This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
How Dell went from dorm room startup in 1984, to the world''s largest PC maker in 2005, and then saw its stock plummet precipitously the next year, is the subject of a lengthy Harvard Business School case study by HBS professor Jan Rivkin. There are two basic patterns to a successful turnaround, Rivkin told me in a recent interview.
“Many of us who have wound up teaching strategy and doing research in strategy grew up learning game theory from Tirole’s textbook,” says Jan Rivkin, the chair of the strategy unit at HBS. As an example, Rivkin cites the notion of commitment, which Ghemawat wrote a book on. The Theory of Industrial Organization was just the first.
As Janet Yellen pointed out in a speech last year, “the opportunity to build a business has long been an important part of the American Dream.” A robust network of small suppliers is important to the long-term competitiveness of large U.S. corporations and for companies considering moving production back to the U.S.
But these trends also had more negative consequences, as Jan Rivkin and Michael Porter have argued in their work as co-chairs of Harvard Business School’s U.S. Instead, businesses see them as in their longer-term strategic interests. In the long-term, the success of U.S. Competitiveness Project.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 5,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content