Here is the synopsis of our sample research paper on Review: “The Core Competence of the Corporation”. Have the paper e-mailed to you 24/7/365.
Essay / Research Paper Abstract
A 4 page paper reviewing this 1990 article appearing in the Harvard Business Review. As a whole, the authors provide a concise view of the issue of core competency that yet manages to provide enough detail to make it practically useful. The article can be used as a broad guide for establishing a business case, but it also can be used at high-level implementation. Bibliography lists 2 sources.
Page Count:
4 pages (~225 words per page)
File: CC6_KSmgmtCoreComp.rtf
Buy This Term Paper »
Unformatted sample text from the term paper:
It was Harvards Theodore Levitt who caused organizations to begin asking, "What business are we in?" In his 1960 "Marketing Myopia" published in the Harvard Business Review, Levitt
used as his example the railroad industry and the events and decisions that led to the industrys decline. Prahalad and Hamel (1990) use
that "What business are we in?" approach to frame their discussion of identification of and action on core competencies in organizations. The purpose here is to review "The Core
Competence of the Corporation," also published in the Harvard Business Review 30 years after Levitts article. Main Points Identifying Core Competencies - And Losing Them
Prahalad and Hamel (1990) write that there are at least three tests that can be used to identify the organizations core competencies. A core competence is one
that * Provides "potential access to a wide variety of markets;" * Makes "significant contribution to the perceived customer benefits of the end product;" and * Is "difficult for
competitors to imitate" (Prahalad and Hamel, 1990; p. 79). The authors note that a company listing 20 or 30 capabilities likely is one
that also has not made the effort to identify and enhance its core competencies. This is one route to losing competitive advantage in core competencies. If the organization
is not aware of what activities it does best, then it also will not place appropriate levels of attention in those areas. Without continual close scrutiny of activity in
the markets in which these competencies are most valuable, the organization is likely to lose - or fail to gain - market share in the very activities in which it
...