Porter’s Competitive Advantage Of Nations: Time For The Final Judgement?

By H. Davies, P. Ellis. 2000

214 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Economics and Econometrics, Strategy and Management

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/073db28f2fdf0eee60c43672da01245b00d449b3

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Economics and Econometrics

1. Mike Wright
2. David Wolfe
3. Paul Westhead
4. Chang Hoon Oh
5. Deniz Ucbasaran
6. Lotta Moberg
7. A. Smit
8. D. Lim

In Strategy and Management

1. Mike Wright
2. Chang Hoon Oh
3. David Wolfe
4. D. Lim
5. Paul Westhead
6. Deniz Ucbasaran
7. Lotta Moberg
8. A. Smit

Citations in the corpus

• The competitive advantage of nations: is Porter’s Diamond Framework a new theory that explains the international competitiveness of countries? (2010, background): “This view is in stark contrast to the views of Waverman (1995), Davies and Ellis (2000) and Boltho (1996).”
• The regional and global competitiveness of multinational firms (2012, background): “A key limitation of Porter’ s( 1990) diamond model is its sole focus on home country conditions: the applicability of a single diamond model for the study of international trade is questionable ( Davis and Ellis 2000 ).”
• Internationalization of private firms: environmental turbulence and organizational strategies and resources (2004, background): “Porter’s (1980, 1981, 1985, 1990) strategy perspective views organization strategy as being industry/environment driven (see Davies and Ellis (2000) who have raised conceptual, methodological and empirical concerns surrounding Porter’s strategy perspective).”
• The political economy of special economic zones (2014, background): “Governments tend therefore to promote more high tech clusters than is compatible with their countries’ comparative advantage (Davies and Ellis, 2000).”
• SPACES OF KNOWLEDGE FLOWS: CLUSTERS IN A GLOBAL CONTEXT (2005, background): “They draw upon the international trade and other bodies of literature to note that these conditions seldom hold to the same extent in small, open trading economies – such as Canada or the Scandinavian economies, which are tightly linked to larger trading partners (Davies and Ellis 2000, 1202–4).”