I definitely agree with you on the use of porter’s five forces to analyze the competitiveness of the market services concerning your company especially since the model identifies where the power lies in the business. However, it does have some assumptions that I guess your discussion does not consider and are relevant as well. These assumptions focus on the power of the buyer and the seller, competitive rivalry, threat of substitution and the threat of new entry (Porter &Michael, 2008). The assumptions have significant influence on monopolistic competition.
Your discussion articulates the competitive position of your company within the industry quite well. However, the uses of the Robert grant view on the company’s strengths and weakness. The model considers only the strengths and the weaknesses of a company do not translate directly to the competitive position for a company. There are external factors like government interference, environmental factors that influence the competitive position of an industry. It would be better if you consider them in your argument before reaching a conclusive decision.
The choice of your factors that contribute to the growth potential of the firm is quite impressive. The factors selected political, economic and social have a high contribution to the growth potential of a company. In addition, these external factors but there are also some internal factors that may be worth considering. These include use of technology, proper management skills, skilled labor, and the innovation. These factors are very are controllable by the company hence they can be regulated to the company’s growth. On the hand if poorly regulated, they can also contribute to the decreasing the company’s potential (Hove, & Tarisai, 2013).
Porter, Michael E. (2008). The Five Competitive Forces That Shape Strategy. (HBSP) Retrieved from: https://cb.hbsp.harvard.edu/cbmp/content/48942136
Hove, P., & Tarisai, C. (2013). Internal factors affecting the successful growth and survival of small and micro agri-business firms in alice communal area. Journal of Economics, 4(1), 57-67.