The Concept of Competition and the Objectives of Competitors

Conclusions
Different concepts of competition derive mainly from the complexity of the phenomenon that necessitates 
researchers to focus only on specific features of interest in particular study or analysis. Abstracting from the specific 
situations using concepts of the focal unit of competition and the field of competition gives possibility to analyze 
these seemingly different concepts in the same framework.
The field of competition defines the unified framework for the analysis of competition and competitiveness in 
terms of six dimensions: defining criterions of focal units of competition, the objectives of competition, internal and 
external determinants of competitiveness, configuration of relationships influencing the competitive process, 
combination of static and dynamic elements in the field of competition, and the purpose of modeling.
The model creates a framework to clarify the aggregation needed when moving from the firm-level analysis to 
the country-level analysis.
Objectives
Focal unit(s)’
(firm etc)
Internal factors
Strategy
External factors
Competition mechanism
Industry/Market
External factors
Business environment
Relations
(Market) exchange Networks
Hierarchies Institutions
Processes Change

---

30

 Enn Listra / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 213 ( 2015 ) 25 – 30 
References
Aghion, P., Bloom, N., Blundell, R., Griffith, R. & Howitt, P. (2002). Competition and Innovation: An Inverted U Relationship. National Bureau 
of Economic Research Working Paper Series, 9269.
Barney, J. (2001). Is the Resource-Based "View" a Useful Perspective for Strategic Management Research? Yes. 
The Academy of Management 
Review, 
26, 41-56.
Bertrand, J. (1883). Théorie mathématique de la richesse sociale. 
Journal de Savants, 
499-508.
Buckley, P., Pass, C. & Prescott, K. (1988). Measures of International Competitiveness. 
Journal of Marketing Management, 
4, 175-200.
Budd, L. & Hirmis, A. (2004). Conceptual Framework for Regional Competitiveness. 
Regional Studies, 
38, 1015-1028.
Cournot, A. (1838). 
Recherches sur les Principes Mathemetiques de la Theorie des Richesses.
Demsetz, H. (1981). Economic, Legal, and Political Dimensions of competition. 
Discussion Paper 
209. University of California, Los Angeles.
Fligstein, N. & McAdam, D. (2012). A Theory of Fields. New York: Oxford University Press.
Fudenberg, D. & Tirole, J. (1996). 
Came Theory
. The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
Hayek, F. A. (1996). 
Individualism and Economic Order.
Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Katz, M. & Shapiro, C. (1985). Network Externalities, Competition, and compatibility. 
The american Economic Review, 
75, 424-440.
Ketels, C. (2006). Michael Porter's Competitiveness Framework—Recent Learnings and New Research Priorities. 
Journal of Industry, 
Competitiveness and Trade, 
6, 424-440.
Kirzner, I. M. (1978). 
Competition and Enterpreneurship.
Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Kitson, M., Martin, R. & Tyler, P. (2004). Regional Competitiveness: An Elusive yet Key Concept? 
Regional Studies, 
38, 991-999.
Krugman, P. (1994). Competitiveness: a Dangerous Obsession. 
Foreign Affairs, 
73, No. 2, 28-44.
Krugman, P. (1996). Making sense of the competitveness debate. 
Oxford Review of the Economic Policy, 
12, 17-25.
Lippman, S. & Rumelt, R. (1982). Uncertain Imitability: An Analysis of Interfirm Differences in Efficiency under Competition.