国际竞争力与国际战略管理的交叉。Wassily Leontief（1998）是与他的受欢迎的Heckscher Ohlin悖论的国际贸易理论界添加实证元的学者之一（1919）的理论。后来，管理学者（巴克利和卡森，1998，Tsang 1999）采用在研究全球竞争的概念。哈梅尔和普拉哈拉德（1994）后增强核心竞争力的概念、产业层面分析和竞争未来。经过这些学者的大量研究，大多数人都同意，一个国家的整体竞争力并不等同于单个企业层面的全球竞争力。Corden（1994）指出，有国家竞争力的三个主要领域：行业或产业竞争力、成本竞争力和生产力。Porter（1990）的许多思想都是早期学者所认同的。弗农（1966）把国家竞争力归结为一个国家的技术和能力，这与波特的先进因素是相似的。海默（1976）认为，公司有独特的竞争优势，使他们能够克服的不利与波特的企业特有优势，导致全球竞争力的概念。洞穴（1982）讨论了企业由于全球竞争而将知识转移到另一个国家的做法，即利用生产要素的适当组合将导致可能的成功。据papanastassou &皮尔斯（1999），Porter的钻石在国际商业研究，说明了在一个特定的行业，包括国家竞争力的几个车型之一。波特试图分析为什么有些国家成功，而另一些国家在国际竞争中失败。他试图利用国家竞争优势的四个决定因素来解决这个问题。
Global competitiveness occur at the cross roads between international economics and strategic management. Wassily Leontief (1998) was one of the scholars to add an empirical element to the theoretical realm of international trade with his popular paradox of the Heckscher-Ohlin (1919) theory. Later, management scholars (Buckley & Casson, 1998, Tsang 1999) adopted the concept of competing globally in their research. Hamel and Prahalad (1994) later reinforced the concepts of core competencies, industry level analysis and competing for the future. After much research by these scholars, most would agree that global competitiveness in the aggregate for a nation is not equivalent to global competitiveness at the individual firm level. Corden (1994) states that there are three major areas of national competitiveness: sectoral or industry competitiveness, cost competitiveness and productivity. Many of Porter’s (1990) ideas were shared by earlier scholars. Vernon (1966) attributed national competitiveness to a nation’s technology and capabilities, which are similar to Porter’s advanced factors. With Hymer’s (1976) idea that firms have specific competitive advantages that allow them to overcome the liability of foreignness is similar to Porter’s concept of firm-specific advantages that lead to global competitiveness. Caves (1982) discussed the practice of firms transferring knowledge gained in one country to another because of global competition is by utilizing the right mix of factors of production would lead to probable success. According to Papanastassou & Pearce (1999), Porter’s diamond is one of the few models in international business research that illustrates what comprises national competitiveness within a given industry. Thus Porter tried to analyse why some nations succeed and others fail in international competition. He tries to solve this problem using the four determinants of national competitive advantage.