Strategic Management in Global Environments

Chrisyanqu

Chapter3.pdf

Home >Business & Finance homework help >Strategic Management in Global Environments

Studying this chapter should provide you with the strategic management knowledge needed to:

J.1 Explain why firms need to study and understand their internal organization.

J 2 Define value and discuss its

importance.

Describe the differences between tangible and intangible resources.

J ~ Define capabilities and discuss their development.

3 '5 Describe four criteria used to determine if resources and capabilities are core competencies.

3 6 Explain how firms analyze their value chain to determine where they are able to create value when using their resources, capabilities, and core competencies.

3 7 Define outsourcing and discuss reasons for its use.

3 8 Discuss the importance of identifying internal strengths and weaknesses.

3 9 Describe the importance of avoiding core rigidities.

C~-npt2mOC~t..c:...c A.Da.,llha..n..S. ,...,._ ._~~-~-_... •• ,.._n..:ID~t

\ ' .

. .

l:ddorul .n- ~a.._.._..,.~~._ ... ~•«~• ... .ma--.~.;.c...,..=:-'....._'==~.;;;..:~.;.;;.;;.;,;.;;;;;;;r:;===--.;.;;;;;z;;;-..:'"0==---=o:-...__.. ......

·;,

LARGE PHARMACEUTICAL COMPANIES, BIG DATA ANALYTICS, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND CORE COMPETENCIES: A BRAVE NEW WORLD

To date, and perhaps surprisingly, the idea of using data strategically remains somewhat novel in some organizations. However, the reality of "big data• and "big data analytics· (which is "the process of examining big data to uncover hidden patterns, unknown correlations, and other useful information that can be used to make better decisions") is becoming increasingly popular in business. Indeed, in the current competitive landscape, most businesses must use big data analytics (BOA} across all customer channels (mobile, Web, e-mail, and physical stores} throughout their supply chain to help them become more innovative.

This is the situation for large pharmaceutical companies (the firms often called " big pharma"} in that many have been working to develop a core competence in BOA. (We define and discuss core competencies in this chapt er.) There are several reasons t hey are doing this. In addition to the vast increases in the amounts of data that must be studied and interpreted for competitive purposes, "health care reform and the changing landscape of health care delivery• systems throughout the world are influencing these firms to think about developing BOA as a core competence.

Many benefits can accrue to big pharma firms that develop BOA as a core competence. For example, having BOA as a core competence can help a firm quickly

" !~~~~----~~~

AI can help analyze data on clinical trials, health records, genetic

profiles, and preclinical studies. China has a goal to become the world

leader in AI.

identify trial candidates and accelerate their recruitment. develop improved inclusion and exclusion criteria to use in clinical trials, and uncover unintended uses and indications for prod- ucts. In terms of customer functionality, superior products can be provided at a faster pace as a foundation for helping patients live better and healthier lives.

In developing their BOA capabilities, many of the big pharma companies are investing in ar- tificial intelligence (AI). AI p rovides the capability to analyze many d ifferent sets of informat ion. For example, AI can help analyze data on clinical trials, health records, genetic profiles, and precl inica l studies. AI can analyze and integrate these data to identify patterns in the data and suggest hypotheses about relationships. A new drug generall y requires a decade of research and $2.6 billion of investment. And only about 5 percent of the drugs that enter experimental research make it to the market and are successful. Eventually, it is expected that the use of AI could reduce the early research development time from 4-6 years to 1 year, not only greatly reducing the time of development but also the costs.

As we discuss in this chapter, capabilities are the foundation for developing core com- petencies. There are several capabilities big pharma companies need for BOA to be a core competence. Supportive architecture, the proper mix of data scientists, and •t echnology that integrates and manages new types and sources of data flexibility and scalability while main- taining the highest standards of data governance, data quality, and data security" are examples

of capabilities that big pharma need if they wish to develop BOA as a core competence. Of course, using artificial intelligence provides strong support for the application of BOA.

Having a strong BOA competence could be critical for pharmaceutical firms in the future. Most Chinese pharmaceutical firms are medium-sized and sell generic drugs and therapeutic medicines, investing in R&D at only about 25% of the amount invested by big pharma in devel- oped countries. However, China has a plan to develop large, competitive pharmaceutical firms by 2025. In 2017, for example, China's second largest class of investments was biopharma. Interestingly, the largest Chinese investment that year was in information systems, including AI. China has a goal to become the world leader in AI.

In recent years, big pharma has been earning mediocre returns of about 3 percent ROI, down from 10 percent a decade earlier. Thus, big pharma executives feel pressure especially with the initial costs of developing BOA and AI. Hopefully, they soon will be able to reduce their costs and experience higher rates of success in the development of new drugs. Until then, however, analysts are predicting record numbers of mergers and acquisitions in the pharmaceutical industry, with big pharma acquiring successful medium-sized pharmaceuticals and biotechnology firms.

Sources: S. Mukherjee, 201 S. How big pnarma is using AI to make better drugs. Fortune, fortune.com, March 19: Z. Torrey, 2018. China prepares for big pl\arrna. thediplomat.com. March 14; E. Corbett. 2018. European mid-sized pharrna companies·biotechs and big pharma? The Pharrnaletter, www.thepharmaletter.com, March 9; M. Jewel. 2018. Signs that 2018 will be a record year for pharma M&A, The Phormaletter, www.thepnarmaletter.com, March 1; B. Nelson, 2018. Why big pharma and biotech are betting big on AI. NBC News, www.nbc.news. March 1; Big data analytks: What it is & why it matters. 2015, SAS, www .sas.com, April2; Big data for the pharmaceutical industry, Informatica, www.informatka.com, March 17; B. Atkins, 201 5. Big data and the board, Wall StreetlournaiOnline. www.wsj.com. April16; 5. F. DeAngelis. 2014, Pharmaceutical big data analytks promises a healthier future, Enterrasolutions, www.enterrasolutions.com, June 5; T. Wolfram, 2014. Data analytks has big pharma rethinking its core competencies, Forbes Online, www.forbes.com, December 22.

A s discussed in the first two chapters, several factors in the global economy, including the rapid development of the Internet's capabilities and globalization in general, are making it difficult for firms to develop competitive advantages.' Increasingly, innovation appears to be a vital path to efforts to develop competitive advantages, particularly sus- tainable ones! Innovative actions are required by big pharma companies, and they need to develop new drugs more quickly and at lower costs while improving the success of the drugs that they develop. As the Opening Case shows, they are trying to use artificial intelligence to help develop capabilities in big data analytics that hopefully can become a core competence.

As is the case for big pharma companies, innovation is critical to most firms' suc- cess. This means that many firms seek to develop innovation as a core competence. We define and discuss core competencies in this chapter and explain how firms use their resources and capabilities to form them. As a core competence, innovation has long been critical to Boeing's success, too. Today, however, the firm is focusing on incre- mental innovations as well as developing new technologies that are linked to major innovations and the projects they spawn, such as the 787 Dreamliner. The first delivery of the 787-10 Dreamliner was made to Singapore Airlines on March 26, 2018. Boeing believes its incremental innovations enable the firm to deliver reliable products to cus- tomers more quickly and at a lower cost.3 As we discuss in this chapter, firms and organizations- such as those we mention here- achieve strategic competitiveness and earn above-average returns by acquiring, bundling, and leveraging their resources for the purpose of taking advantage of opportunities in the external environment in ways that create value for customers.•

Even if the firm develops and manages resources in ways that create core compe- tencies and competitive advantages, competitors will eventually learn how to duplicate the benefits of any firm's value-creating strategy; thus, all competitive advantages have

Copyri; hl 2020 Cmga;t: U:uninz:. All Ri£bts Rekt~led. t.by not bt ~oopied • .ilC*lntd. or duplie&lc'd. in wbc))e or in parl. Due 14e la'.'Cron.k risflli. JOim' lbinl pllrty (.ilatelll m:.y be ~~a~ppm:k'd from lbt e8ook a!:d'cx eCbapta(.s). &btorial rt:'\·kw has dtemt'd lb:.t sny SUppn'llie'd (.Ultelll doH not m:dtriaJJy atrcctlbt o~~ra!J Jeamina: uperim..-e. Cmgaj,~ Uamina: R'!iefl'tS lh;,o ri; hllo f\'mO,,.-t: additiOIUI (.ilatelll 1111 Illy timt ir s~ent ri£blll nostric.tioas noqu:in.- it.

Chapter 3: The Internal O<ganization: Resources, Capabilities, Core Competencies, and Competitive Advantages

a limited life.' Because of this, the question of duplication of a competitive advantage is not if it will happen, but when. In general, a competitive advantage's sustainability is a function of three factors:

1. The rate of core competence obsolescence because of environmental changes 2. The availability of substitutes for the core competence 3. The imitability of the core competence6

For all firms, the challenge is to effectively manage current core competencies while simultaneously developing new ones? Only when firms are able to do this can they expect to achieve strategic competitiveness, earn above-average returns, and remain ahead of competitors in both the short and long term.

We studied the general, industry, and competitor environments in Chapter 2. Armed with knowledge about the realities and conditions of their external environment, firms have a better understanding of marketplace opportunities and the characteristics of the competitive environment in which those opportunities exist. In this chapter, we focus on the firm. By analyzing its internal organization, a firm determines what it can do. Matching what a firm can do (a function of its resources, capabilities, and core competen- cies in the internal organization) with what it might do (a function of opportunities and threats in the external environment) yields insights for the firm to select strategies from among those we discuss in Chapters 4 through 9.

We begin this chapter by briefly describing conditions associated with analyzing the firm's internal organization. We then discuss the roles of resources and capabilities in developing core competencies, which are the sources of the firm's competitive advantages. Included in this discussion are the techniques firms use to identify and evaluate resources and capabilities and the criteria for identifying core competencies from among them. Resources alone typically do not provide competitive advantages. Instead, resources cre- ate value when the firm uses them to form capabilities, some of which become core competencies, and hopefully competitive advantages. Because of the relationship among resources, capabilities, and core competencies, we also discuss the value chain and exam- ine four criteria that firms use to determine if their capabilities are core competencies and, as such, sources of competitive advantage.8 The chapter closes with comments about outsourcing as well as the need for firms to prevent their core competencies from becom- ing core rigidities. The existence of core rigidities indicates that the firm is too anchored to its past, a situation that prevents it from continuously developing new capabilities and core competencies.

3-1 Analyzing the Internal Organization 3-la The Context of Internal Analysis One of the conditions associated with analyzing a firm's internal organization is the real- ity that in today's global economy, some of the resources that were traditionally crit - ical to firms' efforts to produce, sell, and distribute their goods or services - such as labor costs, access to financial resources and raw materials, and protected or regulated markets- although still important, are now less likely to be the source of competitive advantages.9 An important reason for this is that an increasing number of firms are using their resources to form core competencies through which they successfully implement an international strategy (discussed in Chapter 8} as a means of overcoming the advantages created by more traditional resources.

Given the increasing importance of the global economy, those analyzing their firm's internal organization should use a global mind-set to do so. A global mind-set is the

A global mind-set is the ability to analyze, understand. and manage an internal organization in ways that are not dependent on the assumptions o f a single country, culture. or context.

Copyri; hl 2020 Cmga;t: U:uninz:. All Ri£bts Rekt~led. t.by not bt ~oopied . .ilC*lntd. or duplie&lc'd. in wbc))e or in parl. Due 14 e la'.'Cron.k risflli. JOim' lbinl pllrty (.ilatelll m:.y be ~~a~ppm:k'd from lbt e8ook a!:d'cx eCbapta(.s). &btorial rt:'\·kw has dtemt'd lb:.t sny SUppn'llie'd (.Ultelll doH not m:dtriaJJy atrcct lbt o~~ra!J Jeamina: uperim..-e. Cmgaj,~ Uamina: R'!iefl'tS lh;,o ri; hllo f\'mO,,.-t: additiOIUI (.ilatelll 1111 Illy timt ir s~ent ri£blll nostric.tioas noqu:in.- it.

Value is measured by a product's performance characteristics and by its attributes for which customers are willing to pay.

Partl: Strat~lc Management Inputs

ability to analyze, understand, and manage an internal organization in ways that are not dependent on the assuntptions of a single country, culture, or context.10 Because they are able to span artificial boundaries, those with a global mind-set recognize that their firms must possess resources and capabilities that allow understanding of and appropriate responses to competitive situations that are influenced by country-specific factors and unique cultures. Using a global mind-set to analyze the internal organization has the potential to significantly help the finn in its efforts to outperform rivals.11

Finally, analyzing the finn's internal organization requires that evaluators examine the firm's entire portfolio of resources and capabilities. This perspective suggests that individual firms possess at least some resources and capabilities that other companies do not-at least not in the same combination. Resources are the source of capabilities, some of which lead to the development of core competencies; in turn, some core competencies may lead to a competitive advantage for the firm. 12 Understanding how to leverage the firm's unique bundle of resources and capabilities is a key outcome decision makers seek when analyzing the internal organization.U Figure 3.1 illustrates the relationships among resources, capabilities, core competencies, and competitive advantages and shows how their integrated use can lead to strategic competitiveness. As we discuss next, firms use the resources in their internal organization to create value for customers.

3-1 b Creating Value Firms use their resources as the foundation for producing goods or services that will create value for customers.14 Value is measured by a product's performance characteristics and by its attributes for which customers are willing to pay. Firms create value by innova- tively bundling and leveraging their resources to form capabilities and core competencies.15

Firms with a competitive advantage create more value for customers than do competitors.16

Walmart uses its "every day low price" approach to doing business (an approach that is grounded in the firm's core competencies, such as information technology and distribution

Figure 3.1 Components of an Internal Analys1s

Resources • Tangible • Intangible

Core

• Rare • Costly to Imitate • Nonsubstitutable

Strategic Competi- tiveness

C..,-naJ~t 2mOC...,........,.An ..,... ~ed..)la1•k~--.t.cw~ .. .._.or•,.,.DwtoC'~n""'_.._..,_.,. ~..,hc~h-*dtoot....wtor~•~ F.dilorul'"wwluo.,_.._...,~~~- -.U~tyafl«t: *cOftdll--.~ee..z. Lan.&mill'n'ftdw na.ktD,_·C' ~..,.._._,._ .t ...._..,.._~,.._.._

Chapter 3: The Internal Ofganlzation: Resources. C.pabil~ies. Core Competencies. and Competitive Advantages

channels) to create value for those seeking to buy products at a low price compared to competitors' prices for those products. The stronger these firms' core competencies, the greater the amount of value they're able to create for their customers."

Ultimately, creating value for customers is the source of above-average returns for a firm. What the firm intends regarding value creation affects its choice of business-level strategy (see Chapter 4} and its organizational structure (see Chapter 11).'1 In Chapter 4's discussion of business-level strategies, we note that value is created by a product's low cost, by its highly differentiated features, or by a combination of low cost and high differ- entiation compared to competitors' offerings. A business-level strategy is effective only when it is grounded in exploiting the firm's capabilities and core competencies. Thus, the successful firm continuously examines the effectiveness of current capabilities and core competencies while thinking about the capabilities and competencies it will require for future success.19

At one time, firms' efforts to create value were largely oriented toward understand- ing the characteristics of the industry in which they competed and, in light of those characteristics, determining how they should be positioned relative to competitors. This emphasis on industry characteristics and competitive strategy underestimated the role of the firm's resources and capabilities in developing core competencies as the source of competitive advantages. In fact, core competencies, in combination with product-market positions, are the firm's most important sources of competitive advantage.20 A firm's core competencies, integrated with an understanding of the results of studying the condi- tions in the external environment, should drive the selection of strategies.21 As Clayton Christensen noted, "successful strategists need to cultivate a deep understanding of the processes of competition and progress and of the factors that undergird each advantage. Only thus will they be able to see when old advantages are poised to disappear and how new advantages can be built in their stead:'22 By emphasizing core competencies when selecting and implementing strategies, companies learn to compete primarily on the basis of firm-specific differences. However, while doing so they must be simultaneously aware of changes in the frrm's external environment. 23

3-lc The Challenge of Analyzing the Internal Organization The strategic decisions managers make about the internal organization are nonrou- tine,2' have ethical implications,25 and significantly influence the firm's ability to earn above-average returns.M These decisions involve choices about the resources the firm needs to collect and how to best manage and leverage them.

Making decisions involving the firm's assets- identifying, developing, deploying, and protecting resources, capabilities, and core competencies-may appear to be rel- atively easy. However, this task is as challenging and difficult as any other with which managers are involved; moreover, the task is increasingly internationalizedY Some believe that the pressure on managers to pursue only decisions that help the firm meet anticipated quarterly earnings makes it difficult to accurately examine the firm's inter- nal organization.23

The challenge and difficulty of making effective decisions are implied by preliminary evidence suggesting that one-half of organizational decisions fail. 29 Sometimes, mistakes are made as the firm analyzes conditions in its internal organization.30 Managers might, for example, think a capability is a core competence when it is not. This may have been the case at Polaroid Corporation, as decision makers continued to believe that the capa- bilities it used to build its instant film cameras were highly relevant at the time its com- petitors were preparing to introduce digital cameras. In this instance, Polaroid's decision makers may have concluded that superior manufacturing was a core competence, as was the firm's ability to innovate in terms of creating value-adding features for its instant

C..,-naJ~tMMC...,........,. An ...... ~-.)la1•keow-L--.t.c.~ .. .._.or•J*t. OwtoC'~n,lfiD.._a.d,_.,.~_,.,. ~h--dtool:....wtor~». Edilorul'"wwluo.,._.._...,...,.....~~- ---,a««t:*cOftdll--.~ee..z. Lan.&mill'n'ftdwna.ktD,_·C'~..,.._._,._.t...._..,.._~...,_.._

At OM rime, Polaroid's mmeras aNted a sigllifiarnt amount ol Wllw for customers.

P~rtl: Str~t~lc Management inputs

cameras. If a mistake is made when analyzing and managing a finn's resources, decision makers must have the confidence to admit it and take corrective actions.Jt

A firm can improve by studying its mistakes; in fact, the learning generated by making and correcting mistakes can be important in the creation of new capabilities and core com- petencies.32 One capability that can be learned from failure is when to quit. Polaroid should have obviously changed its strategy earlier than it did, so it could have been able to avoid demise. Another potential example concerns News Corp:s Amplify unit (founded 2011), which was created to change the way children are taught. As of mid-2015, the firm had invested over $1 billion in the unit, which makes tablets, sells online curricula, and offers testing services. In 2014, Amplify generated a $193 million loss, facing competition from well -established textbook publishers enhancing their own ability to sell similar digital products. In September 2015, News Corp. decided to sell Amplify to a team of managers and private investors, incurring a sign ificant loss.JJ

~ As we discuss next, three conditions-uncertainty, com- ~ plexity, and intraorganizational conflict-affect managers as ~ they analyze the internal organization and make decisions -~ about resources (see Figure 3.2). i When studying the internal organization, managers face (,:) uncertainty because of a number of issues, including those

Po« d«JsJans may haw contrlburH ro the firm's subseqwnt Inability ro cnar~ Wllw and Its initial filing for banlaupky In 2001.

of new proprietary technologies, rapidly changing economic and political trends, transformations in societal values, and shifts in customers' demands.3 4 Environmental uncertainty increases the complexity and range of issues to examine when studying the internal environment. » Consider how uncertainty affects the ways to use resources at coal com- panies such as Peabody Energy Corp. and Murray Energy

Corp. Coal companies have been suffering in the last decade or more with significant regulations and the competition from cleaner forms of energy such as natural gas. They have been aided some by the reduction of regulations by the Trump administration, but the competition from cleaner and cheaper forms of energy remains. Thus, they still have to deal with a complex an d uncertain environment.

Figure 3.2 Conditions Affecting Managerial Decisions about Resources, Capabilities, and Core Competencies

,------- ------------------------------~

Conditions

Uncertainty

Complexity

Uncerta inty exists about the cha racteristics of the fi rm's ge ne ral a nd ind ustry e nvironments and customers' needs.

Complexity results from the Interrelatio nships among conditions shaping a firm.

lntraorganizational Conflicts lnt raorganizational conflicts may exist among mana gers making decisions as well as among those affected by the decisions.

C..,-naJ~t2mO~ .......... AI ...... ~ed..)la1•k~.-d.«~•wldtor•,...._O.toC'~n""'_._..JIMYc.-...,.trc~.._*dtooL....wtor~t.._ Ecilorul'"wwloo~ .. III!Y~~do&- ---,aft'CICI*cOftdii-...~Cc.pJc l.analamoll'n'ftdwftJ.ktD,_·C'~~-..,._~~.....,_.,.._~...,_..._

Chapter 3: The Internal Ofganlzation: Resources. C.pabil~ies. Core Competencies. and Competitive Advantages

Biases regarding how to cope with uncertainty affect decisions made about how to manage the fLrm's resources and capabilities to form core competencies.36

Additionally, intraorganizational conflict may surface when decisions are made about the core competencies a firm should develop and nurture. Conflict might surface in the energy companies mentioned above about the degree to which resources and capabilities should be used to form new core competencies to support newer "clean technologies."

In making decisions affected by these three conditions, judgment is required. judgment is the capability of making successful decisions when no obviously correct model or rule is available or when relevant data are unreliable or incomplete. In such situations, decision makers must be aware of possible cognitive biases, such as over- confidence. Individuals who are too confident in the decisions they make about how to use the firm's resources may fail to fully evaluate contingencies that could affect those decisions.37

When exercising judgment, decision makers often take intelligent risks. In the current competitive landscape, executive judgment can become a valuable capability. One reason is that, over time, effective judgment that decision makers demonstrate allows a firm to build a strong reputation and retain the loyalty of stakeholders whose support is linked to above-average returns. 38

Finding individuals who can make the most successful decisions about using the organization's resources is challenging, and important. The quality of decisions regarding resources and their management affect a firm's ability to achieve strategic competitive- ness. Individuals holding such key decision-making positions are called strategic leaders. Discussed fully in Chapter U and for our purposes in this chapter, we can think of strate- gic leaders as individuals with an ability to examine the flrm's resources, capabilities, and core competencies and make effective choices about their use.

Next, we consider the relationships among a firm's resources, capabilities, and core competencies. While reading these sections, keep in mind that organizations have more resources than capabilities and more capabilities than core competencies.

3-2 Resources, Capabilities, and Core Competencies

Resources, capabilities, and core competencies are the foundation of competitive advan- tage. Resources are bundled to create organizational capabilities. In turn, capabilities are the source of a flrm's core competencies, which are the basis of establishing competitive advantages.39 We show these relationships in Figure 3.1 and discuss them next.

3-2a Resources Broad in scope, resources cover a spectrum of individual, social, and organizational phe- nomena. By themselves, resources do not allow frrms to create value for customers as the foundation for earning above-average returns. Indeed, resources are combined to form capabilities.4° For example, Subway links its fresh ingredients with several other resources, including the continuous training it provides to those running the firm's fast food restau- rants, as the foundation for customer service as a capability; customer service is also a core competence for Subway.

As its sole distribution charmel, the Internet is a resource for Amazon.com . The firm uses the Internet to sell goods at prices that typically are lower than those offered by competitors selling the same goods through more costly brick-and-mortar storefronts. By combining other resources (such as access to a wide product inventory), Amazon has

C..,-naJ~tMMC...,........,.An..,...~-.)a..,•keow-L--.t.c.~ .. .._.or•J*t.DwtoC'~n,lfiD..-a.d,_.,.~_,.,.~._.,dtool:....wtor~». Edilorul'"wwluo.,._.._...,...,.....~~- ---,a««t:*cOftdll--.~ee..z. t.an.&mill'n'ftdwna.ktD,_·C'~..,.._._,._.t...._..,.._~...,_.._

Tangible resources are assets that can be observed and quantified.

Intangible resources are assets that a re rooted deeply in the firm's history. accumulate aver time, and are relatively difficult for competitors to analyze and imitate.

Parll: Slral~lc Management Inputs

developed a reputation for excellent customer service. Amazon's capability in terms of customer service is a core competence as well in that the firm creates unique value for customers through the services it provides to them.

Some of a fum's resources (defined in Chapter I as inputs to the frrm's production process) are tangible while others are intangible. Tangible resources are assets that can be observed and quantified. Production equipment, manufacturing facilities, dis- tribution centers, and formal reporting structures are examples of tangible resources. For energy giant Kinder Morgan, its stock of oil and gas pipelines are a key tangible resource. Intangible resources are assets that are rooted deeply in the frrm's history, accumulate over time, and are relatively difficult for competitors to analyze and imi- tate. Because they are embedded in unique patterns of routines, intangible resources are difficult for competitors to analyze and imitate. Knowledge, trust between manag- ers and employees, managerial capabilities, organizational routines (the unique ways people work together), scientific capabilities, the capacity for innovation, brand name, the firm's reputation for its goo ds or services and how it interacts with people (such as employees, customers, and suppliers), and organ izational culture are intangible resources."

Intangible resources require nurturing to maintain their ability to help frrms engage in competitive battles. For example, brand has long been a valuable intangible resource for Coca-Cola Company. The same is true for "logo-laden British brand Superdry;' a case highlighted at the end of the chapter. As you will read, SuperGroup PLC, the owner of Superdry, encountered problems a few years ago in its efforts to maintain and enhance the value of the Superdry brand. New management and a new approach are attempting to renew the Superdry brand. 41

As noted in the Strategic Focus, intangible resources may be even more important in the development of core competencies. Of course, three of the firms described in the Strategic Focus- Fainsbert Mase Brown & Susmann, Genpact, and Document Security Systems- were service firms, which commonly base their core competencies on their human capital However, even Hecla Mining Company, which has significant investments in specialized mining equipment, must also have valuable human capital for its core com- petence in "high grade, narrow-vein underground mining."

For each analysis, tangible and intangible resources are grouped into categories. The four primary categories of tangible resources are financial, organizational, physical, and technological (see Table 3.1). The three primary categories of intangible resources are human, innovation, and reputational (see Table 3.2).

Ta ble 3.1 Tangible Resources

Fina ncia l Resources

Organizational Resources

Physical Resource s

Technological Resources

The firm's capacity to borrow The firm's ability to generate fund s thro ugh Inte rnal ope ratio ns

Formal reporting structures

The sophistication of a firm's plant and eq uipme nt and th e attractiveness of its location Distribution fa cilities Product invento ry

Availability of technology-related resources such as copyrights, patents, trademarks, and trade secrets

SourcH: Adapted from J. B. Barney, 1991, Firm resources and sustained competltille l>dvantM}e.JoumdofMor.ogmomt 17: 101;

R. M. Grant. 1991, Contmrpo«UyStrotegyAnalysi<, cambridge: U.Jt: BlackwollBu<ineu, 100...102.

C..,-naJ~tMMC...,........,. An ...... ~-.)la1•keow-L--.t.c.~ .. .._.or•J*t. OwtoC'~n,lfiD.._a.d,_.,.~_,.,. ~h--dtool:....wtor~». Edilorul'"wwluo.,._.._...,...,.....~~- ---,a««t*cOftdll--.~ee..z. Lan.&mill'n'ftdwna.ktD,_·~~~•-t'-11 ....... ,.._~...,_.._

Chapter 3: The Internal O<ganization: Resources, Capabilities, Core Competencies, and Competitive Advantages 83

Tangible and Intangible Resources as the Base for Core Competencies

While tangible resources are important, intangible resources

are perhaps even more important in the development of firms'

core competencies. Understandably, most professional service

firms have few tangible resources but can have high market

value primarily because of their intangible resources. For exam-

ple, Fainsbert Mase Brown & Susmann, llP is a premier law

firm located in los Angeles, California. Obviously, its goal is to

provide superior legal services to its clients. Within this broad

frame, however, there is a core competence. The firm provides

legal advice and support on significant real estate, business,

and corporate transactions for large institutions, high net-worth

individuals, and privately owned businesses. For example,

in 2018 the firm provided the legal services to conclude the

negotiations for the Industrial Realty Group's purchase of the

3.1 million square foot IBM technology campus in Rochester,

Minnesota. This complex transaction required more than one

year to negotiate with a multi-level corporate legal team.

likewise, other major service firms are heavily dependent

on their intangible assets. For example, Genpact requires

highly knowledgeable human capital for its core competence.

Genpact provides solutions to major process problems for

its clients. Genpact describes its competence as providing

"digital-led innovation and digitally enabled intelligent oper-

ations· for cl ients. The firm solves clients' problems using data

analytics, helping its clients transform their operations. Another

technology-based service firm is Document Security Systems,

Inc. (DSS). DSS has a core competence in the development of

anti-counterfeit, authentication, and diversion software that

protects organizations against Internet fraud and theft. And it

tries to remain a leader in this field through continued invest-

ment in research and new technology. In 2018, it announced

an agreement to partner with the Hong Kong R&D Center for logistics and Supply Chain to develop the next generation of

protection products using blockchain technology.

Firms with larger amounts of tangible resources also need

valuable intangible resources. For example, Hecla Mining

Company has a core competence in "high grade, narrow-vein

underground mining~ Obviously, the company has significant

investments in specialized mining equipment in order to

employ this core competence. But significant engineering and

mining knowledge and expertise is required to successfully

engage in this type of mining. This knowledge and expertise

resides in the human capital (intangible assets) within the firm.

It is important to note that firms' reputations are often

significant intangible assets. For example, professional

service firms must be considered not only highly knowl-

edgeable in the areas in which they compete, but also

must be considered honest and high ly trustworthy. In

meeting this challenge, Genpact was selected as one of the

·w orld's Most Ethical Companies· in 2018. Companies can

also enhance intangible assets, such as their reputation,

through use of their core competencies. For exam pie, in the

aftermath of Hurricane Harvey in 2017, Johnson & Johnson

provided medical supplies, Fed Ex provided logistical sup- port to provide bonled water, and Bunerball provided

40,000 pounds of canned turkey to help citizens in the

recovery. Companies that are ethical and good corporate

citizens often are highly respected and are called on to

use their core competencies to serve an increasing number

of customers.

Sources: Document Security Systems. Inc .. 2018, DSS Partners with Hong Kong R&D Centre for logistics and supply chain management enabling technologies

for blcxkchain research, globenewswire.com, March 19:" Srreerlnsider, 2018, Hecla Mining (HU Announces $462 million Acquisition of Klondes Mines, Ltd. (K), www .streetinsider.com. March 19; Businesslnsider, 2018, Genpact named one of the 2018 worlds most ethical companies by the Ethisphere Institute. marketsbusinessinsider .com, March 14; Cision PR Newswire. 2018, Fainsbert Mase Brown & Sussmann, LLP

completes acquisition closing on 3.1 million sq. ft. IBM campus in Minnesota. www.prnewswire. February 23; P. N. Danziger, 2018, Fire, Roods. hurricanes: How and why corpo<ations must help, Fotbes, wwwiorbe~com, October 20.

Copyris:hl 2020 Cmga£t: Uamins:. All Ri£bts Rekr~•ed. ~by not bt copied . .ininntd. or duplic&kd. in wbole or in parl. Due toe.leccronk righl~~;. JOim' lbinl p;:ut)' (.'OOknl m:.y be !IUppruk'd from lbt e8ook aM'w eCbapta(J:). &btorial revkw has dtemt'd tb:.t sny llupprtl!Soed t.-ootelll ~ not m::deriSIJy atrect tbt o~~~J Jeamins uperlem"e. CmgaJ,~ Uamins rt'st'f\'tS lh;,o ris:hlto f\'IUO\'t: additional (.'OOknl Ill any timt i( s~nt ri£blll nostrictioos requin.- it.

84 Part I: Strat~lc Management Inputs

Table 3.2 Intangible Resou rces

Human Resources

Innovation Resources

Reputational Resources

Knowledge Trust Skills Abilities t o collaborate w ith others

Ideas Scientific capabilities Capacity to innovate

Brand name Perceptions of product q uality, d urability, and reliability Positive reputation with stakeholders such as suppliers and customers

Sources: Adapted from R. Hall 1992. The strategic analysis of intangible resources. Srrar<gk Manag<mtnt Journal, 13: 136-139:

R. M. Gran~ 1991 , Contemporary Strategy Analysis, cambridge: U.K" Bladcwetl Business_ I 01-104.

Tangible Resources As tangible resources, a firm's borrowing capacity and the status of its physical fac ilities are visible. The value of many tangible resources can be established through financial statements, but these statements do not account for the value of all of the firm's assets because they disregard some intangible resources!l The value of tangible resources is also constrained because they are hard to leverage-it is difficult to derive additional business or value from a tangible resource. For example, an airplane is a tangible resource, but "you can't use the same airplane on five different routes at the same time. You can't put the same crew on five different routes at the same time. And the same goes for the financial investment you've made in the airplane." ..

Although production assets are tangible, many of the processes necessary to use them are intangible as in the case of Hecla Mining Company described in the Strategic Focus. Thus, the learning and potential proprietary processes associated with a tangible resource, such as manufacturing facilities, can have unique intangible attributes, such as quality control processes, unique manufacturing processes, and technologies that develop over time.ol5

Intangible Resources Compared to tangible resources, intangible resources are a superior source of capabilities and subsequently, core competencies.46 In fact, in the global economy, a fll'm's intellec- tual capital often plays a more critical role in corporate success than do physical assetsY Because of this, being able to effectively manage intellectual capital is an increasingly important skill for today's leaders to develop.<8

Because intangible resources are less visible and more difficult for competitors to understand, pu rchase, imitate, or substitute for, firms prefer to rely on them rather than on tangible resources as the fo undation for their capab ilities. In fact, the more unob- servable (i.e., intangible) a resource is, the more valuable that resource is to create capa- bilities!9 Another benefit of intangible resources is that, unli ke most tangible resources, their use can be leveraged. For instance, sharing knowledge among employees does not diminish its value for any one person. To the contrary, two people sharing their indi - vidualized knowledge sets often can be leveraged to create additional knowledge that, although new to each individual, contributes potentially to performance improvements for the firm.

Reputational resources (see Table 3.2) are important sources of a firm's capabil- ities and core competencies. Indeed, some argue that a positive reputation can even be a source of competitive advantage.50 Earned through the firm's actions as well as

C..,-naJ~tMMC...,........,. An..,...~-.)a..,•keow-L--.t.c.~ .. .._.or•J*t.DwtoC'~n,lfiD..-a.d,_.,.~_,.,.~._.,dtool:....wtor~». Edilorul'"wwluo.,._.._...,...,.....~~- ---,a««t*cOftdll--.~ee..z. t.an.&mill'n'ftdwna.ktD,_·~~..,.._._,._ .t .....,..,.._~...,_.._

Chapter 3: The Internal Ofganlzation: Resources. C.pabil~ies. Core Competencies. and Competitive Advantages

its words, a value-creating reputation is a product of years of superior marketplace competence as perceived by stakeholders.51

A reputation indicates the level of aware- ness a firm has been able to develop among stakeholders and the degree to which they hold the firm in high esteem. 52

A well-known and highly valued brand name is a specific reputational resource. 53 A continuing commitment to innovation and aggressive advertising facilitates firms' efforts to take advantage of the reputation associ- ated with their brands.54 Harley-Davidson has a reputation for producing and servic- ing high-quality motorcycles with unique designs. Because of the desirability of its rep- utation, the company also produces a wide range of accessory items that it sells based on its reputation for offering unique products with high quality. Sunglasses, jewelry, belts, wallets, shirts, slacks, and hats are just a few of the large variety of accessories customers

Developing capabilities In specific functional areas con give companies a competitive edge. The effective use of social media to

direct advertising to specific market segments has given some firms

on advantage over their rivals.

can purchase from a Harley-Davidson dealer or from its online store.55

Taking advantage of today's technologies, some firms are using social media as a

means of influencing their reputation. Recognizing that thousands of conversations occur daily throughout the world and that what is being said can affect its reputation, Coca-Cola company encourages its employees to be a part of these social media-based discussions as a means of positively influencing the company's reputation. Driving the nature of these conversations is a set of social media principles that Coca-Cola employ- ees use as a foundation for how they will engage with various social media. Being transparent and protecting consumers' privacy are examples of the commitments the firm established. 56

3-lb Capabilities The fi rm combines individual tangible and intangible resources to create capabilities. In turn, capabilities are used to complete the organizational tasks required to produce, distribute, and service the goods or services the fum provides to customers for the pur- pose of creating value for them. As a foundation for building core competencies and hopefully competitive advantages, capabilities are often based on developing, carrying, and exchanging information and knowledge through the firm's human capitai.S7 Hence, the value of human capital in developing and using capabilities and, ultimately, core com- petencies cannot be overstated. 58 In fact, it seems to be "well known that human capital makes or breaks companies."59 At pizza-maker Domino's, human capital is critical to the firm's efforts to change how it competes. Describing this, CEO Patrick Doyle says that, in

many ways, Domino's is becoming"a technology company ... that has adapted the art of pizza-making to the digital age:'60

As illustrated in Table 3.3, capabilities are often developed in specific functional areas (such as manufacturing, R&D, and marketing) or in a part of a functional area (e.g., advertising). Table 3.3 shows a grouping of organizational functions and the capa- bilities that some companies are thought to possess in terms of all or parts of those functions.

O.,-naJ~t2mOC...,Lc....,. An ...... ~ed..)laf•keow-L--.t.c.~ .. ..,.or.pt. OwtoC'~n ..... _a.nt,_.,.~..,.trc ~._.*dtoot-..or~,~ F..dilorul'"wwtu..-.... .. ..., .......... ~do&- __.,aft«t*ccwoall--.upma.n-.ee..z. Lan.&mill'n'ftdwnJ.ktD,_~~~--,~~~ ....... ,.._~...,_.._

86 Partl: Strat~lc Management Inputs

Tabla 3.3 Example of Firms'Capabiht ies

Functional Areas Capabilities Examples of Firms

Di.stribution

Human Resources

Management Information Systems

Marbting

Management

Manufacturing

Research & Development

Effective u.se of logistics management techniques

Motivating. empowering. and retaining employees

Effective and efficient control of inventories through point· of-purchase data collection methods

Effective promotion of br.lnd-name products Effective customer service Innovative merchandising

• Ability to envision the future of clothing

Design and production skills yielding reliable products Product and design quality Miniaturization of components and products

Innovative technology Development of sophisticated elevator control solutions Rapid transformation of technology into new products and processes Digital technology

3-2c Core Competencies

Walmart

Microsoft

Walmart

Procter r. Gamble Ralph Lauren Corp. McKinsey r. Co. Nordstrom Inc. Crate r. Barrel

Hugo Boss Zara

Komatsu Witt Gas Technology Sony

Caterpillar Otis Elevator Co. Chaparral Steel Thomson Consumer Electronics

Defmed in Chapter 1, core competencies are capabilities that serve as a source of com- petitive advantage for a finn over its rivals. Core competencies distinguish a company competitively and reflect its personality. Core competencies emerge over time through an organizational process of accumulating and learning how to deploy different resources and capabilities." As the capacity to take action, core competencies are the "crown jewels of a company,n the activities the company performs especially well compared to compet· itors and through which the firm adds unique value to the goods or services it sells to customers.61 Thus, if a big pharma company (such as Pfizer) developed big data analytics as a core competence, one could conclude that the firm had formed capabilities through which it was able to analyze and effectively use huge amounts of data in a competitively superior marmer.

Innovation is thought to be a core competence at Apple. As a capability, R&D activi- ties are the source of this core competence. More specifically, the way Apple has combined some of its tangible (e.g., fmancial resources and research laboratories) and intangible (e.g., scientists and engineers and organ izational routines) resources to complete research and development tasks creates a capability in R&D. By emphasizing its R&D capability, Apple can innovate in ways that create unique value for customers in the form of the products it sells, suggesting that innovation is a core competence for Apple.

Excellent customer service in its retail stores is another of Apple's core competen - cies. In this instance, unique and contemporary store designs (a tangible resource) are combined with knowledgeable and skilled employees (an intangible resource) to provide superior service to customers. A number of carefully developed training and development procedures are capabilities on which Apple's core competence of excellent customer service is based. The procedures that are capabilities include specification of how employees are to interact with customers, carefully written training manuals to

C..,-naJ~t2mOC...,........,.An..,...~-.)la1•keow-L--.t.c.~ .. .._.or•J*t. OwtoC'~n,lfiD.._a.d,_.,.~_,hc ~h--dtool:....wtor~». Edilorul'"wwluo.,._.._...,...,.....~~- ---,a««t*cOftdll--.~ee..z. Lan.&mill'n'ftdwna.ktD,_·C'~..,.._._,~~~ ....... ,.._~...,_..._

Chapter 3: The Internal Ofganlzation: Resources. C.pabil~ies. Core Competencies. and Competitive Advantages

describe on-site tech support that is to be provided to customers, and deep thinking about every aspect of the store's design including music that is played. Apple has a spe- cial training program designed to build associates' knowledge of Apple products and how to sell them.63

3-3 Building Core Competencies Two tools help firms identify their core competencies. The first consists of four specific criteria of sustainable competitive advantage that can be used to determine which capa- bilities are core competencies. Because the capabilities shown in Table 3.3 have satisfied these four criteria, they are core competencies. The second tool is the value chain analysis. Firms use this tool to select the value-creating competencies that should be maintained, upgraded, or developed and those that should be outsourced.

3-3a The Four Criteria of Sustainable Competitive Advantage Capabilities that are valuable, rare, costly to imitate, an d nonsubstitutable are core competencies (see Table 3.4). In turn, core competencies help fir ms to gain compet itive advantages over their rivals. Capabilities failing to satisfy the four criteria are not core competencies, meaning that although every core competence is a capabil ity, not every capability is a core competence. In slightly diffe rent words, for a capability to be a core competence, it must be valuable and unique from a customer's point of view. For a core competence to be a potential source of competitive advantage, it must be inimi- table and nonsubstitutable by competitors.6<

A sustainable competitive advantage exists only when competitors are unable to duplicate the benefits of a firm's strategy or when they lack the resources to attempt imitation. For some period of time, the fum may have a core competence by using capabilities that are valuable and rare, but imitable. For example, some firms are trying to develop a core competence and potentially, a competitive advantage by out-greening their competitors. (Interestingly, developing a "green" core competence can contribute to the firm's efforts to earn above-average returns while benefitting the broader society.) For many years, Walmart has been committed to using its resources in ways that sup- port environmental sustainability while pursuing a competitive advantage in the pro- cess. In this regard, Walmart has three major end goals: to create zero waste, operate with 100 percent renewable energy, and sell products that sustain our resources and the environment. To facilitate these efforts, Walmart recently labeled over 10,000 products on its e-commerce site as products that are "Made by a Sustainability Leader:' Initially, these items were hatched into roughly 80 product categories. In addition to seeking

Table 3.4 The Four Criteria of Sustainable Competitive Advantage

Valuable Capabilities

R.re Capabilities

Costly-to-Imitate Capabilities

NonsubstltUUible Capabilities

Help a firm neutralize threats or exploit opportunities

Are not possessed by many others

Historical: A unique and a valuable organizational culture or brand name Ambiguous cause: The causes and uses of a competence are unclear Social complexity: Interpersonal relationships, trust, and friendship among managers, suppliers, and customers

No strategic equivalent

C..,-naJ~tMMC...,........,. An ...... ~-.)la1•keow-L--.t.c.~ .. .._.or•J*t. DwtoC'~"""'_..,..,..,.~_,hc ~h-*dtool:....wtor~·~ F.dilorul'"wwluo.,._.._...,~~~- -.u&yafl«t*c0ftdll--.~ee..z. t.an.&mill'n'ftdwna.ktD,_·C'~..,.._._,._.t...._..,.._~...,_.._

Valuable capabilities allow the firm to exploit opportunities or neutralize threats in its external environment

Rare capabilities are capabilities that few, if any, competitors possess.

Costly-to-imitate capabilities are capabilities that other firms cannot easily develop.

Partl: Strat~lc Management Inputs

a competitive advantage through these actions, Walmart hoped to make it easier for customers to make "sustainable choices" when purchasing products. Walmart is also working to lead the industry in deploying clean technologies as a means of reducing fuel consumption and air pollution.65 Of course, Walmart competitors such as Target are engaging in similar actions. Time will reveal the degree to which Walmart's green practices can be imitated.

The length of time a firm can expect to create value by using its core competencies is a function of how quickly competitors can successfully imitate a good, service, or process. Value-creating core competencies may last for a relatively long period of time only when all four of the criteria we discuss next are satisfied. Thus, Walmart would know that it has a core competence and possibly, a competitive advantage in terms of green practices if the ways the firm uses its resources to complete these practices satisfy the four criteria.

Valuable Valuable capabilities allow the firm to exploit opportunities or neutralize threats in its external environment. By effectively using capabilit ies to exploit opportunities or neu- tralize threats, a firm creates value for customers.66 For example, Groupon created the "daily deal" marketing space; the firm reached $1 billion in revenue faster than any other company in history. In essence, the opportunity Groupon's founders pursued was to cre- ate a marketplace through which businesses could introduce their goods or services to customers who would be able to experience them at a discounted price. Restaurants, hair and nail salons, and hotels are examples of the types of companies making frequent use of Groupon's services. Young. urban professionals desiring to affordably experience the cities in which they live are the firm's target customers. But, Groupon's fmancial per- formance has been lower than desired by investors primarily because of competition.67

While offering value to customers, the capabilities to offer its services can be imitated and its initial success invited rivals to enter the market. Competing daily-deal websites such as LivingSocial quickly surfaced and offered similar and often less expensive deals. In fact, many competitors have entered the market, to include Yipit, Woot, RetaiiMeNot, Tanga, and Ebate in addition to LivingSocial.68

Rare Rare capabilities are capabilities that few, if any, competitors possess. A key question to be answered when evaluating this criterion is "how many rival firms possess these valuable capabilities?" Capabilities possessed by many rivals are unlikely to become core competencies for any of the involved firms. Instead, valuable but common (i.e., not rare) capabilities are sources of competitive parity.69 Competitive advantage results only when firms develop and exploit valuable capabilities that become core compe- tencies and that differ from those shared with competitors. The central problem for Groupon is that its capabilities to produce the "daily deal" reached competitive parity quickly. Similarly, Walmart has developed valuable capabili ties that it uses to engage in green practices; but, as mentioned previously, Target seeks to develop sustainability capabilities through which it can duplicate Walm art's green practices. Target's suc- cess in doing so, if this happens, suggests that Walmart's green practices are valuable but not rare.

Costly to Imitate Costly-to-Imitate capabilities are capabilities that other fi rms cannot easily develop. Capabilities that are costly to imitate are created because of o ne reason or a com - bination of three reasons (see Table 3.4). First, a firm sometimes is able to develop

C..,-naJ~tMMC...,........,.An..,...~-.)a..,•keow-L--.t.c.~ .. .._.or •J*t.DwtoC'~n,lfiD..-a.d,_.,.~_,.,.~._.,dtool:....wtor~». Edilorul'"wwluo.,._.._...,...,.....~~- ---,a««t:*cOftdll--.~ee..z. t.an.&mill'n'ftdwna.ktD,_·C'~..,.._._,._.t...._..,.._~...,_.._

Chapter 3: The Internal O<ganization: Resources, Capabilities, Core Competencies, and Competitive Advantages

capabilities because of unique historical conditions. As firms evolve, they often acquire or develop capabilities that are unique to them. 70 A firm with a unique and valuable organizational culture that emerged in the early stages of the com- pany's history "may have an imperfectly imitable advantage over firms founded in another historical period;'71 one in which less valuable or less competitively useful values and beliefs strongly influenced the development of the firm's culture. Briefly discussed in Chapter l, organizational cul- ture is a set of values that are shared by members in the organization. An organi- zational culture is a source of advantage when employees are held together tightly by their belief in it and the leaders who helped to create it.n Historically, empha- sizing cleanliness, consistency, and service and the training that reinforces the value of these characteristics created a culture at

Southwest Airlines crew hold puppies who became homeless after Hurricane Maria damaged the island of Puerto Rico. The flight, which was donated by Southwest Airlines, carried 14,000 pounds

of supplies.

McDonald's that some thought was a core competence and a competitive advantage for the firm. However, as explained in Chapter 2's Opening Case, McDonald's has experi- enced problems with a number of strategic actions taken by competitors. McDonald's hired a new CEO in 2015 and is now making a number of menu changes to make its food offerings healthier and more attractive overall to customers.73 McDonald's hopes these changes along with others will help it to reinvigorate its historically unique cul- ture as a core competence.

A second condition of being costly to imitate occurs when the link between the firm's core competencies and its competitive advantage is causally arnbiguous.74 In these instances, competitors can't clearly understand how a firm uses its capabilities that are core competencies as the foundation for competitive advantage. As a result, firms are uncertain about the capabilities they should develop to duplicate the benefits of a compet- itor's value-creating strategy. For years, firms tried to imitate Southwest Airlines' low-cost strategy, but most have been unable to do so, primarily because they can't duplicate this firm's unique culture.

Social complexity is the third reason that capabilities can be costly to imitate. Social complexity means that at least some, and frequently many, of the firm's capabilities are the product of complex social phenomena. Interpersonal relationships, trust, friend- ships among managers and between managers and employees, and a firm's reputation with suppliers and customers are examples of socially complex capabilities.75 Southwest Airlines is careful to hire people who fit with its culture. This complex interrelationship between the culture and human capital adds value in ways that other airlines cannot, such as jokes on flights by the flight attendants or the cooperation between gate per- sonnel and pilots.

Nonsubstitutable

Nonsubstitutable capabilities are capabilities that do not have strategic equivalents. This final criterion "is that there must be no strategically equivalent valuable resources that are themselves either not rare or imitable. Two valuable firm resources (or two bundles

Nonsubstitutable capabilities are capabilities that do not have strategic equivalents.

Copyris:hl 2020Cmga;t: ~:unins:. All Ri£bts Rekf~led. J.by oot bt ~oopied. SC'allntd. or duplie&lc'd. in wbc))e or in p:u-l. 01.11:' lbelt'dron.krisflli. JOim' lbinl pllrty(.ilaklll m:.y be ~~a~ppmsed from lbt eBoak a!:d'cx-eCbapla(.s). &btorial rt:'\·kw has dtemt'd lh:.t sny lluppn'llie'd (.Ultelll does oot m:derbUy atrcctlbt o~~rau Jeamins uperim..-e. Cmg:ij,'C' ~amins n.-ser''tS lh;.o ris:hllo remcn-t: additiontll (.ilaklll 1111 Illy timt ir s~ent ri£blll nostric.tioas noqu:in.- it.

90 Partl: Strat~lc Management Inputs

TAble 3. 5 Outcomes from Combinations of the Criteria fo r Susta inable Co m petitive Advantage

Is the Capability Is the C•p•bility Is the Capability Is the Capability Competitive PerformAnce Valuable? R•re7 Costly to Imitate? Nonsubstitutable? Consequences lmplic•tions

No No

Yes No

Yes Yes

No No Competitive Below-~ diYCfvA!Qge returns

No Yes/no Competitive j)llrity AverAge returns

No Yes/no Tempor.y AverAge returns competitive to Above-AverAge ACtv..nt.ge returns

Yes Yes/no Sust a inable com- Above-average

petitive advantAge re t urns

of firm resources) are strategically equivalent when they each can be separately exploited to implement the same strategies~'76 In general, the strategic value of capabilities increases as they become more difficult to substitute. The more intangible, and hence invisible, capabilities are, the more difficult it is for firms to find subst itutes and the greater the challenge is to competitors trying to imitate a firm's value-creating strategy. Firm-specific knowledge and trust-based working relationships between managers and nonmanagerial personnel, such as has existed for years at Southwest Airlines, are examples of capa· bilities that are difficult to identify and for which finding a substitute is challenging. However, causal ambiguity may make it difficult for the firm to learn and may stifle progress because the firm may not know how to improve processes that are not easily codified and thus are arnbiguous.n

In summary, only using valuable, rare, costly-to-imitate, and nonsubstitutable capabilities has the potential for the firm to create sustainable competitive advantages. Table 3.5 shows the competitive consequences and performance implications resulting from combinations of the four criteria of sustainability. The analysis suggested by the table helps managers determine the strategic value of a firm's capabilities. The firm should not emphasize capabilities that fit the criteria described in the first row in the table (i.e., resources and capabilities that are neither valuable nor rare and that are imitable and for which strategic substitutes exist). Capabilities yielding competitive parity and either temporary or sustainable competitive advantage, however, should be supported. Some competitors such as Coca-Cola and PepsiCo and Boeing and Airbus may have capabilities that result in competitive parity. In such cases, the firms will nurture these capabilities while simultaneously trying to develop capabilities that can yield either a temporary or sustainable competitive advantage.78

3-3b Value Chain Analysis Value chain analysis allows the firm to understand the parts of its operations that cre- ate value and those that do not.79 Understanding these issues is important because the fLtm earns above-average returns only when the value it creates is greater than the costs incurred to create that value. 80

The value chain is a template that firms use to analyze their cost position and to identify the multiple means that can be used to facilitate implementation of a chosen strategy." Today's competitive landscape demands that firms examine their value chains in a global rather than a domestic-only context.82 In particular, activities associated with supply chains should be studied within a global context.IJ

C..,-naJ~t MMC...,........,. An ...... ~-.)la1•keow-L--.t.c.~ .. .._.or • J*t. DwtoC'~"""'_..,..,..,.~_,hc ~h-*dtool:....wtor~·~ Edilorul'"wwluo.,._.._...,~~~- -.u&yafl«t*c0ftdll--.~ee..z. Lan.&mill'n'ftdw na.k tD,_·C' ~..,.._._,._ .t ...._..,.._~...,_.._

Chapter 3: The Internal Organization: Resources, Capabilkies, Core Competencies, and Competitive Advantages

Figure 3.3 A Model of the Value Chain

I Finance I ~

I Human Resources I Support ~

Functions I Management Information Systems I

Supply-Chain Marl<eting _. Operations _. Distribution _. (Including

Management Sales)

Value Chain Activities

We show a model of the value chain in Figure 3.3. As depicted in the model, a firm's value chain is segmented into value chain activities and support functions. Value chain activities are activities or tasks the firm completes in order to produce products and then seU, distribute, and service those products in ways that create value for customers. Support functions include the activities or tasks the firm completes in order to support the work being done to produce, seU, distribute, and service the products the f1tm is producing. A firm can develop a capability and/or a core competence in any of the value chain activities and in any of the support functions. When it does so, it has established an ability to create value for customers. In fact, as shown in Figure 3.3, customers are the ones firms seek to serve when using value chain analysis to identify their capabilities and core competencies. When using their unique core competencies to create unique value for customers that competitors cannot duplicate, firms have established one or more competitive advantages." Deutsche Bank believes that its application development and information security technologies are proprietary core competencies that are a source of competitive differentiation for the firm. 85 As explained in a Strategic Focus about out- sourcing later in the chapter, Deutsche Bank wiU not outsource these two technologies given that the firm concentrates on them as a means of creating value for customers.

The activities associated with each part of the value chain are shown in Figure 3.4, while the activities that are part of the tasks firms complete when dealing with support functions appear in Figure 3.5. AU items in both figures should be evaluated relative to competitors' capabilities and core competencies. To become a core competence and a source of competitive advantage, a capability must allow the fum to either:

1. Perform an activity in a manner that provides value superior to that provided by competitors, or

2 . Perform a value-creating activity that competitors cannot perform.

Only under these conditions does a firm create value for customers and have oppor- tunities to capture that value.

Customer Value

Follow-Up Service

Value chain activities are activities or tasks the firm completes in order to produce products and then sell, distribute, and service those products in ways that create value for customers.

Support functions include the activities or tasks the firm completes in order to support the work being done to produce, sell, distribute, and service the products the firm is producing.

COp)'n&llllOlOc....a.~ Al aqtlb ~ Ml!y_. btcapwd, .-.l.cwdufk*d-• -"'*« •P-'- 0. -~ ,..._ .-r..., ...,._.. _,..t.t....,...... ._ lkdoot _._~.,._ ~.nltW~~-..,~~doo--MIItniOy.tr«tllw~'&'nll~~~~ft'Mnb*QIIil•,__-e.....,_..c-..•..,.'*"ll.......,._nJIIb~~iL

Figure 3 .4 Creatong Value through Value Chain Activities

--onQ,dng sourong. """"-~-ond ~-""'·,.._....,for «he firm 10 recew ~ metMall and c:onv.rt them ll'lltO M.i poducts.

Activmes r~ated to gett•ng the fiN I product tO t~ custom.,. Efficiently handling customers' Ofdtf'l, choollllg the optimal ~.wry channe-l, and working wtth the Mance 1Uppon: function to •rrtnge for cuscomert' paymentS for cl41iivtf"td goodt are exampaes of these KtMt'"

Activities taken for the purpose of segmenting target wstomers on the basis of their ~X~ique needs, satisfy.-.g customers' needs. retaining customers, and locating additional OJstomers.. Adven:ising campaigns, developing and managing product b<ands. deten'I'Wting appropriate pricing strategies.. and tranng and supponing a sales force are spedfic examples of these

P~rtl: Str~t~lc Management Inputs

AaMties ubn tO tnCrMM •

pocixt's ...... '"' cuot...-Surwys.,--~ about ""'"",_.. .. --. of!enng-- •"-""'- .ond ,..,~ """. pocixt's ....._ ... examples cl1hew ""-

Acti\lrtiH necMwy to eff'lc.tendy diAnge ,...v materiah into fil\lshed producu.. Oewloping employees' work sctl.clules. dettgning product•on procMMI ~nd phy$ic.al layout of the o,.rations' facllrties, detttmlnlng ptOduction e~pacity nHds. and Mlect•ng 1nd m1lnt~erung product.an equ•pment are examples of aptcifc operations ll(tMtt ...

Creating value for customers by completing activities that are part of the value chain often requires building effective alliances with suppliers (and sometimes others to which the firm outsources activities, as discussed in the next section) and devel- oping strong positive relationships with customers. When firms have strong positive relationships with suppliers and customers, they are said to have social capital.86 The relationships themselves have value because they lead to transfers of knowledge as well as to access to resources that a firm may not hold internally." To build social capital whereby resources such as knowledge are transferred across organizations requires trust between partners. Indeed, partners must trust each other to allow their resources to be used in such a way that both parties will benefit over time while neither party will take advantage of the other.88

Evaluating a firm's capability to execute its value chain activities and support func- tions is challenging. Earlier in the chapter, we noted that id entifying and assessing the value of a fum's resources and capabilities requires judgment. Judgment is equally nec- essary when using value chain analysis, because no obviously correct model or rule is universally available to help in the process.

What should a firm do about value chain activities and support functions in which its resources and capabilities are not a source of core competence? Outsourcing is one solution to consider.

C..,-naJ~t2mOC...,........., ABa.,...~ed..)bf•keow-L.-.Lc.~ .. .._.or•pt. OwtoC'~n....__..,..,_.,.ODM*..,.bt ~h-*dtoot....wtor~·~ F.dilorul'"wwloo~..,...,~~~-__.,afl«t*cOt'ftaii--.~CC!IIp!Clanaliamolll'n'ftdwna.ktD,_·C'~..,.._._,._.t....._~~...--..

Chapter 3: The Internal O<ganization: Resources, Capabilities, Core Competencies, and Competitive Advantages

Figure 3.5 Creating Value through Support Functions

3-4 Outsourcing

Human Resources

Activities associated with managing the firm's human capital. Selecting, training, retaining, and compensating human resources in ways that create a capability and hopefufty a core competence are specific examp~s of these actMties..

Management Information Systems

Activities taken to obtain and manage information and knowtedge throughout the firm. Identifying and utilizing sophisticated technologies. determining optimal ways to coUect and distribute

knowledge. and linking rek?vant information and knowtedge to organizational functions are activities associated with this support function.

Concerned with how components, finished goods, or services will be obtained, outsourcing is the purchase of a value-creating activity or a support function activity from an external supplier. Not-for-profit agencies as well as for-profit organizations actively engage in outsourcing.89 Firms engaging in effective outsourcing increase their flexibility, mitigate risks, and reduce their capital investments.90 Moreover, in some industries virtually all firms seek the value that can be captured through effective out- sourcing. However, as is the case with other strategic management process decisions, careful analysis is required before the firm decides to outsource.91 And if outsourcing is to be used, firms must recognize that only activities where they cannot create value or where they are at a substantial disadvantage compared to competitors should be outsourced. 92 Experience suggests that virtually any activity associated with the value chain functions or the support functions may fall into this category. We discuss differ- ent activities that some firms outsource in the Strategic Focus. We also consider core competencies that firms to whom others outsource activities may try to develop to satisfy customers' future outsourcing needs.

Outsourcing can be effective because few, if any, organizations possess the resources and capabilities required to achieve competitive superiority in each value chain activity and support function. For example, research suggests that few companies can afford to internally develop all the technologies that might lead to competitive advantage.93 By

Outsourcing is the purchase of a value-creat ing activity or a support function activity from an external supplier.

Copyri;hl 2020 Cmga;t: U:uninz:. All Ri£bts Rekt~led. J.by not bt ~oopied . .ilC*lntd. or duplie&lc'd. in wbc))e or in p:u-l. 01.11:' 14ela'.'Cron.k risflli. JOme lbinl JXUlY' (.ilatelll m:.y be ~~a~ppm:k'd from lbt eBoak :.!:d'cx eCb:.pla(.s). Eddorial rt:'\·iew hai deemt'd lb:il :my SUppn'llie'd(.ilatelll does not m:dtriaiJy atfccl lbt o~~r.liJ leamina: upe:riern:e. Cmg:ij,'C' U:.mina: reSt:r'\'tS lhe ri;hllo remo,,.-e addilion$1 (.ilatelll M Illy time ir s~ent ri£blll nostric.tioas require it.

94 Partl: Strat~lc Management Inputs

nurturing a smaller number of capabilities, a firm increases the probability of developing core competencies and achieving a competitive advantage because it does not become overextended. In addition, by outsourcing activities in which it lacks competence, the firm can fully concentrate on those areas in which it has the potential to create value.

There are concerns associated with outsourcing ... Two significant ones are the poten- tial loss in a firm's ability to innovate and the loss of jobs within the focal firm. When evaluating the possibility of outsourcing, firms should anticipate possible effects on their ability to innovate in the future as well as the impact of losing some of their human capital. On the other hand, firms are sometimes able to enhance their own innovation capabilities by studying how the companies to which they've outsourced complete those activities.95 Because a focal firm likely knows less about a foreign company to which it chooses to outsource, concerns about potential negative outsourcing effects in these cases may be particularly acute, requiring careful study and analysis as a result.96 Deciding to outsource to a foreign supplier is commonly called offshoring.

3-5 Competencies, Strengths, Weaknesses, and Strategic Decisions

By analyzing the internal organization, firms identify their strengths and weaknesses as reflected by their resources, capabilities, and core competencies. If a ftrm has weak capabilities or does not have core competencies in areas required to achieve a compet- itive advantage, it must acquire those resources and build the needed capabilities and competencies.

As noted in the Strategic Focus, some firms decide to outsource a function or activity where it is weak in order to improve its ability to use its remaining resources to create value. Many financial institutions are outsourcing functions that support cashless trans- action because their IT systems cannot handle these activities efficiently. Some govern- ments are outsourcing services to increase the quality and efficiency with which the ser- vices are delivered (e.g., U.K. outsourcing some surgeries to French healthcare providers). Outsourcing decisions must be made carefully, considering all of the options. However, when done effectively, outsourcing can provide access to needed resources.

In considering the results of examining the firm's internal organization, managers should understand that having a significant quantity of resources is not the same as hav- ing the uright" resources. The uright" resources are those with the potential to be formed into core competencies as the foundation for creating value for customers and developing competitive advantages because of doing so. Interestingly, decision makers sometimes become more focused and productive when seeking to find the right resources when the firm's total set of resources is constrained.97

Tools such as outsourcing help the firm focus on its core competencies as the source of its competitive advantages. However, evidence shows that the value-creating ability of core competencies should never be taken for granted. Moreover, the ability of a core compe- tence to be a permanent competitive advantage can't be assumed. The reason for these cau- tions is that all core competencies have the potential to become core rigidities.98 Typically, events occurring in the firm's external environment create conditions through which core competencies can become core rigidities, generate inertia, and stifle innovation.99

After studying its external environment to determine what it might choose to do (as explained in Chapter 2) and its internal organization to understand what it can do (as explained in this chapter), the firm has the information required to select a business-level strategy that it \vill use to compete against rivals. We describe different business-level strategies in the next chapter.

Chapter 3: The Internal O<ganization: Resources, Capabilities, Core Competencies, and Competitive Advantages 95

The Extreme Specialization of Outsourcing: Who Is Doing It and Who Is Not?

Outsourcing activities and functions has been growing dramat-

ically over the last decade. With the election of Donald Trump,

companies in some industries- particularly manufacturing-

have reduced their outsourcing outside of the United States for

fear of government actions against them. However, outsourc-

ing remains strong in other sectors of the economy. As we discussed in the Opening Case, big pharma com-

panies are using some of their resources and capabil ities to

develop "big data analytics" as a core competence because of

the value of these analytics to these firms. In contrast, these

same firms are outsourcing drug safety processes and proce-

dures to other firms, many of which are located in India or have

offices located there. In fact, monitoring drug safety is ·one of

outsourcing's newest frontiers, and the now $2 billion busi-

ness is booming as regulators require closer tracking of rare

side effects and interactions between medici nes~ Accenture,

Cognizant, and Tara Consultancy Services ltd. are some of

the firms to which big pharma companies AstraZeneca PLC,

Novartis AG, and Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. are outsourcing the

monitoring of drug safety. Thus, the big pharma firms have

decided that data analytics processes are an activity in which

they can capture value while monitoring drug safety is not. Similar examples exist within firms competing in other indus-

tries. Deutsche Bank has outsourced some data center services

to Hewlett-Packard; however, it is retaining control over certain

technology application areas it believes are proprietary and, as

such, are core competencies through which the firm creates value.

In fact, outsourcing information technology activities has been

growing in banking and the financial sector. This is due to the

rapid move to cashless transaction and mobile banking. Many of

the banks have "legacy" information technology systems that are

difficult to change over to handle these new functions. As such,

they are outsourcing many aaivities such as commercial credit

card payments to what is referred to as fintech firms. The number

of these specialized fintech firms is growing dramatically because

of the increasing amount of cashless transactions and the need for

help by banks and other financial institutions such as credit unions.

Interestingly, government has become a major outsourcer.

Governments are trying to outsource the provision of services

from government agencies to private and non-profit organizations

who can perform the services more efficiently and with higher

quality. In fact, even the British Health Service is outsourcing

some health services (e.g., surgeries) to healthcare organizations

in other European countries (e.g., France), trying to manage its

own backlog of requests for healthcare services.

Wipro and lnfosys have historically been successful as firms

to whom others outsource activities. However, this success

has been largely a product of being able to employ relatively

inexpensive programmers to complete tasks lacking significant

amounts of complexity. The technology service needs have

become more sophisticated and challenging. And, w ith the

reductions of outsourcing in some sectors, some of these firms

are struggling. For example, lnfosys and Cognizant have laid

off many employees in India and lnfosys is trying to establish

operations in the United States.

Therefore, the nature of outsourcing is changing and firms

are becoming more specialized. Additionally, some industries are

outsourcing less (e.g., manufacturing) and others are outsourcing

more (financial institutions). Nevertheless, outsourcing remains a

critical means for firms to gain access to valuable resources that

they need to seize and maintain a competitive advantage.

Sources: R Koczkar, 201 a Governmental outsourcing a boon for service prov;ders, The Ausrrolion, www..australian.com, March 22; K. Ferguson, 2018, \Nt'ry outsourcing can leave a lasting mark on the US banking industry, Payments Journal, payments- journal.com, March 23; A. Frazzeno. 20 18, Outsourcing in the new normal: Three trends reshaping the global industry. FO/bes. www.forbe~com. March 21: K. de Freytas-Tamura, 2018, U.K., land of'brexi(. quiettyoutsources some surgeries to France, New Y01k Tunes, www.nytimes.com, March 17; A. Jain, 2018, This global fin- tech enabler has a strategy to enter India's crowded payment space, Entrepreneur. www.entrepreneur.com, March 9; L Joyce. 201 a Six Strategic keys to becoming a mobile-centric bank, The Financial Brand, thefinancialbrand.COil\ March 6; 201 5, Deutsche Bank, H-P divide IT responsibility in cloud deal. Wall Street Journal Online, www.wsj.com, February 25; D. A Thoppil, 201 S, Indian outsourcers struggle to evotve as growth slows. Wall Street Journal Onlkle, www.wsj.com, February 22; S Mclain, 201 S, Big Pharma farms out drug safety to India, WaD Street Journal Online, www.wsj.com, February 2: S. Mclain, 201 5, New outsourcing frontier in India:

Monitoring drug safety. Wall Street Joutnol Online, www.wsj.com, February 1.

Copyris;hl 2020 Cms;a£t: Uamins;. All Risb~ Rekt~;ed. J.by oot be ~oopied. ;;canned. or duplie&kd. in wbl))e or in parl. Due t6eJ«1ron.k tishl~. some tbinl pwtytilaklll may bt" S!Upprulk'd from the e8ook &!:d'W eCbapla(.s). &btorial rt:'\·iew has deemt'd tb&t &ny l~Uppn'tile'd tilaklll does oot materit!Uy atreet tbt' o~~rliiJ Jeamins experiem>e. Cms;a!>~ Uamins R'krl'tS the ris;hlto remcn-e :additiontll tilaklll M any time it s:~ent risb~ nostrictioos: require it.

SUMMARY In the current competitive landscape, the most effective

organizations recognize that strategiC competitiveness and above-average returns result only when core competencies

(identified by studying the firm's internal organization) are matched with opportumties (determ.ned by studying the firm's

external environment).

No competitive advantage lasts forever. Over time, rivals use their own unique resources, capabilities, and core compe· tencies to form different value-creating propositions that

duplicate the focal firm's ability to creat e value for cust omers. Because competitive advantages are not permanently sustain·

able, firms must exploit their current advantages while simul· taneously using their resources and capabilities to form new

advantages that can lead to future competitive success.

Effectively managing core competencies requires careful anal· ysis of the form's resources (inputs to the production proce ss) and capabilities (resources that have been p urposely inte·

g rated to achieve a specific task or set of tasks). The k nowledge the firm's human capital possesses is among the most signifi·

cant of an organization's capabilities and ul timately p rovides the base for most competitive advantages. The firm m ust

create an organizational culture that allows people to integrat e their individual knowledge with that held by others so that,

collectively, the firm has a sigmficant amount of value-creating organizational knowledge.

Capabilities are a more l1kely source of core compet ence and subsequently of compellt1ve advantages than are individual

resources. How a firm nurtures and supports it s capabilities

KEY TERMS costly-to-imitate capabilities 88 global mind-set 77 intangible resources 82 nonsubstitutable capabilities 89 outsourcing 93 rare capabilities 88

REVIEW QUESTIONS 1. Why is it important for a firm to study and understand its inter·

nal organization?

2. What is value? Why is 11 critical for the firm to create value? How does it do so?

3. What are the d1fferences between tangible and intangi·

ble resources? Why is it Important for decision makers

Part I: Strategic Management Inputs

to become core competencies is less visible to rivals, making

efforts to understand and imitate the focal firm's capabilities difficult.

Only when a capability is valuable, rare, costly to imit at e, and

nonsubstitutable is it a core competence and a source of com- petitive advantage. Over t1me, core competencies must be supported, but they cannot be allowed to become core rigidi·

ties. Core competencies are a source of competitive advantage only when they allow the firm to create value by exploiting

opportunities in its external env~tonment. When this is no ion· ger possible, the company shifts its attention to forming other

capabilities that satisfy the four criteria of sustainable compel· itive advantage.

Value chain analysis is used to Identify and evaluate the com· petitive pot ential of resources and capabilities. By studying

their skills relative t o those associat ed w ith value chain act iv· ities and su ppo rt functions, firms can understand their cost

st ructure and identify the activities through w hich they are ab le to create value.

When the firm cannot create value in either a value chain

activity or a support function, outsourcing is considered. Used commonly in the global economy, outsourcing is the p u rchase

of a value-creating activity from an external supplier. The firm should outsource only to companies possessing a competitive advantage in terms ofthe particular value cha1n activity or

support function under consideration. In addition, the firm must continuously verify that it is not outsourCing activities

through which it could create value.

support functions 91 tangible resources 82 valuable capabilities 88 value 78 value chain activities 9 1

to u nderstand these differences? Are tangible resources more valuable for creating capabilities than are intangible

resources, or is the reverse true? Why?

4. What are capabilities? How do firms create capabilities?

S. What four criteria must capabilities sat1sfy for them to

become core competencies? Why is 1t important for firms to

c.,..,..lOl'O c...- W'--..AJIRa&lll•~)lll).albtC'IDfl"'d,~cw~••idt«•JIIft.DwiO~nr/Jtth..-t._,.,_.) ~..,hr~'-llwtBool.aadllar~•).. bdllcnal"'cwMt.._.. .. .., ~-.H~.sc-aot......wJ) .t!«tilhtO''\'nll~~ee.pp.~mcnn*nJIII•~'C....,_..~••) tJ..,II~nPb~ft'IIIIII"'"L

Chapter 3: The Internal O<ganlzatoon: Resources. Capabilities. Core Competencies. and Competitive Advantages 97

use these criteria to evaluate their capabilities' value-creating

potential?

6. What is value chain analysis? What does the firm gain by successfully using thos tool?

7. What os outsourcing? Why do firms outsource?

Mini-Case

8. How do firms identify internal strengths and weaknesses? Why

is it vital that managers have a clear understanding of their firm's strengths and weaknesses?

9. What are core rigiditoes? What does it mean to say that each

core competence could become a core rigidity?

Is Strengthening the Superdry Brand a Foundation to Strategic Success?

Brit ish -based SuperGroup, owner of Superdry and its carefully banded product li nes, is taking actions to deal with recent performance prob lems. These problems manifested themselves in various ways, including the need for the firm to issue three profit warnings in one six-month period and a 34 percent decline in the price of its stock in 2014 compared to 2013.

Founded in 1985, the firm is recognized as a dis- tinctive, branded fashion retailer selling quality cloth- ing and accessories. In fact, the firm says that "the Supcrdry brand is at the heart of the business." The brand is targeted to discerning customers who seek to purchase "stylish clothing that is uniquely designed and well made." In this sense, the company believes that its men's and women's products have "wide appeal, capturing clements of 'urban' and 'streetwear' designs with subtle combinations of vintage Americana, Japanese imagery, and British tailoring, all with strong attention to detail." Thus, the firm's brand is criti- cal to the image it conveys with its historical target customer-teens and those in their early twenties. Those leading SuperGroup believe that customers love the Superdry products as well as the "theatre and per- sonality" of the stores in which they are sold. These outcomes are important given the company's in tention of providing customers with "personalized shopping experiences that enhance the brand rather than just selling clothes."

As noted above, problems have affected the firm's performance. What the firm wants to do, of course, is correct the problems before the Superdry brand is damaged. Management turmoil is one of the firm's problems. In January of 2015, the CEO abruptly left. Almost simultaneously, the CFO was suspended for fil- ing for personal bankruptcy. and the Chief Operating

Officer left to explore other options. Some analysts believe that the firm's growth had been ill -conceived, signaling the possibility of ineffective strategic deci · sions on the part of the firm's upper-level leaders. As one analyst said: "The issue with SuperGroup is that they've expanded too quickly, without the supporting infrastructure."

Efforts arc now underway to address these problems. In particular, those now leading SuperGroup intend to better control the firm as a means of protecting the value of its brand. A new CEO has been appointed who believes that "the business is very much more in control" today than has been the case recently. A well-regarded interim CFO has been appointed, and the ftrm's board has been strengthened by added experienced individu- als. Commenting about these changes, an observer said that SuperGroup has "moved from an owner-entrepre- neurial style of management to a more professional and experienced type of management. The key thing is, it is much better now than it was."

Direct actions are also being taken to enhance the Superdry brand. The appointment of ldris Elba, actor from The Wire, is seen as a major attempt to reig· nite the brand's image. In fact, SuperGroup says that Elba epitomizes what the Superdry brand is- Brit ish, grounded, and cool. The thinking here, too, is th at Elba, who at the time of his selection was 42, would appeal to the customer who was "growing up" with the Superdry brand. For these customers, who are 25 and older, SuperGroup is developing Superdry products with less dramatic presentations of the brand's well- known large logos. Additional lines of clothing, for ski- ing and rugby for example, are being developed for the more mature Superdry customer. After correcting the recently encountered problems. SuperGroup intends

C-.,-n&ftii20:!0CftiC\IIIItY--. AJIR.,..,.~..cl'b)•kC'CipWd..--.:l.c.clllpilnkd.• .... o.-•~O.IOc:~npr...-....,,_.),...,_..~bc~'"--c:Booe.'llallkrl~t.-

------" ......... ="-•;;_'-tu.~..._.,. .......-cdl'OIIdl~-~·«t•Ot-.m~~ac:...s~c~u....sm.tf'"ft*'tft&Mto,__.-~~~·..,.._.,~rqllb~~ ..

98 Part l : Strategic Management Inputs

to expand into additional markets, including China. In every instance though, the firm will protect the brand when entering new competitive arenas and will rely on it as the foundation for intended success.

problems, Wall Street foumal On/me, www,WSJ.COm, ApnllS; S. Chaudhuri, 2015, Superdry looks to U. S. to dr~ve gro.,1h, Wall Strut founral Online, wwW.W>J. COm, March 26; H . Mann, 2015, SuperGroup strategy oozes Hollywood glamour,/nttr,ICtn·t Jn~-rstor, W¥.'W.iti.co.uk, March 26; A. Monaghan & S. Butler, 2015, Superdry Signs up Idns

Sources: About SuperGroup. 2015, SuperGroupPLC.com, "'WW.supergroup .co.uk. Apnl 5; S. Chaudhun, 2015, Superdry brand works to iron out

Elba, Tl" Guardran On/me. www.theguard1.1.n.com, March 26; A. Petroff, 2015, Is this the \\""Orst CFO C\"er? CNNAfoucy. www.money.cnn.com, February 25.

Case Discussion Questions

1. What influences from the e xternal environment over the next

several years do you think might affect SuperDry's ability to

compete?

3.. Will the actions that Superdry is taking solve its problems?

Why or why not?

4. What value does Superdry create for its customers?

2. Does Superdry have one or more capabilities t h at are valu able, rare, costly to imitate, and nonsubstitutable? If so, w hat are

they? If not, on which c riteria do they fall s hort?

S. What actions would you recommend the management of

Superdry take to resolve its problems and turn around t h e

performance of the f irm?

NOTES 1.

A. Gambardella, C. Panico, & G. Valentom, 2015, Strategic Incentives to human capo tal, StrategiC Manog~nt Joutnol, 36: 37-52; C. G1ibert. M. Eyring, & R. N Foster, 2012. Two routes to res. hence. Harvord Busu>ns R..,_, 90(12): 65-73; H. A. Ndofor, D. G. S•rmon, & X. He, 2011, Firm resources, competotove actoons and performance: lnvestogatong a medoated model ..nth ev•dence from the ln-vrtro d13gnost1Cs 1ndustry, Strategrc Monage~nt Journal,

32:~57. S. M. E. Porter & M. R. Kramer, 2018, Creatong shared value. In G. lenssen & N. Sm•th (Eds.), Manogmg Susramabl~ BuSiness. Dordrecht. Netherlands: Springer; Khanna, I. Guier, & A. Nerkar, 2016, Fa1i often, fail big, and fall fast : Learning from small failures and R&D performance In the pharmaceutical industry, Academy of Management Journal, 59: 436-459; C. Engel & M. Kle ine, 2015, Who Is afraid o f pirates? An experiment on the deterrence o f innovation by Imitation, R~search Polley, 44: 20-33; K. Wilson & Y. l . Doz. 2012, 10 rules for managing g lobal innovation, Harvard 6. Business Review, 90(10): 84-90. 2018, Onboard Singapore Alrllnes'Boeong 787-10 'dreamliner' delivery flight, USA Today, www.usatoday.com, March 26; J. Ostrower, 2015, At Boeing. Innovation means small steps, not g1antleaps, Wall Street Journal On/me, www.WSJ.com, Apr1l 2. C. Helfat & R. S. Raubotschek. 2018, Dynamoc and ontegratiVe capablht~ for profit•ng 7.

from onnovatJon In dogotal platform-based

ecosystE.>ms, Research Policy, in prE.>ss; M. S. QurE.>shi, N. Aziz & S. A. Mian, 2017, How marketing capabilities shape entrepreneurial firm's performance? Evodence from new technology based firms on Turkey, Journal of Global Entrepreneurshrp Research, on press; D. G. Sirmon, M.A. Holt. & R. D. Ireland. 2007, Managing firm resources m dynamte markets to create value:

loolung •nsodE.> the black box. Academy of Management Review, 32: 273-292. M.·J. Chen & D. Miller, 201S,

Reconceptualizing competitive dynam•c.s: A multodimensional framewo rk. Strategk Management Journal, 36: 758-775; F. Polodoro, Jr. & P. K. Toh, 2011, letting rtvals come dose or warding them off? The effects of substitution threat on imitation deterrE.>nce, Academy of Management Journal, 54: 369- 392; A. W. King, 2007, Disentangling interfirm and intra firm causal ambiguity: A conceptual model of causal ambiguity and sustainable competitive advantage, Academy of Management Review, 32: 156-178. I.LE.> Breton·Miller & D. Miller, 2015, The paradox of resource vulnerability: Considerations for organizatjonal curatorship, Strategic Management Journal, 36: 397-415; M. Semadeni & B.S. Anderson, 2010, The follower's dilemma: Innovation and 1m1tation in the professional services industry, Academy of Management Journal,

53: 1175-1193. U. Stettner & D. lavie. 2014, Arnbodexte<ity under sautmy: Exploration and exploitatiOn

via Internal organizatiOn, alhances, and acquisitions, StrategiC Management Joutno/, 35: 1903-1929; M.G. Jacobodes. S. G. Wlnte<, & S. M. Kassberger. 2012. The dynamocs of wealth, profit, and sustatnable advantage, Sttategoc Monogemmt Journal, 33:1384-1410.

8. J. Ferre<ra & C. Fernandes, 2017, Resources and capaboi•t~' effects on firm performance: What are they? Journal of Know~ Monogernm~ 21: 1202-1217; M. A. Peteraf & J. B. Barney, 2003, Unravehng the resource-based tangle, Managerial and Deosron Economrcs, 24: 309-323; J. B. Barney, 2001, Is the resource-based ·voew· a useful perspectovE.> for strategic management research? Yes, Acad~my of Management Review, 26: 41-S6.

9. R. Roy & M. B. Sarkar, 2016, KnowledgE.>, firm boundaries, and Innovation: Mitigating the Incumbent's curse during radical technological changE.>, Strategic Manog~ment Journal, 37: 835-854; G. Zled & J. McGuire, 201 1, Multimar kE.>t competition, mobility barriers, and form performance, Journal of Management Studi~s. 48: 857-890.

10. D. Plaskowska & G. Trojanowski, 2014, Twice as smart: The Importance of managers' formatlve·years' international experience for thelr International onentation and foreign acquisition decisions, Bnrrsh Journal of Managemmt, 25: 40-57; M. Javodan, R M. Steers, & M. A. H1tt (eds.), 2007, The Global Mtnds~t: Amsterdam: Elsevier ltd.

11. M. Andresen & F. Bergdoll, 2017, A systematK lrterature revieW on the defirvtJons of

CCip) .... 2020C....-W'--..AJIRap. .. ~)b)aolhtC'CII""'l~cw~••idt«•JIIlt.DwiO~niJth..-t._,.,_.)~..,hr~'-11wt8ool.....tt.~•).. bdllcnal"'cwMt..._.. .. .., ~-HC'GIIItell*-aot-*'"lft) .t!«tllhtG~o'\'nll~~ee.pp.~mcnn*nJIII•~'C....,_..~••) tJ..,II~nPb~ft'IIIIII'I\"L

Chapter 3: The Internal Organization: Resources. Capabilrties. Core Competencies. and Competitive Advantages gg

global mindset and cultural1ntelhgence- 17. R. L Priem, M. Wenzel, & J. Koch, 2018, 23. C. Giachem & S. Tomsi, 2018, follow1ng 0< merging two dofferent research streams. Demand-side strategy and busmess runmng away from the market leader? The TM lntern<JtiOnal Joum<JI of Human Resource models: Putting value creation for Influences of enVIronmental uncertainty and m<Jn<Jgm>et>~ 28: 170-195; H. Liang. B. Ref\ consumers center stage, Long Ron~ market leadershop European Management & S. U Suf\ 2015, An anatomy of state Planning, 51: 22- 31; V. Rindova, W. J . Femer, Rel.ww, on press; J. Gomez. R. Orcas. & control in the globahzatoon of state-owned & R. Wiltbank. 2010, Value from gestalt S. Palomas. 2016, Competote<s' strategK enterproses, Journol of lntem<JtiOnol 8115KJeS5 How sequences of compet1bve act10ns heterogenetty and firm performance, LDng Stu~ 46: 223-240. create advantage for firms 1n nascent Ronge Plomwng, 49: 145-163.

12 S. J. Moles & M van Cleat, 2017, Strategoc fit: markets. StrategK Management Journal, 31: 24 M. G. Butler & C. M. Callahan, 2014, Key to grOWing enterpnse value through 1474-1497. Human resource outsourang: Market organizat.onal capetal, Bustness HoriZons. 18. C. Tantalo & R. L Priem 2016, Value and operatong performance effects of 60: 55-65; R. A. O'Aven1, G. B. Dagmno, & creation through stakeholder synergy, admlntstrattve HR func:ttons. Journal K. G. Smoth, 2010, The age of tempe<ary Srrategk Management Joumal, 37: 314-329; of Busmess Research, 67: 218-224; advantage, Srrategk Managm~ent E. R. Brenes, D. Montoya. & L Coravegna, Y. Y. Kor & A. Mesko, 20\3, DynamK Journal, 3113n-1385; E. Danneels. 2008, 2014, Differentiation strategies 1n emerg1ng managenal capabtltties: Configuration and OrganizatiOnal antecedents of second- markets: The case of latin American orchestration of top executrves' capabilrties order competences, StrategK Management agribusinesses, Joum<JI of Busmess Research, and the firm's dommant logoc. Strateg1c Journal, 29: 51~543. 67: 847- 855; D. G. Sirmon, M. A. Hitt. Management Joumal, 34: 233-244;

13. R. Vandale & A. Zaheer, 2015, Alliance J.-L Arregle, & J. T. Campbell, 2010, The D. P. forbes, 2007, Reconsidenng the partners and firm capability: Evidence dynamic interplay of capability strengths strategic lmpllcatoons of decision from the motion picture Industry, and weaknesses: Investigating the bases of comprehensiveness, Academy of Organlzatlan Science, 26: 22-36; S. A. Zahra temporary competitive advantage, Strategic Management Review, 32: 361-376. & S. Namblsan, 2012, Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 31: 1386-1409. 25. T. M. Jones, J. S. Harrison, & W. Felps, 2018, strategic thinking In business ecosystems, 19. S. Nadkarni & J. Chen, 2014, Bridging How applying Instrumental stakeholder Business Horizons, 55: 21~229. yesterday, today, and tomorrow: theory can provide sustainable competitive

14. A. Waeraas & H. L. Sataoen, 2015, Being CEO temporal focus, environmental advantage, Academy of Management all things to all customers: Build1ng dynamism, and rate of new product Review, In press; Maitland & A. Sammartino, reputation In an Institutionalized field, introduction, Academy of Management 2015, Decision making and uncertainty: Brlt1sh Journal of Management, 26: 310-326; Journal, 57: 1810- 1833; S. Nadkarni, The role of heuristics and experience D. G. Sirmon, M. A. Hltt. R. D. Ireland, & T. Chen, & J. Chen, 2016, The clock is In assessing a politically hazardous B. A. Gilbert, 2011, Resource orchestration ticking: Executive temporal depth, environment, Strategic Management to create compet111Ve advantage: Breadth, industry velodty, and compet1t1ve Journal, 36: 1554-1578; T. M. Jones, depth, and hfe cycle effects. Journal of aggressiveness, Strateg1c Management W. Felps, & G. A. Bog ley, 2007, Ethocal theory Management, 37: 1390-1412; R. Adner & Journal, 37: 1132- 1153; F. Aime, S. Johnson, and stakeholder-related deciSions: The R. Kapoor, 2010, Value creatiOn In J. W. Ridge, & A. D. Hoi I. 2010, The rout.ne role of stakeholder culture, Academy of 1nnovat1on e<:osystems: How the structure may be stable but the advantage is Management ReVIew, 32: 137-155. of technologKallnterdependence affects not: Competitive implicatiOns of key 26 P. Chatzoglou. D. Chatzoudes. L firm performance on new technology employee mobility, Strateg1c Management Sav1goannldos. & G. Thenou. 2018, The role generatiOns, SrrategK Monogm~ent Journal, Journal, 31: 75-87. of ftrm-specofic factors 1n the stiategy- 31: 306-333. 20. M. Arrfelt. R. M. Wisemaf\ G. McNamara, performance relatoonsh1p: ReviSiting the

15. C. Gnmpe & K. HusSJnger, 2014, Resource & G. T. M. Hult. 2015, Examon•ng a key resource-based VII!!W of the firm and the complementaroty and value capture m corporate role: The influence of capctal VRIO framework, Managm~ent Research firm acquiSitions: The role of Intellectual allocation competency on busmess un1t Review, 41; 46-73. property nghts, Strategk Management performance. Strategic Management v . f. R. Cahen, M de M1randa 011veora. & Journal, 35: 1762-1780; M. A. Holt, R. D. Joumal, 36: 1017- 1034; D. L• & J. Uu, 2014, f. M. Brln~ 2017, The mternabonahzaoon of Ireland, D. G. Sirmon, & C. A. Trahms. 2011, Dynamk capabilities, environmental new technology-based firms from emerging Strategic entrepreneurship: Creating value dynamism, and competitive advantage: markets,lntemat10nol Journal of Technology for lndovlduals, organizations, and socoety, Evidence from China, Journal of Business Management, 74: 23-44; W. Tong. J. J. Reuer, Academy of Management ~rspecflves, 25: Research, 67: V93-2799; D. J . Teece, B. B. Tyler, & S. Zhang, 2015, Host country 57-75; D. G. Sirmon, S. Gove, & M. A. H1tt, 2012. Dynamic capabilities: Routines executives' assessments of international joint 2008, Resource management In dyadic versus entrepreneurial action,Journo/ of ventures and divestitures: An experimental competitive rivalry: The effects of resource Management Studies, 49:1395-1401. approach, StrategiC Management Journal, bundling and deployment, Academy of 21. A. R. Menon & D. A. Yao, 2017, Elevating 36: 254-275; C. B. Bingham & K. M. Management Journal, 51: 919-935. Repiositioning costs: Strategy dynamics Eisenhardt, 2011, Rational heuristics: The

16. B. Clarysse, M. Wright, J. Bruneel, & and competitive interactions, Strategic 'simple rules' that strategists learn from A. Mahajan, 2014, Creating value In management Journal, 38: 1953-1963; process experience, Strategic Management ecosystems: Crossing the chasm between A. M. Kleinbaum & T. E. Stuart. 2015, Journal, 32: 1437-1464. knowledge and business ecosystems, Network responsiveness: The social 28. M. Hughes-Morgan & W. J. Ferrier, 2017, 'ShO<t Research Polley, 43: 1164-1176; J. S. Harrison, structural microfoundations of dynamic Interest pressure' and competitive behaviour, D. A. Bosse, & R. A. Phillips, 2010, Managing capabilities. Academy of Management Blltish Journal of Management, 28: 120-\34; for stakeholders, stakeholder utility Perspectives, 28: 353-367; M. H. Kunc & R. Mudambi & T. Sw1ft, 2014, Knowing when functions, and compet1tlve advantage, J. D. w. Morecroft. 2010, Managenal decision to leap: Transrtoonong between exploitative StrategiC Management Journal, 31: 58-74; making and firm performance under and explorative R&D, Strategic Management J. L. Me< row, Jr .. D. G. Sormon, M.A. Holt, & a resource-based paradigm, Srrateg.: Joum<JI, 35: 126-145; Y. Zhang & J. G1meno, T. R. Hokomb, 2007, Creating value 1n Management Joumo/, 31: 1164-1182. 2010, Eam1ngs pressure and competobve the face of dechn1ng performance: f1rm 22. C. M. Christensen, 2001, The past and behavior. Evldence from the U5. electncity strateg.es and organozauonal recr:Nery, future of competitive advantage, 5/oon Industry, Academy of Management Journal, StrategK Monagm~ent Journal, 28: m-283. Monogtment Review, 42(2): 105-109. 53: 743-768.

CCip) .... 2020C...-W'--..AJIRap. .. ~)b).alhtC'CII""'l~cw~••idt«•JIIlt.DwiO~niJth..-t._,.,_.)~..,hr~'-11wt8ool.....tt.~•).. l:dllcnal"'cwMt..._.. .. _,~-.HC'GIIItell*-aot-*'"lft).tf«tllhtG~o'\'nll~~ee.pp.~mcnn*nJIII•~'C....,_..~••)tJ..,II~nPb~ft'ICIIII'I\"L

100

29.

30.

31.

32.

33.

34.

35.

Part I: Strategic Management Inputs

E. Vidal & W. Mttchell, 2018, Virtuous or EnVIronment, 26: 125-141; S. R Hian & 40. C. A. Maritan & G. K. lee, 2017, Bnnging a viCious cycles? The role of dlvestttures W. D. Sme, 2014, Clear and present danger: resource and capability lens to resource as a complementary Penrose effect Planntng and new venture survival amkl allocatiOn, Journal of Management, 43: within resource-based th<!ory, Strategic poh!Kal and civil violence, Strategic 2609-2619; llppannt, G. lorenzont, & Management Journal, 38: 131-154; P. Madsen Management Joumo/, 35: 773-785; A. A10ra S. Fern ant, 2014, From core to penphery and & V. Oesat, 2010, Fathng to learn 1 The effects & A. Nandkumar, 2012.1nsecure advantage? back; A study on the deltberate shaptng of failure and success on organoz.attonal Markets for technology and the value of of knowledge flows tn tnterfirm dyads and learntng tn the global orbital launch vehKie resources for entrepreneurial ventures. netwo<ks, StrategiC Management Journal, tndustry, Academy of Management Journal, StrategiC Management Journal, 33: 231-251. 35: 578-595. 53: 451~76; P. C. Nutt. 2002. Why Oecmons 36. P. C Pate~ M. J. Guecles. N. Soares. & V. C 41. L RaduloVICh. R. G. Javalgt, & R. F. Scherer, Fat/, San Francisco, Barren·Koenler Goncalves, 2018, Strength of the associatiOn 2018, lntangtble resources tnftuenctng the PubliShers. between R&D volatility and firm growth: •ntemabonal performance of professtonal M. R. Habtbt. A Davidson. & M. Laroche. The roles of corporate governance and servke SMEs in an emergtng market: 2017. What managers should know about tangtble asset volatility. Journal of 8usmess Evidence from lndta,lntemotlono/ the shanng economy. 8usmess Honzons, Research, tn press; J.Winkler, C P. Jian-Wt'J Morl<etmg Re"-. 35: 113-135; S. Ratthel & 60: 113-121; D. Maslach, 2016, Change and Kuklinsk~ & R. Moser, 2015, Decision M. Schwaiger, 2015, The effects of corporate persistence wtth fatled technologiCal making in emerging markets: The Delphi reputation perceptions of the general innovation. Strategic Management Journal, approach's contribution to coping with pubhc on shareholder value, Strategic 37: 714-723; A. 0. Laplume & P. Dass, 2015, uncertainty and equivocality, Journal of Management Journal: 36: 945-956; Outstreaming for ambidexterity: Evolving Business Research, 68: 1118- 1126; 0. H. Azar, B. S. Anderson & Y. Eshima, 2013, The a firm's core business from components to 2014, The default heuristic in strategic Influence of firm age and Intangible systems by serving Internal and external decision making: When is it optimal to resources on the re lationship between customers. Long Range Planning, 4B: 135-150. choose the default without investing in entrepreneurial orienta tion and firm S. Singh, P. D. Corner, & K. Pavlovich, information search? Journal of Business growth among Japanese SMEs, Journal 2015, FailecL not finished : A narra tive Research, 67: 1744-1748. of Business Venturing, 28:413-429. approach to understanding venture failure 37. M.A. Hitt & K. T. Haynes, 2018, CEO 42. B. Wright, 2017, SuperGroup to rebrand as stigmatization. Journal of Business Venturing, overpayment and underpayment: Superdry, Just·Style, www.juststyle.com, 30: 150-166; S. Mousavl & G. Glgerenzer, Executives, governance and institutions, September 27: M. Khan, 2017, SuperGroup 2014, Risk, uncertainty, and heuristics, Management Research. in press; M. Cain, D. to launch Superdry sports stores, FastFT, Journal of Business Research, 67: 1671-1678; A. Moore. & U. Haran, 2015, Making sense of www.ft.com, July 3. J. D. Ford & L W. Ford, 2010, Stop blamtng overconftdence in market entry, Strategk 43. D. A. levtnthal, 2017. Resource allocation reSistance to change and start uSing tt. Management Journal, 36: 1-18; M. Gary. and firm boundaries, Journal of OrganizatiOnal Dynamta, 39: 24-36. R. E. Woctd, & T. Pillinger, 2012. Enhancing Management, 43: 2580-2587; A. Vomberg, V. Desai, 2015,learnlng through the mental moclels, analogical transfer. C. Homburg. & T. Bornemann, 2015, distribution of fa1lures wuhan an and performance in strategic decision Talented people and strong brands: The organizatiOn: Evodence from heart maktng. Strotegk Management Journal. 33: contnbut10n of human capttal and brand bypass surgery performance, Acodemy 1229-1246. equoty to firm value, StrategiC Management of Management Journal, S8 1032-1050; 38. A. D. Marttnez. Z. A. Russell, L P. Maher. Journal, 36: 2122-2131. J. P. Eggers & L Song. 2015, Oealtng woth S. A. Brandon-lai, & G. R. Ferris. 2017, 44. A. M. Webber, 2000, New math for a new failure: Sertal entrepreneurs and the costs The soc10- polttocal implications of firm economy, Fast Company, January( of changtng tndustnes between ventures. reputation: Rrm financial reputation 45. Z. Karato)tene & A. JurgeleVtCuts, 2017, The Academy of Management Journal, 58: X social reputation interaction on 1mpact of intangable rf!'SOUrces on economy 1785-1803; K. Muehlfeld, P. Rao Sahtb, & firm financial performance. Journal of in the EU, PubliC PoliCY and Admmtstrotron A. Van WitteiCIOStUtJn, 2012. A contextual Leadershtp & Organizattono/ Studies. 24: Research Journal, 16: 279-295; R. Sydler, theory of organizatiOnal learning from 55-64; D. laureiro-Martinez. 2014, S. Haeftlger, & R. Pruksa. 2014, Measunng faolures and successes: A study of Cognrttve control capabilities. intelleclual capttal wtth financtal ftgures: acquoSttiOn completiOn In the global routinizabon propensity. and decision- Can we predkt ftrrn profitability? European newspaper industry, 1981-2008, Strategic makmg performance. Organization Management Journal, 32: 244-259; F. Neffke Management Journal, 33: 938-964. Science, 25: 1111- 1133; P. D. Windschitl, & M. Henning, 2013, Skill relatedness and News Corp. 2018, News Corp completes sale A. M. Scherer, A. R. Smith. & J. P. Rose, firm dlverstficatiOn, Strategic Management of Amplify Digital Education businesses, 2013, Why so confident? The influence Journal, 34: 297-316. newscorp.com, Accessed Aprll14; L Colby, of outcome desirability on selec-tive 46. A. A. Hajl & N. A. M. Ghazall, 2018, The role 201S, News Corp:s $1 btlllon plan to overhaul exposure and likelihood judgment, of Intangible assets and liabilities in firm education Is riddled with failures. Bloomberg Organizational Behavior & Human performance: Empirical evidence, Journal Online, www.bloomberg.com, Aprll7. Decision Processes, 120: 73- 86. of Applied Accounting Research, 19: 42-59; R. Aguilera. W. Judge. & S. Terjesen, 2018, 39. N.D. Tho, 2018, Firm capabilities and F. Honore, F. Munarl, & B. van Pottelsberghe Corporate governance deviance, Academy performance: a necessary condition de La Potterie, 2015, corporate governance of Management Review, 43: 87-109; analysis, Journal of Management practices and companies' R&D intensity: V. Bamiatzl, K. Bozos. S. T. Cavusgll, & Development, in press; D. Albert M. Evidence from European countries, G. T. M. Hult, 2016, RevisJtlng the firm, Kreutzer, & C. Lechner, 2015, Resolving Research Po/1cy, 44: 533-543; J. G6mez & industry. and country ~fects on profitabili ty the paradox of interdependency and P. Vargas, 2012. Intangible resources and under recessionary and expanSion penods: strategic renewal in activity systems. technology adoptton In manufactunng A multtlevel analysJs. StrategiC Management Academy of Management Review. firms. Research Pol1cy, 41: 1607-1619. Journal, 37: 1448-14n. 40: 21o-234; L Alexander & D. van 47. B. Cuozzo, J. Oumay, M. Palmacao, & H. Che~ S. Zeng. H.ltn, & H. Ma, 2017, Knoppenberg. 2014, Teams in pursuit of R. Lombardi, 2017, Intellectual capttal Muntficence. dynamtsm and complextty: radtcal ann ovation: A goal orientat•on d•sdosure: A structured literature rev1ew, How tndustry context droves corporate perspect1ve, Academy of Management Journaloflntell«tua/Capttal. 18: 9-28; J.-Y. sustatnabihty, 8usmess Strategy and the Revrew, 39: ~38. Lee. D. G. Bachrach, & D. M. Rousseau, 2015,

CCip) .... 2020C...-W'--..AJIRap. .. ~)b).alhtC'CII""'l~cw~••idtcw•part.DwiO~niJth..-t._,.,_.)~_,ht~'-11wt8ool......ttc.~,).. bdllcnal"'cwMt..._.. .. .., ~-HC'GIIItell*- .al-*'"lft) .t!«tilhtG~o'\'nll~~ee.pp. ~mcnn*nJIII•,...,....,....,_..~ • •) tJ..,II~nP...~ft'ICIIII'I\" L

Chapter 3: The Internal Organization: Resources. Capabilrties. Core Competencies. and Competitive Advantages 101

Internal labor markets, firm·speCif ic human 53. C. B. Astrachan, I. Bolero, J. H. Astrachan, & strategtc cho1ce, learn1ng, and competrtton. capotal, and heterogeneity antecedents R. Prug~ 201B, Branding the famoly firm: Industrial and Corporate Change, 26: of employee IdiosyncratiC deal requests. A review, integrative framework propos.a~ 747-762; D. J. Teece. 2014, The foundations Organaat10n Sctence, 26: 794-810. and research agenda,.JournalofFomrly of enterprose performance: DynamK and

48. B. Y. Obeoda~ A. Tarhlno, R. Masa'deh, & Business Strategy, in press; P. Foroud~ ordonary capabolotoes on an (economiC) N. 0 . Aqqad, 2017, The ompact of ontellectual T. C. Melewar, & S. Gupta, 2014, unkong theory of firms. .Ac.odemy of Management cap.tal on onnovatoon voa rnedoatong role corporate logo, corporate image, and ~sp«t-., 28: 328-352; K. H. Hetmenlu, of knowtedge management: A strUKtural reputation: An exam.nat10n of consumer M. Schojven, & S. Gates, 20t2, Manofestatoons equatoons approach, lnternotoonoi.Joumol perceptions in the financial settong. Journal of hogher-otder routones: The underlyong of~ Management Studtes. 8: of Busrness Research, 67: 2269-2281; S. mec.hantsms of deliberate learntng m the ID-295; J. Raffoee & R. Coif, 2016, Mocro- Tischer & L Hildebrandt. 2014, unkong context of post acquos.toon ontegratoon, foundatiOns of form-specofoc human capota~ corporate reputation and sharenolder .Ac.ochmy of Management Journal, 55: When do employees percerve then slulls to value using the publicatoon of reputatoon 703-n6. be form-specofoc 1 Academy of Management ran kings. Journal of Busrness Research, 62. S. J. G. Gorod & R. Whottongton, 2017, Journal, S9: 766-790. 67; 1007- 1017. Reconfiguration, restructuring and firm

49. A. Jaon & R.· A. Thoetart. 2014, Capabilities 54. R. Sellers-Rubio, F. Mas-Ruiz. & F. Sancho· performance: Dynamoc capabolotoes and as shoft parameters for the outsourcong Esper, 2018, Firm reputation, advertising environmental dynamism, Strategic decoslon, Strategk Management Journal, investment and price premium: The role Management Journa( 38: 1121-1133; 35: 1881-1890; R. E. Ployhart, C. H. Van of collective brand membership in high· Y. Zhao, E. Cavusgil, & S. T. Cavusgil, 2014, lddekinge, & W. I. MacKenzie, Jr., 2011, quality wines, Agribusiness, in press; An lnvestogation of the black-box supplier Acquiring and developing human capotal in C. A. Roster, 2014, Cultural influences on Integration In new product development. service contexts: The Interconnectedness global fi rms' decisions to cut the strategic Journal of Busmess Research, 67: 1058-1064; of human capital resources, Academy of brand ties that bind: A commentary essay, H. R. Greve, 2009, Bigger and safer: The Management Journal, 54: 353-368. Journal of Business Research, 67: 4~88; diffusion of competitive advantage,

so. D. Ravasl, J. Cornelissen, V. Rlndova, & N. Rosen busch & J. Brinckmann, 2011, Is Strategk Management Journal, 30: 1-23; M. Etter, 2018, The formation of innovation always beneficial? A meta- C. K. Prahalad & G. Hamel, 1990, The core organizational reputation, Academy of analysis of the relationship between competence of the corporation, Harvard Management Annals, In press; N. Tracey innovation and performance in SME.s. Business Review, 68(3): 79-93. & E. French, 2017, Influence your firm;s Journal of Business Venturing, 26: 441-457. 63. L Moak, 2018, Associates become masters resilience through Its reputation: Results ss. 2018, Harley-Davidson Online store, In Apple training program, XTheExchange won't happen overnoght but they woll www.harley-davidson.com, Aprill7. Post.com, publocalfaors·sme.com. March 1; happen, Corporate Reputation Rev1ew, 20: 56. Coca-Cola online social medoa proncoples, Reoslnger, 201S, Apple's genous bar to get 57-75; S. Raithel & M. Schwaoger, 2015, The 2018, Coca-Cola Company Home page, smarter w1th 'conc1erge'-report, CNET. effects of corporate reputation perceptoons www.cocacolacompany.com, Aprol17. com, www.cnet.com, February 24; Y. I. Kane of the general publoc on shareholder value, 57. H. Feng. N. A. Morgan, & L L Rego, & I. Sherr, 2011, Secrets from Apple's genous StrategiC Management .Journal, 36: 945-956. 2017, Firm capabilities and growth; The bar. Full loyalty, no negatrvoty, Wall Street

Sl. E. G. love, J. Lim, & M. ll Bednar, 2017, moderating role of market condotoons. Journal, www.wsj. com. June 15. The face of the form : The influence of Journal of the Academy of Morket•ng 64 C . M. Carnes, F. Choroco, M.A. Hott. CEOs on corporate reputatoon. Academy Scrence, 45: 76-92; Y. Un & L·Y. Wu, 2014, D. W. Huh, & V. Posano, 2017, Resource of Management .Journal, 60: 1462-1481; Exploring the role of dynamoc capabohtoes orchestratoon for onncrvatoon: Structunng G. Dowlong & P. Moran, 2012. Corporate in firm performance under the resource- and bundling resources on growth and reputatoons Built on or oolted on? based view Ira mewor1<. Journal of Busrness mature-stage firms, Long Range Plannrng, Callfom.a Management RevieW, 54(2): 25-42; Research, 67: 407-413; R. W. Coif, 2010, 50: 4n-486; J. Schmidt. R. Makadok, & T. M. D. P1arrer, T. G. Pollock. & V. P. Rlndova, The coevolution of rent appropnatoon Keol, 2016, Customer-specofic synergoes and 2010, A tale of two assets: The effects of and capability development. StrategiC market convergence, Strategic Management firm ~putation and celebnty on earnings Management Journal, 31: n1-733. Journal, 37: 870-895; S. New bert. 2008, surpnses and Investors' reactions, Academy 58. J. E. Delery & D. Roumpi, 2017, Strategic Value, rareness. competrtrve advantage, of Manog~ment Journal, 53: 1131-1152; human resource management. human and performance: A conceptual-level T. G. Pollock. G. Chen, & E. M. Jackson, 2010, capital and competititve advantage. Is emplricallnvesugation of the resource- How much prestige Is enough? Assessing the field going in circles? Human Resoura based view of the firm, Strategic the value of multiple types of high-status Management Journal, 27: 1-21: S. Chowdhury, Management Journal, 29: 74s-768. affiliates for young firms, Journal of Business E. Schulz. M. Milner, & D. Van De Voort, 2014, 65. 2018, Sustalnabillty: Enhancing Venturing, 25: 6-23. Core employee based human capital and sustalnablllty of operations and g lobal

52. R. Sroufe & V. Gopalakrlshna·Remani, revenue productivity in small firm~ An value chains, Walmart, corporatewalmart. 2018, Management, social sustalnability, empiri cal investigation, Journal of Business com/global-responsibility, Apr i1 18 Walmart reputation, and financia l performance Research, 67: 2473-2479; A.M. Sumamanlan, environmental sustalnability, 2015, Walmort relationships: An empirical examination 2012, A longitudinal study of the influence Homepoge, www.walmart. com, March 30; of U.S. firms, Organization and of intellectual human capital on firm A. Wonston, 2015, Can Walmart get us to Environment, in press; A. P. Petkova, A. exploratory innovation,IEff TransocOons on buy sustainable products? Harvard Business Wadhwa, X. Yao, & S. Jain, 2014, Reputatoon Engineering Management, 59: 540-SSO. Review blog, www.hbr.org, February 24. and decision making under amboguoty: 59. K. Freeman. 2015, CEOs must priorotlze 66. R. S. Nason & J. Wiklund, 2018, An A study of U.S. venture capotal firms' human capital. Wall Street Journal Onlr~. Assessment of resource-based theorizing 1nvestments In the emergtng dean energy www.wsj.com. February 27. on firm growth and suggestJons for the sector, Acad~my of Management Journal, 60. S. Moore, 2015, How pizza became a future, Journal af Managemen~ 44: 32-60; 57: 422-448; Y. Wang, G. Berens, & growth stock. Wall Street Journal Onll~. A. Kaul & Z (Broan) Wu, 2016, A capaboloties· C. van Rie~ 2012, Competong on the capo tal www.wsj.com. March 13. based perspectrve on target selectiOn market w>th a good reputatoon, C«porate 61. G. P. Pisano, 2017, Toward a prescropt=ptove In acqu•stttons. StrotegK Management R~putat1on Reontw, IS: 198-221. theory of dynamic capabilotoes: Connectong .Journot 37: 1220-t239; D. S. K.lom, N. Celly,

CCip) .... 2020C...-W'--..AJIRap. .. ~)b).alhtC'CII""'l~cw~••idt«•JIIlt.DwiO~niJth..-t._,.,_.)~_,hr~'-11wt8ool......ttc.~,).. l:dllcnal"'cwMt..._.. .. _,~-.HC'GIIItell*-aot-*'"lft).tf«tllhtG~o'\'nll~~ee.pp.~mcnn*nJIII•~'C....,_..~••)tJ..,II~nPb~ft'ICIIII'I\"L

102

67.

68.

69.

70.

72.

73.

74.

Part I: Strategic Management Inputs

E. A Morse, & W. G. Rowe, 2013, Rethinking retrieval of knowledge after spillovers. 83. R. Garcla..Castro & R. V. Aguilera, the effe<!Jveness of asse t and cost Strategic Management Journal: 2015, Incremental value creation and retrenchment The contongency e ffe<ts of 37: 1263-1279; A W.King & C P. Zeitham~ appropriation on a world woth multo pie a firm's rent creatoon mechanism, StrategiC 2001, Competencies and firm performance: stakeholders, StrategiC Management Manage~t Journal, 34 42-61. Examomng the causal ambiguity paradox, Journal, 36: 137- 147; S. Manmng. 2018, Groupon stock rallieS as Morgan Strategte Management Joomal, 22: 75-99. M. M. larsen, & P. Bharau, 2015, Global Stanley ends bearrrsh call, MotketWatch. 7S. L Zhang. X. Zhang. & Y. X~ 2017, The delivery models. The role of talent. speed www.morketwotdl.com, March 5; socaality of resources: Understanding and lime zones on the global outsourcong D. Roos. 2011, How does Groupon work? organoz.allonal competitive advantage from ondustry, Joumo/ of lnternat10na/Busmess Howstuffwor*s.com, www.howstuffworks a soaal perspective, AsiO Poafte Journal cl Stud~. 46; 8S0-8n; A Jara & H. Escarth. . com. June 12. Monogemen~ 34:619-648 . 2012. Global value charns, rnte<nallonal E. Moreau, 2018, looking for more sotes 76. Barney, Form resources. 111. trade stahshcs and policymakrng on a lrke Gouponl uf~r~ wwwJofewrre.com. n. A Kaleka & N. A. Morgan, 2017, Which ftattenrng world, World Economo, 13(4): 5-18. March 4, 2018. competotrve advantage(s)? Competitive 84. J. Sheth, 2017, Revrtalrzrng relatlonshrp 0 . Alexy, J. West. H. Klapper, & M. Reotzig. advantage-market performance marketing. Journal of Servoces Marketing, 2018, Surrenderrng control to gain relationshipS in international markets, 31:6-10 advantage: Re<onclllng openness and the Journal of International Marketing, 85. C. Boulton & S. Norton, 2015, Deutsche resource-based view of the firm, StrategiC 25: 25-49; Z. Erden, D. Klang. R. Sydler, & Bank. H-P divide IT responsobrlity in cloud Management Journal, In press; H. A Ndofor, G. von Krogh, 2014, Knowledge-flows deal, Wall Street Journal On/me, www.wsj D. G. Sirmon, & X. He, 2015, Utlllzrng the and firm performance,Joumo/ofBus;ness .com, February 26. form's resources: How TMT heterogeneity Research, 67: 2n7- 2785; E. Seleska-Spasova 86. J. Rietveld, 2018, Creating and capturing and resulting raultllnes affe<t TMT & K. W. Glaister, 2013, lntrafirm causal value from freemlum business models: tasks, Strategic Management Journal: ambiguity in an international context. A demand·slde perspective, Strategic 36: 1636-1674. International Business Review, 22: 32-46. Entrepreneurship Journal, in press; A. Doha, M. Pagel!, M. Swink. & 0 . Johnston, 78. N. T. Sheehan & N.J. Foss, 2017, Using R. Lungeanu & E. Zajac, 2015, Venture 2017, Measuring forms' imitation Porterian activity analysis to understand capital ownership as a contingent activity, R&D Management, 47: 522-533; organizational capabilities, Journal of resourc~: How owner/firm fit Influences S. G. Lazzarini, 2015, Strateglzrng by General Management, 42: 41- 51. IPO outcomes, Academy of Management the government: Can lndustrral policy 79. B. Sleuer, R. Ramusch, F. Part. & S. Salhorer, Journal, 59: 93()-955; J.-Y. lee, D. G. create firm-level competltrve advantage? 2017, Analysis of a value chain structure of Bachrach, & K. lewis, 2014, Social network Strategrc Management Journal, 36: 97-112; informal waste re<ycling in Beijing, China. ties, transac.t1ve memory, and perf01mance H. Rahmandad, 2012. Impact of growth Resources, Conservation and Recycling, In groups, Organization ScH!nce, 25: 951-967. opportunities and competotoon on form- 117 B: 137-150; M.G. Jacobides & C. J. Tae, 87. H. Wteland, N. N. Hartmann, & S. L. Vargo, level capabohty development trade-offs. 2015, Kingpins. bottlenecks, and value 2017, Business models as servrce strategy, Organrza110n Sc"'nu, 23: t38- 1S4. dynamrcs along a sector, OrganizatiOn Journal of the Academy ofMorketmg J. 8. Barney, 1991, Fltm resources and Saence: 26: 889-907; J. B. Heide, A. Kumar, Saenc~ 45: 925-943; S. G. L.azzarrn~ sustarned competrtr~ advantage, Joomol & K. H. W.thne, 2014, Concurrent sourcong. 2015, Strategrzrng by the government of Monagen>l'nl, 17: 99-120. governance mechanisms, and performance Can rndustraal polrcy create firm-level M. E. B. Herrera, 2015, Cre atrng competitiVe outcomes m Industrial value chains. competrtove advantage? StrategiC advantage by onstrtutoonahzrng corporate StrategiC Management Journal, 35: 1164-1185. Mona~t Journal, 36: 97-112; H. Yang, socialonnovatron. Journal of Busmess 80. M. E. Porter, 1985, Competitrve AdYantage, Y. Zheng. & X. Zhao, 2014, Exploratoon or Research: 68: 1468-1474; C. M. Wrlderom. New York: Free Press. 33-61. exploitation: Small forms' alhance strategres P. T. van den Berg. & U. J. Wiersma, 2012. 81. C F. Dunant. M.P. Drewniok. M. Sansom, woth large firms, Strategic Management A longrtudrnal study or the effe<ts of S. Corbey, J. M. Cullen. & J. M. Allwood, 2018. Journal, 35: 146-157. charrsmabc leadershrp and organlzatoonal Optoons to make steel reuse profitable: An 88. C.lloukas & J. Reuer, 2015, 1solatrng trust culture on objectrve and percerved anatysis of cost and risk distribution across outcom~s from exchange relatoonshrps: corporate performance, ~dership the UK construction value chain, Journal of Social e xchange and learnong benefits Quarterly, 23: 835-848; C. C. Maurer, GeonerProduction, 183: 102- 111; R. Garcia- or prior toes In alliances, Academy of P. Bansal, & M. M. Crossan, 2011, Creating Castro & C. Francoeur, 2016, When more is Management Journal, 58: 1826-1847; J. Song, e<onomic value through social values: not better: Complementarities. costs and 2014, Subsidiary absorptive capacrty and Introducing a culturally Informed resource- contingencies in stakeholder management, knowledge transfer within multinational based view, Orgonizatoon Science, Strategic Management Journal, 37: corporations, Journal of International 22:432-448. 406-424; P. Frow, S. Nenonen, A. Payne, & Business Studoes, 45: 73-84. C. Smith, 2018, 40 Interesting McDonald's K. Storbacka, 2015, Managing co-creation 89. R Strange & G. Magnani, 2018, Outsourci ng, facts and statistics, OMR Business Statistics, design: A strategic approach to innovation. ofrshorlng and the global factory, in https://expanded rambllngs.com/lndex British Journal of Management, 26: 463-483 . G. Cook & F. McDonald (eds.), The Routledge . php/mcdonalds-statlstlcs/, February 19; 82. P. J. Buckley, T. D. Craig. & R. Mudambi, 2018, Companion on International Business and J. Wohl, 2018, McDonald's makes happy Time to learn? Assignment of duration in Economic Geography, London: Routledge, meals (slrghtly) healthier, AdAge, http:// g lobal value chain organization. Journal In press; E. Mrtchell, 2014, Collaborative adage.com, February 1S;J. Wohl, 2018, of Business Research. in press; Y. M. Zhou, propensities among transnational NGOs McDonald's CMO bullish on tiered value 201S, Supervising across borders: The case registered In the United States. The menu amid competition, AdAge. http:// of multinational hierarchies, Organization American R~Jrw of Pubhc Admimstraflon, adage.com, January 5. Science, 26: 2n- 292; N. Haworth, 2013, 44: 575-599. D. Mciver & C Lengnl<k-Hall, 2018, The Compressed development Global value 90. J. J. Chol, Mrng Ju, M. Kotabe, l. Trrgeorgis, causal ambiguity paradox: Deliberate chains_. multmational enterprises and & X. T Zhang. 2018, Flexrbolrty as firm value actoons under causal ambogurty, StrategiC human resource development in 21st dnver Evtdenc:e from offshore outsourcing, Orgamza/IOn, rn press. Alnuarmr & century Asia, Journal of World BuSiness, Global Strategy Journal, rn press; W. Tate & G. George, 2016, Appropraabolrty and the 48: 251- 259. L Bals, 2017, Outsourcrnglofkhorrng

CCip) .... 2020 C...-W'--..AJIRap. .. ~)b)aolhtC'CII""'l~cw~••idtcw•part.DwiO~niJth..-t._,.,_.) ~_,hr~'-11wt8ool......ttc.~,).. bdllcnal"'cwMt..._.. .. .., ~-HC'GIIItell*-aot-*'"lft) .t!«tilhtG~o'\'nll~~ee.pp.~mcnn*nJIII•~'C....,_..~••) tJ..,II~nPb~ft'IIIIII'I\"L

Chapter 3: The Internal Organization: Resources. Capabilrties. Core Competencies. and Competitive Advantages

on sights: Going beyond resoring to under uncertainty: A novel mult•-cnterla rlghtshorong, lntemat1011al Journal decision-rna lOng structure. International of PhY$1Cal OrstflbutiOII & LogrstiCs Journal of Production Economics, 190: Management 47: 106-113; S. M. Handley 96-107; R Kapoor & N. R. Furr, 2015, & C. M. Angs~ 2015, The Impact ol culture Complementarities and compelltoon: on the relation shop between gcwernance Unpacking the drivers of entrants' and opportun•sm 1n outsourc.ng technology choices on the solar photovoltak relallonshops. Strat~K Management ondustry, StrotegK Monogement.Joumol, Journal, 36: 1412-1434. 36: 416-436; N. Raassens, S. Wuyts, &

91. M. Kotabe & J Y. Murray, 2018, Global I. Geyskens, 2012. The market valuation o( sourcong strategy: An evolutoon on global outsourcing new product developmen~ product•on and sourcing rattonaltzabOI'\ 1n Journal of Morkellng Research, 49: 682-695. L C. leonOdou. C. S. Kat.okeas. S. Samoee. & 94. S. Holloway & A. Parrnigoan~ 2016, Fnends B. Aykol (eds.) Advan<n rn Global and profits don't mix: The perforrnance Marketmg .· A Research Anthology, Spnnger, implications of repeated partnershops. in press; A. Gunasekaran, Z. lrano,lt-L Academy of Management Journal, 59: Ct>oy, L Filippi, & T. Papadopoulos, 2015, 460-478; A Arino, J. J. Reuer, It J. Mayer, & Performance measures and metrtcs J. Jane, 2014, Contracts, negotiation, and in outsourcing decisions: A review for learning: An examination of termination research and applications, lnternatronol provisions. Journal of Management Journal of Production Economics, 161: Studies. 51: 379-405; A. Martinez-Noya, 153-166; W. l . Tate, L M. Ell ram, E. Garcia-Canal, & M. F. Guillen, 2013, R&D T. Schoenherr, & K. J. Petersen, 2014, outsourcing and the effectiveness of Global competitive conditions driving the intangible investments: Is proprietary manufacturing location decision, Business core knowledge walking out of the door I Horizons, 57: 381-390. Journal of Management Studies, SO: 67-91.

92. J. Pia-Barber, E. Linares, & P. N. Ghauri, 95. J. Alcacer & J. Oxley, 2014,learning by 2018, The choice of offshorlng operation supplying, Strategic Monogemenr Journal, mode: A behavioural perspectove, Journal 35: 204- 223; S. Sonenshein, 2013, How of Busm~u Research, in press; Jain & organizations fo ster the creabve use of R.-A. Thletart, 2014, Capabilities as sh1ft resources. Academy o( Management Journal, parameters for the outsourcing dec1sion, 57: 814-848; C. Grimpe & U. Kaoser, 2010, Srrat~u: Management Journal, 35: 1881- Balancing internal and external knowledge 1890; J. U, 2012. The alignment between acquisition: The gains and pa1ns from organizat1onal control mechanisms and R&D outsourcing, Journal of Management outsourcing strategies: A commentary Stud1es, 47: 1483-1509. essay, JoumoJ of Busmns Research. 96. 8.Kim, lt S. Park. S.-Y. Jung. & S. H. Park. 65: 1384-1386. 2018, Offshoring and outsourcong on a

93. lt-J. Wu. M.·L Tseng, AS. F. Ch1u, & global supply chain: Impact of the arrn's M. lt lom, 2017, Achoevong compebtrve length regulation on transfer procong, advant.-.ge through supply chaon agolity European Joumol of Operatronal Research.

103

266: 88-98; ObloJ & P. Zemsky, 2015, Value creation and value capture under moral hazard; Explorong the mocro-founclations oJ buyer-supploer relatoonshops. StrategiC Management Journal, 36: 1146-1163; S. M. Handley, 2012. The perolous effects o( capabolity loss on outsourang manoagement and performance. Journal o( ~ratrons Management, 30: 152- 165.

97. L I' It Ade, A. Mufutau. & A l Tubosun, 2017, The Influence of marketJng ontellogence on busoness competotove advantage (A study of Doamond Sank PlC), Journal of Competlllvrnns. 9: 51-71; M. Taussig & A Oeloos. 2015, Unbundling the effects of lnst•tutlons on firm resources: The contingent value of beong local on emerging economy provate equoty. Strategic Management Journal, 36: 1845-1865; 0 . Baumann & N. Stoeghtz. 2014, Rewarding value "'creatlng Ideas in organizations: The power of low·powered incentives, Strategic Management Journal, 35:358- 375.

98. U. Stettner & D. lavie, 2014, Ambidexterity under scrutiny: Exploration and exploitation via internal organization, alliances, and acquisitions, Straregic Management Journal, 35: 1903-1929; E. Rawley, 2010, Doverstfication, coord1nat1on costs. and organizatjonal rogldoty: Evodence from microdata, Strategic Management Joumol, 31: 873-891.

99. A Schneider, C. Wicke~ & E. Marto, 2017, Reducing complexoty by creating complexoty: A systems theory perspectove on how organ1zattons respond to the1r emnronments. Journal of Management Stud~n, 54: 182-208; D. L Barton, 1995, Wellsprrngs of Knowledge: Bu11d1ng and Sustarmng th~ Sources of lnfiO'oOtoon, Boston: Harvard 8usoness School Press, 30-31.

CGp) .... 2020C....-W'--..AJIRap. .. ~)b).alhtC'CII""'l~cw~••idt«•JIIlt.DwiO~niJth..-t._,.,_.)~..,hr~'-11wt8ool.....tt.~•).. l:dllcnal"'cwMt..._.. .. _,~-.HC'GIIItell*-aot-*'"lft).tf«tilhtO''\'nll~~ee.pp.~mcnn*nJIII•~'C....,_..~••)tJ..,II~nPb~ft'ICIIII"'"L