NEW HAVEN, Connecticut: The debate over the difference between tactics and strategy is as rich as it is enduring. In his seminal 1996 article in the Harvard Business Review, Harvard's Michael Porter tackled this issue head-on. While his focus was business, his arguments can be applied much more broadly — including to today's Sino-American rivalry.
Porter differentiated between "operational effectiveness" and strategy, arguing that nimble companies had become well-practiced in the former but had dropped the ball on the latter. He also drew a sharp contrast between tactical tools — such as benchmarking, re-engineering and total quality management — and competitive strategies aimed at "choosing a different set of activities to deliver a unique mix of value."
Continue reading with one of these options:
Ad-free access
P 80 per month
(billed annually at P 960)
- Unlimited ad-free access to website articles
- Limited offer: Subscribe today and get digital edition access for free (accessible with up to 3 devices)