resource-based view

 

  • [4] Although the literature presents many different ideas around the concept of the resource-advantage perspective, at its heart, the common theme is that the firm’s resources
    are financial, legal, human, organisational, informational and relational; resources are heterogeneous and imperfectly mobile and that management’s key task is to understand and organise resources for sustainable competitive advantage.

  • The resource-based view (RBV), often referred to as the “resource-based view of the firm”,[1] is a managerial framework used to determine the strategic resources a firm can
    exploit to achieve sustainable competitive advantage.

  • [5][6] Other scholars suggest that the resource-based view represents a new paradigm, albeit with roots in “Ricardian and Penrosian economic theories according to which firms
    can earn sustainable supranormal returns if, and only if, they have superior resources and those resources are protected by some form of isolating mechanism precluding their diffusion throughout the industry.

  • suggest the following classification of competitive positions:[1] • Price positioning • Quality positioning • Innovation positioning • Service positioning • Benefit positioning
    • Tailored positioning (one-to-one marketing) Value-based view of strategy In addition to the resource-based views, value-based views provide an additional way to create organizational management links between employees at a company, based
    on their core values and beliefs.

  • [22] The resources are divided into two critical assumptions: Heterogeneous: It is the assumption that each company has different skills, capabilities, structure, resources
    and that makes each company different.

  • Due to the different forms of employment and amount of resources, organizations can design different strategies that promote competitiveness in the market.

  • [24] In the resource-based view, strategists select the strategy or competitive position that best exploits the internal resources and capabilities relative to external opportunities.

  • In the resource-based view, strategists select the strategy or competitive position that best exploits the internal resources and capabilities relative to external opportunities.

  • A key insight arising from the resource-based view is that not all resources are of equal importance, nor do they possess the potential to become a source of sustainable competitive
    advantage.

  • [25] The steps to a values-based view of strategy are: • Fundamental Values or Beliefs • Design Management Practices That Reflect and Embody These Values • Use These to Build
    Core Capabilities • Invent a Strategy That is Consistent with the Values and Uses the Capabilities to Compete in New and Unusual Ways • Senior Management’s role The main reason for these alternate steps to view strategy is to provide a method
    that concentrates on the values of management practices, rather than simply resourced-based strategy.

  • Given that strategic resources represent a complex network of inter-related assets and capabilities, organisations can adopt many possible competitive positions.

  • Given that strategic resources represent a complex network of inter-related assets and capabilities, organisations can adopt many possible competitive positions.

  • [2] The resource-based view suggests that organisations must develop unique, firm-specific core competencies that will allow them to outperform competitors by doing things
    differently.

  • Criticisms A number of criticisms of RBV have been widely cited,[26] and are as follows: • The RBV is tautological[27] • Different resource configurations can generate the
    same value for firms and thus would not be competitive advantage[citation needed] • The role of product markets is underdeveloped in the argument [28] • The theory has limited prescriptive implications.

  • Barney’s 1991 article “Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage” is widely cited as a pivotal work in the emergence of the resource-based view.

  • [5] Other criticisms include: • The failure to consider factors surrounding resources; that is, an assumption that they simply exist, rather than a critical investigation
    of how key capabilities are acquired or developed.

  • Barney stated that for resources to hold potential as sources of sustainable competitive advantage, they should be valuable, rare, imperfectly imitable and not substitutable
    (now generally known as VRIN criteria).

  • Although scholars debate the precise categories of competitive positions that are used, there is general agreement, within the literature, that the resource-based view is
    much more flexible than Porter’s prescriptive approach to strategy formulation.

  • Although scholars debate the precise categories of competitive positions that are used, there is general agreement, within the literature, that the resource-based view is
    much more flexible than Porter’s prescriptive approach to strategy formulation.

  • [23] RBV and strategy formulation Firms in possession of a resource, or mix of resources that are rare among competitors, are said to have a comparative advantage.

  • controlled by a firm that enable the firm to conceive of and implement strategies that improve its efficiency and effectiveness” [17] Capabilities[edit] Capabilities are “a
    special type of resource, specifically an organizationally embedded non-transferable firm-specific resource whose purpose is to improve the productivity of the other resources possessed by the firm.

  • Resources and capabilities may also be intraorganizational or interorganizational: While RBV scholars have traditionally focused on intraorganizational resources and capabilities,
    some research points to the importance of interorganizational routines.

 

Works Cited

[‘Hooley, Graham; Broderick, Amanda; Möller, Kristian (January 1998). “Competitive positioning and the resource-based view of the firm”. Journal of Strategic Marketing. 6 (2): 97–116. doi:10.1080/09652549800000003.
o ^ Jump up to:a b c d e Barney, Jay
(1 March 1991). “Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage”. Journal of Management. 17 (1): 99–120. doi:10.1177/014920639101700108. S2CID 220588334.
o ^ Lavie, Dovev (2008). “The Competitive Advantage of Interconnected Firms”. 21st Century
Management: A Reference Handbook. pp. I-324–I-334. doi:10.4135/9781412954006.n32. ISBN 9781412949729.
o ^ Jump up to:a b c Prahalad, C. K.; Hamel, G. “The Core Competence of the Corporation”. Harvard Business Review. 68 (3): 79–91.
o ^ Jump up
to:a b Priem, R. L.; Butler, J. (2001). “Is the Resource-Based ‘View’ a Useful Perspective for Strategic Management Research?”. Academy of Management Review. 26 (1): 20–40. doi:10.5465/amr.2001.4011928. hdl:10397/34056.
o ^ Mahoney, J.T.; Pandian,
J.R. (1992). “The Resource-Based View Within the Conversation of Strategic Management”. Strategic Management Journal. 15 (5): 363–380. doi:10.1002/smj.4250130505. hdl:2142/30019.
o ^ Lewis, Alfred; Kipley, Dan (2012). “Resource-Based View”. Encyclopedia
of New Venture Management. doi:10.4135/9781452218571.n158. ISBN 9781412990813.
o ^ Kor, Yasemin Y.; Mahoney, Joseph T. (January 2004). “Edith Penrose’s (1959) Contributions to the Resource-based View of Strategic Management”. Journal of Management
Studies. 41 (1): 183–191. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6486.2004.00427.x.
o ^ Jump up to:a b c Fahy, John; Smithee, Alan (1999). “Strategic Marketing and the Resource Based View of the Firm” (PDF). Academy of Marketing Science Review. 3. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.194.6865.
S2CID 16366124.
o ^ Hunt, Shelby D. (April 2013). “A general theory of business marketing: R-A theory, Alderson, the ISBM framework, and the IMP theoretical structure”. Industrial Marketing Management. 42 (3): 283–293. doi:10.1016/j.indmarman.2013.02.002.
o ^
Makadok, Richard (May 2001). “Toward a synthesis of the resource-based and dynamic-capability views of rent creation”. Strategic Management Journal. 22 (5): 387–401. doi:10.1002/smj.158.
o ^ Hunt, Shelby D.; Derozier, Caroline (January 2004). “The
normative imperatives of business and marketing strategy: grounding strategy in resource‐advantage theory”. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing. 19 (1): 5–22. doi:10.1108/08858620410516709.
o ^ Lowson, Robert H. (August 2003). “The nature
of an operations strategy: combining strategic decisions from the resource‐based and market‐driven viewpoints”. Management Decision. 41 (6): 538–549. doi:10.1108/00251740310485181.
o ^ Day, G.S.; Wensley, R. (1988). “Assessing Advantage: A Framework
for Diagnosing Competitive Superiority”. Journal of Marketing. 52 (2): 1–26. doi:10.2307/1251261. JSTOR 1251261.
o ^ Day, G. S. (1994). “The Capabilities of Market-Driven Organizations”. Journal of Marketing. 58 (4): 37–52. doi:10.2307/1251915.
JSTOR 1251915.
o ^ Hooley, G. J.; Greenley, G. E.; Fahy, J.; Cadogan, J. W. (2001). “Market-focused Resources, Competitive Positioning and Firm Performance”. Journal of Marketing Management. 17 (5–6): 503–520. doi:10.1362/026725701323366908. S2CID
168120105.
o ^ Barney, J.B. (2001). “Is the Resource-Based “View” a Useful Perspective for Strategic Management Research?”. Academy of Management Review. 26 (1): 101. doi:10.5465/AMR.2001.4011938.
o ^ Makadok, Richard (May 2001). “Toward a synthesis
of the resource-based and dynamic-capability views of rent creation”. Strategic Management Journal. 22 (5): 387–401. doi:10.1002/smj.158.
o ^ Andriessen, D., Making Sense of Intellectual Capital: Designing a Method for the Valuation of Intangibles,
Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann, Burlington, 2004[page needed]
o ^ Dyer, Jeffrey H.; Singh, Harbir (October 1998). “The Relational View: Cooperative Strategy and Sources of Interorganizational Competitive Advantage”. Academy of Management Review.
23 (4): 660–679. doi:10.5465/amr.1998.1255632.
o ^ Kale, Prashant; Dyer, Jeffrey H.; Singh, Harbir (August 2002). “Alliance capability, stock market response, and long-term alliance success: the role of the alliance function”. Strategic Management
Journal. 23 (8): 747–767. doi:10.1002/smj.248. hdl:2027.42/34615.
o ^ Argyres, Nicholas; Mayer, Kyle J. (October 2007). “Contract design as a firm capability: An integration of learning and transaction cost perspectives”. Academy of Management Review.
32 (4): 1060–1077. doi:10.5465/amr.2007.26585739.
o ^ Jump up to:a b Jurevicius, O. (2013). Resource Based View. Retrieved 1 March and 9 March 2019 from https://www.strategicmanagementinsight.com/topics/resource-based-view.html
o ^ Hunt, S.D.
and Morgan, R.M., “The Comparative Advantage of the Firm,” Journal of Marketing, Vol. 59, April, 1995, pp 1-15
o ^ O’Reilly III, Charles A. (2000). Hidden Value. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press. pp. 1–20.
o ^ Barney, J.B. (2001). “Is
the Resource-Based “View” a Useful Perspective for Strategic Management Research?”. Academy of Management Review. 26 (1): 41–56. doi:10.5465/AMR.2001.4011938.
o ^ Collis, D. J. (1994). “Research Note: How Valuable Are Organizational Capabilities?”.
Strategic Management Journal. 1994: 143–152. doi:10.1002/smj.4250150910.; Priem, R.L.; Butler, J.E. (2001). “Tautology in the Resource-Based View and Implications of Externally Determined Resource Value: Further Comments”. Academy of Management Review.
26 (1): 57–66. doi:10.5465/amr.2001.4011946. hdl:10397/23200.
o ^ Priem, R.L.; Butler, J.E. (2001). “Is the Resource-Based Theory a Useful Perspective for Strategic Management Research?”. Academy of Management Review. 26 (1): 22–40. doi:10.5465/amr.2001.4011928.
hdl:10397/34056.
o ^ Stinchcombe, Arthur L. (2000). “On equilibrium, organizational form, and competitive strategy”. Economics Meets Sociology in Strategic Management. Advances in Strategic Management. Vol. 17. pp. 271–284. doi:10.1016/S0742-3322(00)17021-4.
ISBN 0-7623-0661-0.
o ^ Rumelt, Richard P. (March 1991). “How much does industry matter?”. Strategic Management Journal. 12 (3): 167–185. doi:10.1002/smj.4250120302.
Photo credit: https://www.flickr.com/photos/thartz00/4844697927/’]