Abstract Numerous models for developing strategy, defining and aligning competitive advantage have been proposed over the years (and even centuries if we consider Arian, Sun Tzu etc.) including probably the most famous of all, the 5 forces model by Porter (P5F). With publications in the field of strategy now in the thousands it is difficult to get an overall picture of how to classify and appreciate strategy tools and models. Mintzberg et al. have developed schools of thought to help alleviate and categorise this problem but this approach lacks a comparison of the models found in industry e.g. BCG, 7S McKinsey, ANSOFF etc. Consequently at academic level (but not only) we see models like P5F, etc. predominate while tools like SWOT, PEST, ARC etc. populate the consultancy arena and operative levels of the organisation. The purpose of this paper is therefore to provide an overview and comparison of selected models used in the development of business strategy together with a brief discussion of schools of strategic thought. Judging by the bibliography searched and, perhaps, the major appeal of this paper, is that a selection of common strategy development models and tools are compared systematically for the first time in one single paper. In fact it was found that models, at least in Italy, are rarely compared and if they are, it is on a one-to-one basis. The intent is to at least start to bridge and compare models and show how new models can be realised. The paper closes with the proposal of a new model, the Ward-Rivani model, which does not claim to be the most universal rather a complementary and perhaps useful platform
Abstract Numerous models for developing strategy, defining and aligning competitive advantage have been proposed over the years (and even centuries if we consider Arian, Sun Tzu etc.) including probably the most famous of all, the 5 forces model by Porter (P5F). With publications in the field of strategy now in the thousands it is difficult to get an overall picture of how to classify and appreciate strategy tools and models. Mintzberg et al. have developed schools of thought to help alleviate and categorise this problem but this approach lacks a comparison of the models found in industry e.g. BCG, 7S McKinsey, ANSOFF etc. Consequently at academic level (but not only) we see models like P5F, etc. predominate while tools like SWOT, PEST, ARC etc. populate the consultancy arena and operative levels of the organisation. The purpose of this paper is therefore to provide an overview and comparison of selected models used in the development of business strategy together with a brief discussion of schools of strategic thought. Judging by the bibliography searched and, perhaps, the major appeal of this paper, is that a selection of common strategy development models and tools are compared systematically for the first time in one single paper. In fact it was found that models, at least in Italy, are rarely compared and if they are, it is on a one-to-one basis. The intent is to at least start to bridge and compare models and show how new models can be realised. The paper closes with the proposal of a new model, the Ward-Rivani model, which does not claim to be the most universal rather a complementary and perhaps useful platform