In 2019, HBS faculty members of the U.S. Competitiveness Project conducted the sixth survey on U.S. competitiveness. This report—built on the latest survey findings and eight years of prior research on the competitiveness of the United States—highlights a disturbing pattern: structural failures in the U.S. political system continue to prevent meaningful progress on actions needed to improve U.S. competitiveness. Despite a decade of steady economic growth, the trajectory of the nation’s competitiveness remains disappointing.
The lens of industry competition helps diagnose why the U.S. political system is failing to deliver results for the average American. A Five Forces analysis explores the nature of competition in the politics industry, identifies the root causes of poor political outcomes for customers (citizens), and provides a strategic framework to determine reforms that are powerful and achievable.
The 2016 HBS report on the State of U.S. Competitiveness provides a comprehensive analysis of five years of research from the U.S. Competitiveness Project along with the findings of the 2016 HBS survey on U.S. competitiveness. This survey was administered to HBS alumni worldwide, HBS students, and members of the U.S. general public in May—June 2016.
Professor Michael E. Porter and Professor Jan W. Rivkin discuss the findings of Harvard Business School’s 2015 Alumni Survey on U.S. Competitiveness,
The Challenge of Shared Prosperity. Alumni are optmistic about the ability of U.S. firms to compete globally, but they doubt that firms will be able to lift the living standards of the average American.
The 2015 HBS survey on U.S. competitiveness reveals that business leaders are concerned about the economy’s ability to generate shared prosperity. America’s business environment is improving, but alumni doubt that firms in the U.S. will be able to improve living standards for the average American. Alumni see issues like inequality, middle-class stagnation, and economic immobility, as social as well as business challenges.
This report presents the findings of HBS' 2013–14 survey on U.S. competitiveness. It highlights a troubling divergence in the U.S. economy: large and midsize firms are prospering, but middle- and working-class citizens and small businesses are struggling.
This paper develops a novel clustering algorithm that systematically generates and assesses sets of cluster definitions (i.e., groups of closely related industries).
Second in the series of U.S. Competitiveness surveys, Harvard Business School gleaned responses from nearly 7,000 alumni and more than 1,000 members of the general public.
Policy steps for the president and Congress to follow in order to make American companies more competitive and their employees more prosperous.
Business leaders should not simply accept the business environment as a given, set by government. They can—and should—enhance the commons in ways that boost their own long-run profits.
This paper evaluates the role of regional cluster composition in the economic performance of industries, clusters and regions.
Some of the world’s most original thinkers explain the competitiveness challenge America faces and point the way forward.
As part of the U.S. Competitiveness Project, Harvard Business School asked its alumni to complete an in-depth survey on U.S. competitiveness.
Industries located in regions with strong clusters (i.e. a large presence of other related industries) experience higher growth in new business formation and start-up employment.
The performance of regional economies varies markedly in terms of wage, wage growth, employment growth, and patenting rate.
The real work of raising productivity and innovative capacity usually occurs not in our nation's capital, but in the cities and regions where firms are based and competition actually takes place.
In the modern competitive marketplace, nations have their own competitive advantages. These are investigated and discussed in-depth.