| From 1970's to 2000's, there was a characteristic and interesting phenomenon in the course of the development of world economy. That is, during the latest 30years of 20th century, a "Great Contrast" has been shaped in the process of the development of American economy and Japan economy. Specially, during the latest 10 years of 20th century, contrast to the prosperity of American New Economy, the perdition of Japan "Bubble Economy" has been quite noticeable. Because of their importance for the global economy, American economy and Japan economy have been got lots of attention paid by numerous investigators. Further, in the dynamic evolutionary process of American economy and Japan economy from 1970's to 2000's, the characteristic state of "Great Contrast" has been the focus that all circles have been probing into from different aspects。In allusion to this phenomenon, by the study of the dynamic change tendency of American and Japan industrial competitiveness from 1970's to 2000's, then by comparing American industrial competitiveness with Japan industrial competitiveness, this paper has found a surprised Contrast Phenomenon synchronized with the-American and Japan economic "Great Contrast" in the course of development of American industrial competitiveness and Japan industrial competitiveness: from 1970's to 1985's, American industrial competitiveness had declined, while, in the meantime, Japan industrial competitiveness had become more prosperous everyday and reached its peak; then from 1985's to 2000's, the development tendency between American industrial competitiveness and Japan industrial competitiveness had been greatly reversed, American industries enjoyed the boon of " endless smoothing vistas" , then Japan industries had to endure the distress of "the lost 10 years". Because the problems of macro-economy are rooted in the micro-economy, therefore, this paper holds such point of view that the "Great Contrast" in the course of the development of American and Japan macro-economy from 1970's to 2000's is rooted in the dynamic changes of American and Japan firms' competitive advantages of micro-economy. In the meanwhile, firm's competitive advantages are rooted in industrial competitiveness, without the support from the strong industrial competitiveness; a country couldn't gestate firms that can possess international competitive advantages. Therefore, this paper attributes the "behind-the-scenes" driving forces for the "Great Contrast" phenomenon of American and Japan economic development tendency to the "creative destruction" of American and Japan industrial competitiveness. The author takes the point of view that it is the fluctuation of American and Japan industrial competitiveness that results in the "Great Contrast" of Japan-Americanmacro-economy growth situation.Through attributing the essence of the driving force for the Japan-American economic "Great Contrast" phenomenon to the "creative destruction" of two countries' industrial competitiveness, there must be three logic problems that have to be probed into. The author of this dissertation believes, the answer to those three logic problems is the key to make clear the changes of Japan-American industrial competitiveness, and the foundation stone to reveal the dynamic change laws of Japan-American industrial competitiveness. Those three inevitable logic problems follow:Problem 1: what is the "cause-effect" transmission chain for the industry competitiveness? Building such a "cause-effect" transmission chain for industry competitiveness is the foundation to explore the laws in the dynamic change process of Japan-American industry competitiveness from 1970' s to 2000' s.Problem 2: what is the dynamic change mechanism for the industry competitiveness from prosperity to decaying? For the "Great Contrast" phenomenon of Japan-American economy, its essence is just the dynamic changes of Japan-American industry competitiveness. Thereby, the explanation of change process of Japan-American industry competitiveness is the core of the research on the "Great Contrast" phenomenon of Japan-American economy. The dynamic change mechanism for industry competitiveness from prosperity to decaying is the headstone to disclose the laws in the change process of Japan-American industry competitiveness from 1970' s to 2000' s.Problem 3: what is the strategy model to assure the smothering of the dynamic change path of industry competitiveness in order to hold the sustainable national competitiveness? As the logic extend of problem 1 and problem 2, in the light of the fluctuation lesson of Japan-American economy driven by the dynamic changes of industry competitiveness, and on account of the solution of the existing problems, the research on the strategy management model for assuring the smothering of change path of industry competitiveness should be the inevitable attribution to the study of the "Great Contrast" phenomenon of Japan-American economy.Being a global great master in the strategy field, the professor Michael E. Porter has been paying great attention to the dynamic change process of Japan-American industry competitiveness from 1970' s to 2000' s. The theoretical logic on which the professor Port had based to explain the dynamic change of Japan-American industry competitiveness is contained in the framework of " Dynamic Strategy Theory ", which was posted by Michael E. Port in the year of 1991. The professor Port's "dynamic strategy theory" built the rudiment of "cause-effect" chain of industry competitiveness: diamond system — — initialconditions/management choices-------drives-------strategies: positioning, trade-off andintegration of activities/value system — — competitive advantages: Costadvantage/differentiation advantage------competitive strategy: five forces model------firmsuccess------industry competitiveness. Therefore, for answering the three questions containedin the dynamic change of Japan-American industry competitiveness, Professor Port has relatively perfectly settled the problem 1: what is the "cause-effect" transmission chain for the industry competitiveness? Based on this rudiment of "cause-effect" chain of industry competitiveness, Professor Port successively explained prosperity and decaying of Japan-American industry competitiveness in different period.On the static spatial point, the theory on which Professor Port has based to analyze the statement of Japan-American industry competitiveness is perfect: given the constraint conditions in the 1980s, Port's "dynamic strategy theory" can convince the fact why Japan industry competitiveness could be more prosperous everyday, while why American industry gradually declined; given the constraint conditions in the 1990s, Port's "dynamic strategy theory" can also persuade the fact why American industry competitiveness could become more prosperous everyday, while why Japan industry competitiveness gradually declined. However, based on the aspect of dynamic evolution, Port's explanation on the "Great Contrast" of Japan-American industry competitiveness is still deficient and imperfect.First, Port's explanation for the "Great Contrast" of Japan-American industry competitiveness lacks a clear integrated analysis for the "cause-effect" chain of industry competitiveness. In the course of the study of the root of the decaying of Japan industry competitiveness, Professor Port divided the diamond system into two parts: the first part is composed of Japan government model and corporation management model; the second part is composed of Japan factor conditions, demand conditions, related and supporting industries, firm strategy, structure and rivalry. Based on Port's dynamic "cause-effect" chain of industry competitiveness, it is the whole diamond system but the single factor in the diamond system that drives firm strategies. Therefore, because of the lack of the integrated analysis of dynamic "cause-effect" chain of industry competitiveness, Professor Port's conclusion that Japan firms don't have strategies is unilateral and deficient.Second, Port's explanation for the "Great Contrast" of Japan-American industry competitiveness lacks the analysis of dynamic evolution of firm strategy and diamond system: how strategic inertias are cumulated in the dynamic evolution process in which firm strategies lead to industry competitiveness, how strategic inertias in turn erode drives needed by firms' strategic competition, and how industry competitiveness declines because of the lack of firms' strategic competition; As a dynamics system driven by itself, how the diamond systemevolves, how the path dependence is cumulated in the process of dynamic evolution of diamond system, and how industry competitiveness declines because of the appearance of path dependence.Third, Professor Port didn't study the strategy management model by which the smothering of dynamic change path of industry competitiveness can be guaranteed so that the national competitiveness should be sustainable.In the light of Professor Port's existing theories and deficient points in the study of the "Great Contrast" of Japan-American industry competitiveness, this dissertation builds the framework for analyzing the mechanism of "creative destruction" of industry competitiveness, which should consummate Port's "dynamic strategy theory" in the following three aspects:First, this dissertation-- will further integrate the "cause-effect" transmission chain of industry competitiveness driven by firm strategy and diamond system. The research on this issue contains the following aspects: (1) Refining and embodying the "cause-effect" chainmechanism "environment (diamond system)------strategy------industry competitiveness"which drives and shapes industry competitiveness. (2) Probing into the "causereffect" driving mechanism between firm strategy-and diamond system.. (3) Studying, the innovative essence of firm strategy and diamond system: entrepreneurial mentality and national innovation system. Those content is arranged in the chapter 2 of this dissertation: the " cause-effect" chain of industry competitiveness.Second, studying the dynamic change mechanism for industry competitiveness fluctuating from prosperity to decaying. The research on this issue contains the following two aspects: (1) based on strategic inertias cumulated in the course of mutual evolution- between strategy and environment, studying- the mechanism of the failure of the smothering path of strategy evolution, which in turn contributes to the decaying of industry competitiveness. Those content is arranged in the chapter 3 of this dissertation: strategic inertias and the declination of industry competitiveness. (2) Based on the feedback mechanism that path dependence is cumulated in the course of the evolution of diamond system, which in turn contributes to the "lock-in" of diamond system and leads to the relative degradation of diamond system, studying the decaying mechanism of industry competitiveness. Those content is arranged in the chapter 5 of this dissertation: path dependence and the declination of industry competitiveness.Third, studying strategy management model whose aim is to guarantee the smothering dynamic change path of industry competitiveness. The research on this issue contains the following two aspects: (1) based on surmounting strategic inertias in order to smoother the evolving path of firm strategies, studying firm internal strategy decision-making ecologicalmechanism. Those content is arranged in the chapter 4 of this dissertation: strategy decision-making ecological mechanism and sustainable industry competitiveness. (2) Studying industry competitiveness strategy management thinking levels based on " Great" dynamic capabilities thought, which can contribute to overcome path dependence and avoid relative degradation of diamond system. Those content is arranged in the chapter 6 of this dissertation: "Great" dynamic capability mechanism and sustainable industry competitiveness.Making a comprehensive survey of this dissertation's content for the research on the mechanism of "creative destruction" of industry competitiveness, two issues about the mechanism of "creative destruction" of industry competitiveness are still not settled: (1) what is the "cause-effect" relationship mechanism between strategy evolution and national diamond system's dynamic evolution? (2) What is the mechanism for the nation to create an unprecedented industry that possess globalized value?... |
PDF Full Text Request