At an event at Harvard Business School that was three parts analysis and one part rally, participants tried to chart a new path forward for the sluggish U.S. economy — a move that may require a new definition of "competitiveness."
Business leaders expect the nation's competitiveness to deteriorate, with companies less able to compete globally, pay workers well, or both, according to a new report released by Harvard Business School.
Some experts fear the United States is falling behind other developed nations in broadband adoption and performance, but others say such concerns are often exaggerated and unsupported by analysis.
The US is becoming less competitive partly because it refuses to address mounting debt problems. Federal policymakers in Washington DC have to make some tough choices to put the nation's finances in order and improve economic prospects.
America's public infrastructure — roads, bridges, airports, seaports, waterways and even sidewalks — is a mess. You can see it for yourself every day. It's not just a nuisance; it's bad for our economy.
The return of a few companies' manufacturing is encouraging. But the big question is: To what extent is the United States capable of taking back manufacturing on a significant scale? The challenges are great.
The United States has been using fiscal and monetary solutions as a base for its economic growth policy. But these macroeconomic strategies by itself are not leading to long-term growth. If we want to create more jobs, increase per capita income and reduce poverty, we need a shift in focus towards regions as the drivers of the national economy.
Current policy measures will accomplish only the bare minimum to improve U.S. competitiveness in the global information economy. According to recent FCC data, gigabit broadband connections are available in only about 40 communities across 15 states.
The United Kingdom has beaten the United States to become the fifth top tourist destination in the world, according to a new report.
The US has an international tax system that puts American companies and workers at a disadvantage as they try to compete in a new world.
Political skirmishes and impasses around short-term events are distracting us from the real danger ahead: Our reckless fiscal trajectory that threatens America's competitiveness. Insights by David Walker and Robert Kaplan.
Contradicting earlier studies, conventional wisdom and politicians' rhetoric, European researchers say that the Internet infrastructure of the United States is one of the world's best and getting better.
Housing prices in Silicon Valley remain defiantly high. New BMWs and Saabs cruise Highway 101. But for the first time there are signs that the current economic downturn is taking its toll on the country's cradle of technology and innovation.
For innovation, entrepreneurship, and startups, the U.S. continues to be unparalleled. But in spreading economic benefits broadly throughout the economy, we have not done well the last 30 years.
The U.S. economy will be between 1.5 and 2.6 percent smaller over the long-term because other nations' corporate tax rates are considerably more competitive, according to a new study by Ernst & Young and the RATE Coalition, a group lobbying for lower corporate tax rates.
The news from Washington certainly isn't very good. Intransigence and partisan politics are really just distracting us from what's really important — our lack of competitiveness in the world. Have we lost our edge? Harvard Business School's Michael Porter, Jan Rivken and Rosabeth Moss Kanter seem to think so.
Concerned about long-term structural issues such as the educational system, the tax code, and partisan politics, business leaders are continuing to voice pessimism about the state and direction of U.S.competitiveness, according to a new survey by the Harvard Business School (
Business leaders are warning that the federal budget morass is one symptom of a far more troubling problem: long-term challenges to U.S. competitiveness that are sapping America's strengths, according to a Harvard Business School survey.
Recently, the results of the second year of Harvard Business School's survey on US competitiveness were released. This time, in addition to asking both the public and of business leaders how the economy was doing, the survey asked their opinions of specific policies.
Jan Rivkin, professor and chair of the Strategy Unit at Harvard Business School, discusses the structural issues facing the United States and as a result, the multiple short term crises. He speaks on Bloomberg Television's "Market Makers."
Michael Porter, University professor at Harvard, talks to Charlie Rose about the United States in the global economy.
The American middle class is "hollowing out" as the U.S. economy fails to compete effectively in a globalized world, Harvard economist Michael Porter told CNBC's "Closing Bell" this week.
The electrical blackout at the Super Bowl wasn't about New Orleans. It speaks more to the pressing challenge of ensuring our infrastructure is capable of enabling America to be competitive in a global economy.
Weak conditions abroad and flagging U.S. competitiveness caused exports to contract $27 billion and businesses anticipating a further slowdown slashed inventories by $40 billion in the fourth quarter.
Mounting debt obligations threaten the very foundation of US business, placing at risk our competitiveness and innovation leadership in the world.
Harvard Business School Professors Michael Porter and Jan Rivkin lay out policy steps for the president and Congress to follow in order to make American companies more competitive and their employees more prosperous.
In this video from the Nightly Business Report, Harvard Business School Professor Michael E. Porter says the US needs to make structural changes to restore its competitiveness.
FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski says making sure that the U.S. has super-fast, high-capacity, ubiquitous broadband networks is essential to economic growth, job creation, and U.S. competitiveness.
Longer winter breaks and shorter summer vacations are ideas being tested around the country as school districts debate whether to extend the school year.
Our ability to compete in a global economy, attract the world's brightest workers and nurture a functional political system is slipping. This weakness is now at a point where it threatens to erode the pillars upon which America's national security rests. America's competitiveness is now a matter of national security.
Until recently, the debate about tax reform has focused mostly on the corporate side and mostly on the international side, but in the negotiations about the fiscal cliff, the debate has moved into a discussion about individual taxation.
Two Harvard Business School professors warn a group of incoming congressional freshmen that it would be a mistake to separate concerns about the economy from the broader and increasingly urgent problem of America's waning competitiveness in the global world of business.
A report by the National Intelligence Council predicts that the United States will lose its superpower status by 2030, but that no country -- including China -- will be a hegemonic power. Instead, the report says, power will shift to "networks and coalitions in a multipolar world."
The Puget Sound region, for all its strengths, is only a few Chinese leaps in software, airplanes and biotechnology from becoming Akron, Ohio, with ferries, columnist Jon Talton says.
America's success in restoring competitiveness will define the opportunities and economic mobility of American citizens as well as America's influence in the world, according to Harvard Business School's Michael Porter and Jan Rivkin.
Video Harvard Business School Professor Michael E. Porter, a co-leader of the United States Competitiveness Project, suggests three simple and bipartisan actions that may help boost productivity in the US.
At Rochester Institute of Technology, working together with several corporate representatives, we have developed a template agreement in which the university agrees to a different kind of research relationship with an interested company.
The United States faces a number of steep economic challenges to its continued economic growth, but a group of business and policy experts said they believe the Obama administration, working with Congress, can solve daunting short-term issues that threaten to derail economic recovery.
Harvard Business School Professor Michael E. Porter on US competitiveness and the "fiscal cliff."
Video Samuel R. Allen, chief executive officer for Deere & Co., James Hagedorn, CEO for Scotts Miracle-Gro Co., Keith D. Nosbusch, CEO for Rockwell Automation Inc., Michael E. Porter, professor at Harvard Business School, and Edward M. Smith, CEO for Ullico, Inc., talk about U.S. productivity and economic growth outlook. They speak at the National Competitiveness Forum in Washington. Bloomberg's Al Hunt moderates.
It's time for business to lead in restoring American competitiveness, rather than waiting for Washington to act, write Harvard Business School professors Michael Porter and Jan Rivkin.
A recent survey of Harvard Business School graduates found 58 percent expect U.S. competitiveness to worsen over the next three years. This would be a good time for Obama to prove them wrong.
For the first time in our lives, the promise of upward mobility -- the core of the American Dream -- can no longer be taken for granted. The top priority for President Obama is to enact policies that support job growth and reduce worker anxieties.
The United States will slip to fifth place from third in manufacturing competitiveness in the next five years as India and Brazil race ahead, according to a report published Friday.
Wanna be a rock star? Come to Detroit. That's one takeaway a group of Harvard Business School professors had Thursday night during a presentation on their year-long project on U.S. competitiveness.
Shippers say the limited choices many face give railroads too much power, which allows them to dictate price increases or arbitrarily impose extra fees, such as for diesel fuel to power their locomotives.
Shippers say the limited choices many face give railroads too much power, which allows them to dictate price increases or arbitrarily impose extra fees, such as for diesel fuel to power their locomotives.
Over the next four years, U.S. President Barack Obama has an opportunity to help the U.S. remain competitive in a rapidly globalizing, recalibrating world.
Next week, a coalition of business leaders will press a longer-term to-do list on Washington's politicians. Its 200 items include cutting corporate taxes, streamlining regulations, upgrading the nation's crumbling infrastructure and creating a more highly skilled workforce.
In an open letter to President Obama, Rosabeth Moss Kanter advises, "You have been reelected at a time when no one is satisfied with the status quo. You must show that your are serious about solving problems by a willingness to act quickly on a big, national campaign to get action throughout the country."
History shows that four to five years after a financial crisis is usually when a country either moves slowly but surely into a sustained recovery or lapses back into recession.
If the United States economy is to restore itself to earlier levels of full employment, prosperity and financial soundness, the American manufacturing community must engage in a national effort to resurrect its global competitiveness.
If the United States economy is to restore itself to earlier levels of full employment, prosperity and financial soundness, the American manufacturing community must engage in a national effort to resurrect its global competitiveness.
Executives from around the world are profoundly pessimistic about the ability of companies operating in the U.S. to compete in the global economy and to pay high wages to American workers, a survey of more than 6,800 Harvard Business School alumni found.
Harvard Business School alumna Chitra Nawbatt provides a "view from the field" as the School continues its U.S. Competitiveness Project.
A group of national leaders seeking to make the United States more globally competitive chose Lehigh University for their venue this week when they met to discuss manufacturing and innovation. The event was sponsored by the Washington D.C.-based Council on Competitiveness, the Allentown, Pa.-based company Air Products, and Lehigh.
Harvard Business School's U.S. Competitiveness Project aims to engage local leaders, find paths to prosperity
Harvard Business School Dean Nitin Nohria and Professor Michael Porter discuss America's declining competitiveness and possible solutions. Their appearance begins at about the 1:20 mark.
The chairman and CEO of General Electric outlined five areas where he believes the United States needs improvement: the number of math and science majors should double, the manufacturing sector should increase, globalization has to be accepted, energy independence is necessary, and the value placed on training and education should be greater.
Speakers at the forum included former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright; Harvard Business School Professor Michael Porter; and Aspen Institute CEO Walter Isaacson. Former presidential advisor David Gergen moderated the event.
Three Harvard Business School professors made a stop in Silicon Valley to warn that the economic competitiveness of the United States is lagging. Their message was laced with hopes that entrepreneurship will save the country, but the facts they carried with them would depress members of any political party.
Job creation in the United States is hampered by supply and demand, but not in a traditional sense, according to new research from Deloitte. Specifically, the demand for highly skilled and adaptable workers is accelerating, but the skill set of the country's available talent is either outdated or out of stock, Deloitte reports.
The United States' ability to compete on the global stage has fallen for the fourth year running as confidence in the country's politicians continues to decline, an annual survey from the World Economic Forum found Wednesday.
Michael Porter and his colleagues at Harvard Business School have taken a new look at national competitiveness, one that raises deep questions about our economy, our businesses, and our politics.
Business groups complain that taxes, regulations and unfair trade practices hurt their international competitiveness. Now, we can add the weight of the American workforce to that list.
The US is still lagging behind other developed nations in levels of broadband internet availability. Nineteen million Americans still lack broadband access, according to the Eight Broadband Progress Report, issued by the Federal Communications Commission.
The United Soybean Board reports that transportation reliability and efficiency will be taxed as soybean production and global demand rises, threatening the agricultural product's ability to remain competitive on a worldwide scale.
Does the United States face insoluble economic challenges? In the aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis and subsequent recession, growth has been sluggish--with unemployment devastating far too many Americans. Yet the real problem, obscured by this acute, cyclical downturn, may be a long-term erosion of competitiveness in a more challenging global economic era.
Nearly every member of Congress has blocked steps that would help their constituents prosper. The answer? Sol Erdman and Lawrence Susskind discuss advocacy plans for the Center for Collaborative Democracy.
Few doubt that to grow, the nation must innovate -- but how? We invite readers to post their specific ideas for accelerating development of the products, technologies and ideas we need to compete in global markets.
As the United States celebrates its independence, where does it stand in the world? The glut of global rankings generated by think tanks, nonprofit groups and global agencies gives a jumbled picture of how the U.S. stacks up on everything from happiness to health spending.
Among cities, New York, London and Tokyo are some of the strongest competitors in the world. Even so, their dominance is being threatened by the ongoing economic crisis, a top Chinese think tank said in a report.
Is there any hope for America's political process? Not much, was the answer from the group of Harvard Business School faculty gathered in Washington D.C.'s Newseum last week.
Leaders from the U.S. Senate, Small Business Administration, media, business and labor will join HBS in an interactive discussion about areas of agreement around the actionable steps that can be taken to address America's structural competitiveness challenges
Pushing the limits of an aging infrastructure, U.S. manufacturers face a future of increasing costs and instability unless new technologies and new investments can rejuvinate the system.
For the first time, people responding to a global survey are more likely to view China and not the United States as the world's leading economic power.
U.S. competitiveness was ranked second for 2011 for by the IMD, behind Hong Kong. The bad news is that it was first in 2010 and most years before, but it's worth contemplating the advantages that a group of international business executives and analysts still can find in the U.S. economy.
Professor Michael Porter joins a roundtable discussion on a potential Romney administration, Wall Street regulations, and the fundamental issues facing the US as a worldwide economic competitor. The 7-minute conversation on competitiveness begins at about the 8:40 mark of the video.
Four top government cybersecurity officials say America is getting attacked by nation state hackers and is vulnerable to much more.
The current state of U.S. competitiveness is not the problem, but rather, a symptom of a larger systemic one, says Andrew McKeon, founder of business-climate.com. Fixing U.S. competitiveness will require a systems perspective much broader and more holistic than American management has practiced in the last 40 years.

CEOs are waking up to the idea that companies have a role to play in addressing weaknesses in the business environment — in the United States or elsewhere — and that business needs to invest in the "commons" to prosper, not just pursue its narrow self-interest. By Harvard Business School's Michael Porter and Jan Rivkin.
The Harvard Business School's U.S. Competitiveness Project is challenging beliefs that have become deeply ingrained among many U.S. business leaders as the global economy has expanded and growth has accelerated in emerging markets.
Why are big companies not investing more in the United States? Findings from Harvard Business School's U.S. Competitiveness Project were discussed at a fascinating meeting of business leaders in New York Monday evening.
At an HBS-hosted event devoted to action, not academics, more than 600 New York City business and civic leaders gathered at Lincoln Center Monday evening to explore causes and business-led solutions to the nation's decline in global competitiveness.
When a business school solicits alumni, it's usually to ask for donations. Last night, though, the school hit them up for something they may find harder to give: a commitment to use whatever influence they have to get their companies to invest in the local workforce, raise U.S. median wages, and support local suppliers.
Harvard Business School professors Michael Porter and Jan Rivkin released a new report (PDF) where business community respondents suggest the root of U.S. competitiveness problems may lie in the country's tax code, political system, K-12 education, macroeconomic policies, legal framework, regulations, infrastructure, and workforce skills.
Professors Michael E. Porter and Jan W. Rivkin frame the HBS project on U.S. competitiveness by defining "competitiveness," assessing the state of U.S. competitiveness, and pinpointing dynamics that threaten America's competitiveness.
Across the political spectrum, there is consensus that the United States faces challenges to its competitiveness. Current U.S. fiscal policy is, unfortunately, part of the problem rather than the solution, according to Professors Richard H.K. Vietor and Matthew C. Weinzierl.
Over the last four decades companies have dispersed more and more of their activities across the globe. Data and analysis from Michael E. Porter and Jan W. Rivkin suggest that the U.S. is losing out on location decisions at an alarming rate, even for high value adding activities such as R&D that it should be able to attract.
It’s generally understood that the United States can’t be competitive—and won’t be able to support high, and rising, living standards—without a well trained, well paid, and continuously improving workforce that can compete with the best that other countries have to offer. Yet, at all levels of the economy, we behave as if we don’t believe this, opines Thomas A. Kochan.