3 ms·
What utter crap. The version of Michael Porter that this "article" argues against is a straw man that bears little resemblance to the actual man or his ideas.
by socalnate1 14y ago
What utter crap. The version of Michael Porter that this "article" argues against is a straw man that bears little resemblance to the actual man or his ideas.
Between Forbe's hosted blogger section (where this article came from) and the Atlantic's paid content, the quality of mainstream business reporting is dropping like a stone.
- mindcrime 14y agoYou basically just said what I came here to say. This guy seems to have a bone to pick with Porter and this article is flawed on so many levels that it's ridiculous. Strawmen, faulty logic, unsubstantiated assumptions, this article has a laundry list of reasons to not take it seriously. I love the part where he talks about "Porter's Strategy" as though there was one specific strategy that - in and of itself - encapsulated everything of Porter's thought. Denning seems clueless here. Yeah, Porter talked about a handful of "generic strategies" but to claim that Porter's thinking can be reduced to one simple thing that you adopt or don't adopt, is ludicrous.