Clusters and the New Economics of Competition

Michael E. Porter

Article | Harvard Business Review | November – December 1998

Clusters and the New Economics of Competition

Abstract

This article explains how clusters foster high levels of productivity and innovation and lays out the implications for competitive strategy and economic policy. Economic geography in an era of global competition poses a paradox. In theory, location should no longer be a source of competitive advantage. Open global markets, rapid transportation, and high-speed communications should allow any company to source any thing from any place at any time. But in practice, location remains central to competition. Today's economic map of the world is characterized by what Porter calls clusters: critical masses in one place of linked industries and institutions—from suppliers to universities to government agencies—that enjoy unusual competitive success in a particular field. The most famous examples are found in Silicon Valley and Hollywood, but clusters dot the world's landscape. Porter explains how clusters affect competition in three broad ways: first, by increasing the productivity of companies based in the area; second, by driving the direction and pace of innovation; and third, by stimulating the formation of new businesses within the cluster. Geographic, cultural, and institutional proximity provides companies with special access, closer relationships, better information, powerful incentives, and other advantages that are difficult to tap from a distance. The more complex, knowledge-based, and dynamic the world economy becomes, the more this is true. Competitive advantage lies increasingly in local things—knowledge, relationships, and motivation—that distant rivals cannot replicate.

Keywords: Economics; United States;

Format: Print

Find at Harvard Purchase

Citation:

Porter, Michael E. "Clusters and the New Economics of Competition." Harvard Business Review 76, no. 6 (November–December 1998): 77–90.

Since its establishment in 2005, Hamburg’s Martini Klinik had single mindedly focused on prostate cancer care with a commitment to measure long-term health outcomes for every patient. A wholly owned subsidiary of the University Hospital Hamburg, Martini Klinik was a “hospital in a hospital” in close proximity to other medical departments and services. By 2019, Martini Klinik had become the largest prostate cancer treatment program in the world with 8,000 outpatient cases and more than 2,500 surgical cases annually. Patients came from all over Germany and from around the world. A new and expanded facility was under construction to have the capacity to manage more patients with prostate cancer.

Currently, few health care providers measure and report their patient outcomes, which leads to several problems. Attempts to introduce price transparency without outcomes transparency could trigger a “race to the bottom.” Should Medicare coverage be expanded to non-elderly populations, its much lower reimbursements will create pressure on providers to lower their spending in ways that produce even worse outcomes. Even without Medicare expansion, the lack of systematic outcomes measurement has made the migration from fee-for-service to value-based reimbursements, especially bundled payments, less effective and more difficult to implement. Hidden variation in outcomes prevents providers from learning from others how to produce better outcomes for their patients. We propose that the Congress elected in November 2020 mandate the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services to begin requiring outcomes measurement by all providers reimbursed under government Medicare and Medicaid programs.

We are entering a new stage of understanding of the linkage between investment performance and social impact. Previous approaches, such as socially responsible investing and environmental, social, and governance (ESG) screening, have obscured the opportunities for higher growth, profitability, and competitive advantage that come from creating shared value: addressing social and environmental issues as integral to a company’s core strategic positioning. A shared value approach to investing can deliver superior shareholder returns, but capturing that value will require very different practices on the part of both corporate leaders and investors.

Faculty & Research

Clusters and the New Economics of Competition

Abstract

Citation:

About the Author

More from the Author