現在、H.ミンツバーグ教授の「組織論」に関する以下の本を読んでいます。
ミンツバーグ教授（カナダ／マギル大学）は、（一般にはそれほど知られていませんが）マイケルポーター教授（アメリカ／ハーバードビジネススクール）と並ぶ戦略論の大家です。
ポータ教授とミンツバーグ教授の間では、しばしば戦略論に関する熱い論戦が繰り広げられていることでも有名ですが、それは2人の教授の戦略（Strategy）に対する考え方が対照的であるということ物語っています。
ミンツバーグ教授は、現在のMBA教育に対する批判的な著書もあり、（MBAホルダーの私としては耳の痛い部分もありますが）、正鵠を射た内容だと思います。
本日は、ミンツバーグ教授とポーター教授の戦略論に関する考え方を紹介したいと思います。
【English】
Michael Porter and Henry Mintzberg are strategic management gurus, each offering distinct perspectives on corporate strategy.
Michael Porter’s theories, such as the “Five Forces Model” and “Generic Strategies,” are frequently tested on the Small and Medium Enterprise Consultant Examination, so examinees are familiar with them. However, due to the lack of emphasis on Mintzberg’s theories in the exam, they are less familiar to examinees.
So, I‘d like to briefly introduce the theoretical differences between these two strategic gurus.
Porter views strategy as deliberate, based on analysis and planning. He focuses on achieving competitive advantage through positioning within an industry and emphasizes analytical tools and frameworks for strategic planning.
Porter’s theory is based on microeconomics (Industrial Organization), so it is very clear and straightforward.
On the other hand, Mintzberg views strategy as emergent, evolving through learning, and emphasizes flexibility and responsiveness to change. According to Mintzberg, organizational learning, intuition, and the adaptability of strategies over time are critical when considering strategies.
Mintzberg’s theory is based more on sociology than economics, and it focuses on the study of organizational behavior, making it somewhat complex.
In Porter’s view, the environment is a set of forces to be analyzed and understood to position the firm effectively. He focuses on deliberate planning and clear strategic direction.
In contrast, Mintzberg sees the environment as dynamic and complex and underscores the importance of emergent strategies that develop through patterns of behavior.
The theoretical differences between Michael Porter and Henry Mintzberg reflect contrasting views on how organizations should approach strategy. Porter’s focus on competitive positioning and deliberate planning contrasts with Mintzberg’s emphasis on emergent strategy, adaptability, and learning.
The debate between these two strategic management gurus, Porter and Mintzberg, has attracted academic attention and provides us with fascinating insights into corporate strategy.
コメント