Milestone map
Milestone map
3 milestones
Apply Porter's Five Forces to a Real Industry with Evidence
2–3 weeks
Select a real industry and apply Porter's Five Forces framework systematically. For each force, collect specific evidence — not general statements. Quantify where possible: market concentration ratios, switching cost estimates, supplier or buyer power indicators, entry barrier heights. The analysis must conclude with an overall assessment of industry attractiveness and profitability dynamics.
Proof required
Submit a Five Forces analysis (minimum 1,500 words) covering all five forces with: (a) specific evidence for each force assessment (quantitative where possible, sourced from free public data), (b) an overall attractiveness rating (1–5 scale) with rationale, and (c) identification of the one or two forces that most determine profitability in this industry, with explanation of why.
What gets checked
- Each force is assessed with specific evidence — not assertions
- At least two forces are supported with quantitative data
- Overall attractiveness rating is justified, not just stated
Common mistakes
- Five Forces applied as a checklist without genuine analysis — listing factors without assessing their relative intensity is not an analysis
- Industry scope is too broad — 'the technology industry' is not a well-defined competitive space; 'cloud infrastructure services for enterprise customers' is
Resources
What a verifier looks for
- Challenge the most critical force assessment: 'You rated buyer power as high — but your evidence is primarily that buyers have many alternatives. How do you account for the switching costs associated with long-term contracts in this industry?'
- Is the industry scope well-defined? An analysis of 'retail' is not tractable; 'UK grocery retail' is.
Produce Competitive Positioning and Strategic Group Analysis
2–3 weeks
Map the competitive landscape of the chosen industry using strategic group analysis. Identify two to three strategic groups based on key dimensions (e.g., price-quality positioning, geographic scope, product breadth). Analyse the mobility barriers between groups. Identify which group(s) have the strongest competitive position and which are under competitive pressure.
Proof required
Submit a competitive landscape analysis (minimum 1,200 words) including: (a) a strategic group map with two identified positioning dimensions and at least six named competitors placed by group, (b) mobility barriers analysis explaining what prevents movement between groups, (c) competitive pressure assessment identifying which group(s) face the greatest threat in the next two to three years and why.
What gets checked
- Positioning dimensions are chosen to reveal meaningful competitive differences — not generic axes
- Mobility barriers are specific to this industry, not generic
- Competitive pressure assessment is forward-looking with specific evidence
Common mistakes
- Strategic group map places competitors without explaining what the positioning dimensions reveal about competitive strategy
- Mobility barriers described as 'economies of scale' without specifying the actual scale thresholds relevant to this industry
What a verifier looks for
- Challenge the strategic group placement of one competitor: 'You placed Competitor X in the premium group — but their average selling price is only 15% above the market median. Is that sufficient price premium to distinguish them as premium?'
Present Industry Analysis to a Strategy or Industry Professional
1 week
Present the Five Forces and competitive landscape analysis to a strategy professional (strategy consultant, industry analyst, senior business strategist, or business academic) who will challenge at least two of your assessments. Document challenges and responses.
Proof required
Submit: (a) an industry analysis executive summary (minimum 500 words) with strategic implications for a hypothetical market entrant, (b) Q&A log from the review session (minimum 300 words), and (c) attendance record with reviewer name and credentials.
What gets checked
- Executive summary draws strategic implications — not just summarises the analysis
- Q&A log shows challenges to industry assessments, not just clarifying questions
- Reviewer has strategy or industry expertise
Common mistakes
- Executive summary summarises the Five Forces without drawing strategic implications
- Reviewer with no relevant industry or strategy experience
What a verifier looks for
- Challenge the strategic implication for a market entrant: 'Given the barriers to entry you've identified, where would a new entrant find the most viable beachhead? What would their minimum viable entry strategy look like?'
- Provide written confirmation (minimum 150 words) of your strategy credentials and challenges raised.