Porter’s Five Forces is a framework for analysing the competitive pressure in an industry — competitive rivalry, the threat of new entrants, the threat of substitutes, the bargaining power of suppliers, and the bargaining power of buyers. Developed by Harvard economist Michael Porter in 1979, it answers a question SWOT and PESTEL cannot: how attractive and profitable is this industry, and why? Business, management, and MBA students use it to judge whether a market is worth entering and where competitive advantage can be built. This guide explains all five forces with Australian examples, works through a full analysis, shows how Porter’s fits with SWOT and PESTEL, and answers the most common questions.
Working on a strategy assignment now? Our business and management writers and MBA specialists build framework-led competitive analyses every day, and our proofreading service will sharpen your argument before you submit.
What is Porter’s Five Forces?
Porter’s Five Forces is an industry-analysis framework that assesses the five competitive forces determining how much profit an industry can sustain. The central insight is that competition is not just about existing rivals — it also comes from customers, suppliers, potential new entrants, and substitute products. The stronger these five forces, the more they squeeze industry profitability; the weaker they are, the more attractive the industry. Michael Porter introduced the model in a 1979 Harvard Business Review article, and it remains the standard tool for industry-level strategic analysis.
Unlike a SWOT analysis, which looks at a single organisation, Porter’s Five Forces analyses the industry as a whole. And unlike a PESTEL analysis, which scans the broad macro-environment, it stays focused on the immediate competitive landscape. The goal is to understand the structural reasons some industries are persistently more profitable than others, and to find where a firm can defend a strong position.
The five forces explained
The five forces are competitive rivalry, the threat of new entrants, the bargaining power of suppliers, the bargaining power of buyers, and the threat of substitutes. Each one can be strong (bad for industry profits) or weak (good for them). The table summarises what raises each force and gives an Australian example.
| Force | The force is strong when… | Australian example |
|---|---|---|
| Competitive rivalry | Many equal-sized rivals, slow growth, low differentiation. | The supermarket sector, with intense Coles–Woolworths competition. |
| Threat of new entrants | Low barriers to entry, little capital needed, weak brands. | Online retail, where a store can launch cheaply. |
| Supplier power | Few suppliers, unique inputs, high switching costs. | Specialised mining-equipment suppliers. |
| Buyer power | Few large buyers, low switching costs, price-sensitive customers. | Large retailers dictating terms to food producers. |
| Threat of substitutes | Cheap, convenient alternatives exist outside the industry. | Streaming services substituting for pay-TV. |
1. Competitive rivalry
Competitive rivalry is the intensity of competition among existing firms in the industry, and it usually sits at the centre of the model because the other four forces feed into it. Rivalry is strong when there are many competitors of similar size, when industry growth is slow (so firms fight for share rather than riding a rising market), when products are undifferentiated, and when exit barriers are high. Strong rivalry drives down prices and margins. The Australian supermarket and airline sectors are textbook examples of intense rivalry between a small number of large, evenly matched players.
2. Threat of new entrants
The threat of new entrants is the risk that new competitors will enter the industry and erode profits. It depends on barriers to entry: the capital required, economies of scale, brand loyalty, access to distribution, regulatory licensing, and the likely retaliation of incumbents. When barriers are low, the mere threat of entry forces existing firms to keep prices and profits modest. High-barrier industries — banking, telecommunications, aviation — protect incumbent profitability; low-barrier ones such as online retail are constantly exposed to new rivals.
3. Bargaining power of suppliers
The bargaining power of suppliers is the leverage that the providers of inputs hold over the firms in an industry. Suppliers are powerful when there are few of them, when their input is unique or differentiated, when switching to another supplier is costly, or when they could integrate forward into the industry themselves. Powerful suppliers capture more of the value by raising prices or cutting quality. A firm dependent on a single specialised supplier — common in advanced manufacturing and mining — faces high supplier power.
Strategy assignment due soon? Our Master’s- and PhD-qualified business writers build Porter’s Five Forces, SWOT and PESTEL analyses that connect into one coherent argument — fully referenced and matched to your rubric.
4. Bargaining power of buyers
The bargaining power of buyers is the leverage customers hold to push prices down or demand more. Buyers are powerful when there are few of them and each buys in volume, when the product is undifferentiated, when switching costs are low, and when buyers are price-sensitive or could integrate backward. Powerful buyers squeeze margins. In Australia, the concentration of grocery retailing means a small number of large retailers wield significant power over the food producers that supply them — a clear case of strong buyer power.
5. Threat of substitutes
The threat of substitutes is the risk that customers will meet the same need with a product or service from outside the industry. Substitutes differ from direct competitors: they solve the problem in a different way. The threat is high when substitutes are cheaper, more convenient, or improving quickly, and when switching is easy. The classic recent example is streaming services substituting for traditional pay-TV and cinema. A strong substitute threat caps how much an industry can charge before customers defect entirely.
How to apply Porter’s Five Forces: step by step
To apply Porter’s Five Forces, assess each force in turn, judge whether it is strong or weak with evidence, and then draw an overall conclusion about industry attractiveness. The process is:
- Define the industry precisely. “Australian budget domestic airlines” is analysable; “transport” is too broad.
- Assess each of the five forces. For each, list the factors that make it strong or weak in this specific industry.
- Rate each force. Conclude whether each is high, moderate, or low, with reasons and evidence.
- Judge overall attractiveness. Many strong forces mean a tough, low-profit industry; many weak forces mean an attractive one.
- Draw strategic implications. Identify how a firm could position itself to weaken the forces working against it — the “so what?” that earns marks.
A worked example: the Australian streaming industry
Here is a condensed Porter’s Five Forces analysis of the Australian video-streaming industry. (Use it as a model for structure, not as text to copy.)
| Force | Assessment | Strength |
|---|---|---|
| Competitive rivalry | Many well-funded global and local platforms competing for the same subscribers; content costs rising. | High |
| Threat of new entrants | High content-licensing and technology costs deter most entrants, but tech giants can enter at will. | Moderate |
| Supplier power | Studios and content owners hold strong leverage over licensing terms. | High |
| Buyer power | Subscribers can cancel and switch instantly with no switching cost. | High |
| Threat of substitutes | Free platforms, social video, gaming and piracy all compete for screen time. | High |
With four of five forces strong, this is a structurally unattractive, low-margin industry — which matches reality. The strategic implication is clear: a platform must reduce the forces working against it, for instance by producing exclusive original content (to differentiate and weaken both rivalry and substitutes) and by bundling services (to raise switching costs and reduce buyer power). That move from analysis to implication is what a high-scoring assignment delivers.
How Porter’s Five Forces fits with SWOT and PESTEL
The three frameworks operate at different levels and are strongest together. PESTEL scans the broad macro-environment; Porter’s Five Forces zooms in on the specific industry’s competitive structure; and SWOT combines those external findings with the firm’s internal strengths and weaknesses. A coherent strategic analysis often runs in that order: PESTEL for context, Porter’s for industry attractiveness, then SWOT to assess how well a particular firm is placed, finishing with a TOWS matrix to generate strategy. Showing a marker how the findings flow from one framework into the next — rather than presenting three disconnected diagrams — is consistently the difference between an average and a strong result.
Barriers to entry in detail
Because the threat of new entrants is so often the force that determines long-run profitability, it is worth understanding what actually keeps competitors out. The main barriers to entry are: economies of scale (incumbents produce so cheaply at volume that a small entrant cannot match their costs); capital requirements (the upfront investment needed to compete, such as an airline’s fleet); brand loyalty and switching costs (customers attached to existing brands are expensive to win over); access to distribution (shelf space or platform placement may be locked up by incumbents); regulation and licensing (banking, telecommunications, and healthcare all require approvals that take time and money); and expected retaliation (if incumbents are likely to cut prices aggressively, entry looks risky). When several of these stack up, an industry can stay profitable for decades; when they are weak, profits are quickly competed away. Identifying which barriers apply — and whether technology is eroding them — is one of the most valuable parts of a Porter’s analysis.
The sixth force: complementors
Some strategists add a “sixth force” — complementors — to Porter’s original five. A complementor is a company whose product makes yours more valuable: streaming devices for streaming services, apps for smartphones, fuel networks for electric vehicles. When complementary products thrive, demand for the industry’s product rises; when they are scarce, the industry suffers regardless of the other five forces. Porter himself treated complements as a factor within the existing forces rather than a separate one, so check whether your unit expects the classic five or the extended six. Either way, mentioning complementors where they genuinely matter shows analytical maturity.
Limitations of Porter’s Five Forces
Porter’s framework is powerful but not complete, and acknowledging its limits strengthens an assignment. First, it offers a snapshot of a static industry, whereas real markets evolve — technology and deregulation can dismantle barriers and reshape forces within a few years, so an analysis dates. Second, it underweights the role of complementors and of cooperation between firms (alliances, ecosystems), which the original five forces do not capture well. Third, it assumes reasonably clear industry boundaries, which digital convergence increasingly blurs — is a tech platform in retail, media, or payments? Finally, it analyses industry structure but says little about a firm’s internal resources and capabilities, which is why it pairs naturally with a SWOT and a resource-based view. Used as one lens among several, Porter’s Five Forces remains one of the most useful tools in strategy; treated as the whole answer, it misses the dynamism of modern markets.
Common Porter’s Five Forces mistakes to avoid
- Defining the industry too broadly. A vague scope makes every force impossible to assess; be specific.
- Confusing substitutes with direct competitors. Substitutes come from outside the industry and meet the need differently.
- Just describing each force. You must rate it (high/moderate/low) and explain why, with evidence.
- No overall conclusion. The point is to judge industry attractiveness, not to list five paragraphs.
- Ignoring strategic implications. Finish by showing how a firm could weaken the forces against it.
- Treating it as static. Forces shift over time, especially with new technology — note the trajectory.
Need the full competitive analysis written? Our subject-matched business and MBA writers deliver Porter’s Five Forces, SWOT and PESTEL analyses, fully referenced and matched to your rubric — Turnitin-checked and AI-free.
If you’d rather have an expert handle this, here’s what we offer
Frequently asked questions
What are Porter’s Five Forces?
Porter’s Five Forces are competitive rivalry, the threat of new entrants, the bargaining power of suppliers, the bargaining power of buyers, and the threat of substitutes. Together these five forces determine the level of competition and the profit potential of an industry — the stronger the forces, the harder it is to make sustained profits in that market.
Who created Porter’s Five Forces and when?
Porter’s Five Forces was created by Michael E. Porter, a Harvard Business School economist, in a 1979 Harvard Business Review article titled “How Competitive Forces Shape Strategy”. Porter later expanded the framework in his 1980 book Competitive Strategy, and it has been a cornerstone of industry analysis and strategy teaching ever since.
What is the difference between Porter’s Five Forces and SWOT?
The difference between Porter’s Five Forces and SWOT is the unit of analysis: Porter’s Five Forces analyses the competitive structure of an entire industry, while SWOT analyses a single organisation’s internal strengths and weaknesses alongside external opportunities and threats. Porter’s tells you how attractive an industry is; SWOT tells you how well a particular firm is positioned within it.
What is the difference between a competitor and a substitute?
The difference between a competitor and a substitute is where it comes from: a direct competitor offers the same type of product within the industry, while a substitute meets the same customer need from outside the industry in a different way. For a cinema, another cinema is a competitor, but streaming, gaming, and live events are substitutes — all competing for the same leisure time and spend.
How do you write a Porter’s Five Forces analysis for an assignment?
To write a Porter’s Five Forces analysis for an assignment, define the industry precisely, then assess each force in turn, rating it high, moderate, or low with specific evidence. Conclude with an overall judgement of industry attractiveness and the strategic implications for a firm operating in it. Markers reward the ratings, the overall conclusion, and the strategic “so what?” far more than a description of each force.
Is competitive rivalry the most important of the five forces?
Competitive rivalry is often treated as the central force because the other four feed into it — strong supplier power, buyer power, entry threats, and substitutes all intensify rivalry and squeeze profits. However, no single force is automatically most important; their relative weight depends on the industry, so a good analysis identifies which forces dominate the specific market being studied rather than assuming rivalry always rules.
Can Porter’s Five Forces be used for service and online industries?
Yes, Porter’s Five Forces applies to service, digital, and online industries as readily as to manufacturing, though the factors look different. In online markets, low entry barriers often raise the threat of new entrants, low switching costs raise buyer power, and rapidly improving alternatives raise the threat of substitutes. The framework still works; you simply identify the industry-specific drivers behind each force.
What does it mean if all five forces are strong?
If all five forces are strong, the industry is structurally unattractive: intense rivalry, easy entry, powerful suppliers and buyers, and readily available substitutes all combine to squeeze profit margins. Firms in such industries struggle to earn sustained high returns and must compete hard on cost or differentiation to survive. Conversely, an industry where most forces are weak tends to be highly profitable and worth entering or defending.
