relative market share. All of the many other things that affect profitability are implicitly ignored. In contrast, the PIMS Program was designed, from its inception, to explore many possible dimensions of strategy and of the market environment that might influence performance. We have, for instance, shown that investment intensity, product or service quality relative to that of competitors, labor productivity, and vertical integration -- among other strategic factors -- have powerful effects on business performance. None of these dimensions of strategy is included in the widely-used portfolio classification systems.

A second big difference between PIMS and portfolio planning systems is that we have assembled and used a data base to determine how strategies affect results under different circumstances. This data base includes many different kinds of businesses operating in a wide variety of industries and countries. Only by investigating varied types of situations, we believe, can we or anyone else arrive at meaningful conclusions about competitive strategy. What works in one situation may be disastrous in another. Put another way, all "dogs" should not be treated alike, and neither should all "cash cows."

The Reaction Against Strategic Planning

Portfolio planning, and theoretical approaches to planning more generally, became faddish during the period from the early seventies up to the early eighties. Planning consultants and corporate planning staffs grew rapidly in number, size, and power. Perhaps inevitably, a reaction against this movement has taken place. As Kenneth Andrews put it in a 1984 article:

As with all enthusiasms that have swept the management community, a backlash has developed against strategic planning.

The backlash cited by Andrews has led to wholesale reductions in planning staffs, changes in planning procedures, and shifts in the kinds of work done by the consultants who popularized the new view of strategy a decade earlier. "Bashing" portfolio planning has become almost as much of a fad as the approach was in the first place.

Among the criticisms that have been levelled against formalized strategy analysis, one is of particular relevance here. Strategy consultants, it has been claimed, have misled managers by making recommendations that are based on excessively broad generalizations or "principles." Some commentators have gone so far as to suggest that there are no valid generalizations about strategy at all. Michael Lubatkin and Michael Pitts raised this issue in an article comparing what they termed the "policy perspective" with the "PIMS perspective." As they see it, the policy perspective assumes that "...no two businesses are exactly alike...there can [therefore] be few, if any, specific formulas for achieving competitive advantage." They go on to suggest that the "PIMS Perspective" involves a mechanistic application of formulas to complex management problems, with predictably unhappy consequences.

We should acknowledge that criticisms like these are, to some extent, reactions against the over-enthusiastic and oversimplified claims made by some advocates of PIMS and of other generalized approaches to strategy. When PIMS research results were first reported publicly in the mid-1970s, the whole idea of generalizing about strategy was new. Inevitably, in this first wave of enthusiasm for theories of strategic management, ideas were oversimplified and excessive claims were made. The same cycle of overselling and unrealistic expectations, followed by disillusionment and debunking, occurred a generation earlier when quantitative methods "operations research" were first applied extensively to business problems.

Like those who have criticized PIMS and portfolio planning, we reject the notion that there are "formulas" for management decision-making or that "easy wins" can be had by applying general rules to specific problems. We hope we have avoided any appearance of such an oversimplified approach in this book. We do not claim to have discovered universal and precise "laws of strategy," like those of physics. But, once again, we suggest that there are general relationships that can provide valuable guidance to managers. It is just as much an oversimplification to say that every situation is unique as it is to say that they all fall into a few general categories.

Our view, then, is that there are principles that can help managers understand and predict how strategic choices and market conditions will affect business performance. Some of these principles apply to virtually all kinds of businesses, while others apply only to specific types or under certain conditions. None of them constitutes a complete formula or prescription for any individual case because there are always situation-specific factors to consider in addition to the more general ones. The general principles must be calibrated to fit the distinctive features of a particular situation, and elements of the situation that are not covered by any general principle must also be taken into account.

Strategy Principles: Some Examples

To illustrate what we mean by strategy principles, and to give a preview of some of the topics that are explored in subsequent chapters, we summarize here a half-dozen of the most important linkages between strategy and performance.

1. In the long run, the most important single factor affecting a business unit's performance is the quality of its products and services, relative to those of competitors. A quality edge boosts performance in two ways:

* In the short run, superior quality yields increased profits via premium prices. As Frank Perdue, the well-known chicken grower, put it: "Customers will go out of their way to buy a superior product, and you can charge them a toll for the trip." Consistent with Perdue's theory, PIMS businesses that ranked in the top third on relative quality sold their products or services, on average, at prices 5-6% higher relative to competition than those in the bottom third.

* In the longer term, superior and/or improving relative quality is the most effective way for a business to grow. Quality leads to both market expansion and gains in market share. The resulting growth in volume means that a superior-quality competitor gains scale advantages over rivals. As a result, even when there are short-run costs connected with improving quality, over a period of time these costs are usually offset by scale economies. Evidence of this is the fact that, on average, businesses with superior quality products have costs about equal to those of their leading competitors. As long as their selling prices are not out of line, they continue to grow while still earning superior profit margins.

The linkages between relative quality and business performance are shown in Exhibit 1-1. As the exhibit suggests, businesses usually achieve quality advantages first by innovating in product/service design and later via product improvements. Investments in quality, when successful, lead to gains in volume that provide scale economies.

We should emphasize that the sequence depicted in Exhibit 1-1 represents what happens on average, as reflected in the PIMS data base. Not all efforts to improve quality pay off, and even when they do the added costs may exceed the benefits. In most cases, however, quality strategies do pay off.

While the importance of quality has come to be widely recognized by American and European executives in the 1980s, there has been little real evidence to back up such claims as Philip Crosby's in the title of his best-selling book, Quality Is Free. The experience of the businesses in the PIMS data base do support Crosby's generalizations, and also show how quality contributes to growth as well as to profitability. These relationships are examined in greater detail in Chapter 6.

2. Market share and profitability are strongly related. As shown in Exhibit 1-2, business units with very large market shares -- over 50% of their served markets -- enjoy rates of return more than three times greater than small-share SBUs those that serve under 10% of their markets.

The share-profitability relationship has been questioned by some observers who claim that it is largely spurious. By this they mean that both a strong market position and high ROI are reflections of other factors, notably management skill or luck. It is true that part of the profit premium earned by large-share businesses can be explained in terms of factors that usually accompany a strong competitive position -- especially superior relative quality. But when we take quality as well as some 20 other market and strategic factors into account, market share still has a strong positive impact on profitability. Its net effect is about 3 1/2 points of ROI for every 10 points of market share See Chapter 5 for further discussion.

The primary reason for the market share-profitability linkage, apart from the connection with relative quality, is that large-share businesses benefit from scale economies. They simply have lower per-unit costs than their smaller competitors. These cost advantages are typically much smaller than those once claimed by over-enthusiastic proponents of "experience curve pricing strategies," but they are nevertheless substantial and are directly reflected in higher profit margins.

The fact that market share and profitability go together does not mean that every business can or should strive to increase its share! The costs attached to a share-building campaign may be prohibitive, especially if the primary means used is price-cutting. A vivid example of this was the kamikaze attack launched by Yamaha in the early 1980s on Honda, the world market leader in motorcycles. Yamaha's president, Hisao Koike, was determined to overtake Honda and tried to do so by cutting prices, introducing new models, and advertising heavily. The end result was a crushing burden of debt, massive lay-offs, and ultimately Koike's dismissal.

While the costs of gaining share may exceed the payoffs, this is not always the case. Indeed, most of the PIMS businesses that have improved their market-share positions also enjoyed rising profitability! We explore the subject of share-building strategies further in Chapter 9.

3. High-investment intensity acts as a powerful drag on profitability. Investment-intensive businesses are those that employ a great deal of capital per dollar of sales, per dollar of value added, or per employee.

Whichever of these measures is used, high investment intensity -- in the form of either fixed assets or working capital -- usually leads to lower rates of return. Exhibit 1-3 demonstrates the impact of this strategic factor, measured by the ratio of total investment to sales adjusted for differences in plant capacity utilization. As investment intensity rises, pretax profit margins on sales change only modestly. Because the investment base is rising, ROI falls steadily and sharply. The average rate of return for the most capital-intensive businesses is less than half that earned by the low capital intensity SBUs.

The profit-depressing effect of high capital intensity is particularly important because:

* None of the widely-used portfolio planning systems recognizes the impact of investment intensity on profitability.
* The popular notion of re-industrializing American and European manufacturing industry involves massive new investments in plant and equipment. Leading companies in such industries as automobiles, steel, and machine tools are attempting to regain their competitiveness through mechanization. Will these efforts drive their rates of return down instead of up?

Managers, of course, do not pursue capital intensity for its own sake. They make decisions or adopt policies, however, that result in increased capital intensity. They add capacity, mechanize production processes, and liberalize credit terms or inventory limits, all in the hope of increasing sales or lowering costs. When these kinds of decisions lead to higher ratios of investment to sales, the explanation sometimes is inaccurate forecasting anticipated sales gains don't materialize, and sometimes competitive retaliation. Whatever the mechanisms at work, however, the fact is that when capital intensity rises, ROI usually falls.

The fact that high capital intensity tends to depress profitability does not mean that managers should shun new capital investments. Even a large addition to a business unit's investment base need not affect capital intensity adversely, as long as sales and value added grow commensurately. Furthermore, it may be desirable to accept a reduction in the average rate of return on investment as long as the ROI on a particular incremental investment exceeds the applicable cost of capital.

For further discussion of the interplay between investment policy and performance, see Chapter 7.

4. Many so-called "dog" and "question mark" businesses generate cash, while many "cash cows" are dry. The guiding principle of the growth-share matrix approach to planning is that cash flows largely depend on market growth and competitive position your share relative to that of your largest competitor. Thus, SBUs with dominant shares of static or declining markets should be cash generators, while those with small shares of growing markets should use much cash. The simplicity of this alleged principle makes it appealing as a foundation for planning. The problem is that it is often wrong.

Our analyses, and PIMS-based research by others, show that while market growth and relative share are linked to cash flows, many other factors also influence this dimension of performance. As a result, forecasts of cash flow based solely on the growth-share matrix are often misleading. Some evidence on this point is shown in Exhibit 1-4: here, we show the percentages of businesses with various growthshare positions that were net-cash generators. Net cash flow equals after-tax income, plus depreciation, plus or minus the net change in a unit's investment base. More than half of the "question marks," and six out of ten "dogs," were cash generators! Conversely, more than one in four "star" businesses those with top-ranking market shares in growing markets, and almost as high a proportion of "cash cows," were actually net cash users.

The reason for these deviations from normal cash flow performance is that growth and relative share are just two of a long list of factors that influence cash flows. In fact, cash flow is affected by essentially the same market and strategic factors that determine profitability. These factors are outlined in Chapter 3, and many of them are explored in greater detail in subsequent chapters.

5. Vertical integration is a profitable strategy for some kinds of businesses, but not for others. This "general principle" is one of many that reflects a contingent relationship between strategy and performance. Whether increased vertical integration helps or hurts depends on the situation, quite apart from the question of the cost of achieving it.

Exhibit 1-5 shows how ROI varies with vertical integration for SBUs with different market share positions. For small-share businesses, ROI is highest when the degree of vertical integration is Iow. But for businesses with average or above-average share positions, ROI is highest when vertical integration is either low or high, and lowest in the middle!

The complex linkage between vertical integration and profitability reflects several things. For one, increased vertical integration usually leads to higher capital intensity. This poses major problems for small-share businesses because they may have difficulty in achieving a minimum efficient scale of operations at each of several vertically-linked stages. A small producer of electronic equipment, for example, cannot utilize a high enough volume of components to justify a captive source of microprocessors. Large-share businesses, like IBM and AT&T, can and do produce their own components profitably.

The pros and cons of vertical integration are explored further in Chapter 8.

6. Most of the strategic factors that boost ROI also contribute to long-term value. Much of our work with PIMS has been directed toward explaining differences in business unit profitability, measured either in terms of profit margins on sales or ROI. While we have used 4-year average profit figures to minimize the impact of annual ups and downs, we could still be and have been accused of aiding and abetting the over-emphasis on short-run results for which American managers have been so widely criticized. To avoid this, we have developed a measure of long-term value enhancement and applied it to the more than 600 businesses in the PIMS data base for which we have at least 7 years of information. Our value enhancement measure rates performance on the basis of discounted cash flows plus the net change in a business unit's market value, using a stock market valuation model. The measure is explained in detail in Chapter 11. Using this kind of measure enables us to give due credit to businesses that, in order to strengthen their strategic positions, invested in such things as new products or quality improvement, often at the expense of short-term profits.

To what extent is there a conflict between maximizing current profitability and building long-term value? Exhibit 1-6 shows how the two measures are related. For each business, we calculated average ROI over a 5-year planning horizon using 2 earlier years as a base period. Then, we constructed an index of value enhancement that includes both discounted cash flows for 5 years and the discounted market value of the business at the end of the period. Our index is defined as the ratio of total value DCF plus future market value to an SBU's beginning market value.

As Exhibit 1-6 shows, businesses with high ROIs usually also performed well on the long-term value enhancement index. Consistent with this, more detailed analysis shows that most of the strategic and market factors that enhance ROI also tend to increase long-term value. Businesses with strong initial competitive positions, for example, generally scored well on long-term value. So did businesses with high employee productivity, and superior relative quality, and those with cost advantages relative to competitors.

There are some trade-offs between current profitability and long-term value enhancement. Not surprisingly, the most visible trade-offs have to do with levels of spending on marketing and R&D, and with capacity expansion. In each of these areas, the SBUs that performed best over the long term were more aggressive than similar businesses that scored lower on our value enhancement index. The differences between good and poor long-term performers are outlined in greater detail in Chapter 11.

Overview of the Book

The six strategy principles summarized in the preceding section illustrate the approach that we and our co-workers have followed in the research on which this book is based. The basic concepts are outlined in more detail in Chapter 2, where we define what we mean by strategy and by performance. The methods used to collect and analyze the PIMS data are discussed in Chapter 3, and additional technical details are provided in Appendices A and B.

The principal strategic factors that influence business performance are discussed in Chapters 4-12.

Chapter 4, "Picking Profitable Markets," shows how profitability is affected by market characteristics such as stage of the life cycle, growth rate, and inflation. Competitive position and relative product quality are explored in Chapters 5 and 6. In these chapters we show how businesses attain strong market positions and how some lose them, and we outline a systematic approach to quality measurement and improvement.

The influence of capital intensity on competition and profitability is discussed in Chapter 7, while Chapter 8 presents the pros and cons of vertical integration.

Strategic options for market leaders and followers are compared in Chapter 9. Chapter 10 shows how these options change as a market evolves over time.

Chapter 11 presents our version of a long-term value enhancement performance measure and shows how it is related to market conditions and strategic choices. In Chapter 12, we explore issues involved in formulating integrated strategies for clusters of related businesses.

Copyright © 1987 by The Free Press

Read More Show Less

Customer Reviews

Be the first to write a review
( 0 )
Rating Distribution

5 Star


4 Star


3 Star


2 Star


1 Star


Your Rating:

Your Name: Create a Pen Name or

Barnes & Noble.com Review Rules

Our reader reviews allow you to share your comments on titles you liked, or didn't, with others. By submitting an online review, you are representing to Barnes & Noble.com that all information contained in your review is original and accurate in all respects, and that the submission of such content by you and the posting of such content by Barnes & Noble.com does not and will not violate the rights of any third party. Please follow the rules below to help ensure that your review can be posted.

Reviews by Our Customers Under the Age of 13

We highly value and respect everyone's opinion concerning the titles we offer. However, we cannot allow persons under the age of 13 to have accounts at BN.com or to post customer reviews. Please see our Terms of Use for more details.

What to exclude from your review:

Please do not write about reviews, commentary, or information posted on the product page. If you see any errors in the information on the product page, please send us an email.

Reviews should not contain any of the following:

  • - HTML tags, profanity, obscenities, vulgarities, or comments that defame anyone
  • - Time-sensitive information such as tour dates, signings, lectures, etc.
  • - Single-word reviews. Other people will read your review to discover why you liked or didn't like the title. Be descriptive.
  • - Comments focusing on the author or that may ruin the ending for others
  • - Phone numbers, addresses, URLs
  • - Pricing and availability information or alternative ordering information
  • - Advertisements or commercial solicitation


  • - By submitting a review, you grant to Barnes & Noble.com and its sublicensees the royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable right and license to use the review in accordance with the Barnes & Noble.com Terms of Use.
  • - Barnes & Noble.com reserves the right not to post any review -- particularly those that do not follow the terms and conditions of these Rules. Barnes & Noble.com also reserves the right to remove any review at any time without notice.
  • - See Terms of Use for other conditions and disclaimers.
Search for Products You'd Like to Recommend

Recommend other products that relate to your review. Just search for them below and share!

Create a Pen Name

Your Pen Name is your unique identity on BN.com. It will appear on the reviews you write and other website activities. Your Pen Name cannot be edited, changed or deleted once submitted.

Your Pen Name can be any combination of alphanumeric characters (plus - and _), and must be at least two characters long.

Continue Anonymously

    If you find inappropriate content, please report it to Barnes & Noble
    Why is this product inappropriate?
    Comments (optional)