Skip to contentScholarGate
LibraryBookshelfDeskReview StudioAssistant
Sign in
GE-McKinsey Nine-Box Matrix/Evidence
Method evidence record

GE-McKinsey Nine-Box Matrix

The GE-McKinsey nine-box matrix is a multifactor portfolio-analysis tool that positions a company's business units in a three-by-three grid defined by two composite dimensions: the attractiveness of the industry the unit competes in, and the unit's competitive strength within it. Developed by General Electric with McKinsey & Company in the early 1970s as a richer alternative to the BCG growth-share matrix, it replaces single proxies (market growth and relative share) with weighted indices built from many underlying factors. Hax and Majluf's 1983 Interfaces article gave the matrix a systematic methodological treatment, and Wind, Mahajan, and Swire's 1983 Journal of Marketing study empirically compared it with other standardized portfolio models, showing how much business positions depend on model choice. The nine cells map onto invest-grow, selectivity, and harvest-divest zones that guide resource allocation.

Sources recorded, not reviewed

Source record

Citations copied verbatim from the method’s source record. No claim-level verification is inferred from them.

GE-McKinsey Nine-Box Matrix (Industry Attractiveness-Business Strength Portfolio)
Taxonomic method record · process-pipeline / strategic-management
  • Hax, A. C., & Majluf, N. S. (1983). The Use of the Industry Attractiveness-Business Strength Matrix in Strategic Planning. Interfaces, 13(2), 54-71. · DOI 10.1287/inte.13.2.54
  • Wind, Y., Mahajan, V., & Swire, D. J. (1983). An Empirical Comparison of Standardized Portfolio Models. Journal of Marketing, 47(2), 89-99. · DOI 10.1177/002224298304700209
Open full method

Curated claims

Claims persisted in the evidence ledger, each with its own assessment.

No curated claims yet

This view does not invent a claim assessment when the ledger has none.

Related methods

Generated from the method graph and shown as machine-suggested relations — no evidence claim is inferred.

Taxonomic bucketBCG Growth-Share Matrixmachine-suggested · Relational suggestion, not evidence.Same method familyDiversification-Performance Analysis (Rumelt Categories)machine-suggested · Relational suggestion, not evidence.Same method familyPorter's Five Forces Industry Analysismachine-suggested · Relational suggestion, not evidence.Same method familyStrategic Value Chain Analysismachine-suggested · Relational suggestion, not evidence.

Evidence status

Sources recorded, not reviewed

Bibliographic sources are present. Claim-level evidence review has not been performed.

Sources

2 recorded citations, copied from the method source record.

Actions

Open method page
ScholarGate

A content-first reference library for research methods — what each one is, how it works, and where it comes from.

Open data (CC-BY)

Explore

  • Library
  • Search the library…
  • Browse by field
  • Fields
  • Journey
  • Compare
  • Which method?

Reference

  • Subjects
  • Atlas
  • Glossary
  • Methodology
  • Philosophy

Your tools

  • Bookshelf
  • Desk
  • Chat

Company

  • About
  • Pricing
  • Contact
  • Suggest a method

Entries are compiled from published sources for reference. Verifying the accuracy and suitability of any information for your own use remains your responsibility.

© 2026 ScholarGate · A research-method reference library
  • Privacy
  • Cookies
  • Terms
  • Delete account