Toward an Advantage-Based View of the Firm
hao ma
2000-01-01
Abstract:INTRODUCTION Strategic Management researchers and practitioners alike have long been preoccupied with the phenomenon of persistent superior performance demonstrated by highly successful firms. As such, a great deal of attention has been focused, and rightly so, on the nature and causes of competitive advantage and its sustainability (Porter, 1980, 1985; Ghemawat, 1986; Barney, 1991). Consequently, faithful and aspiring pilgrims on the journey to the Holy Grail of competitive advantage often find themselves bombarded by various theories and perspectives that claim to provide the authoritative road map, the secret path, or the newest edition of the official travel guide. These theories and perspectives, among others, range from industry analysis (Porter, 1980, 1985) to the resource-based view (Barney, 1986a, Rumelt, 1984; Wernerfelt, 1984); from core competence (Prahalad and Hamel, 1990) to dynamic capability (Stalk, Evans, and Shulman, 1992, Teece, Pisano, and Shuen, 1997); from time-based competition (Stalk and Hour, 1990; Stalk, 1090) to knowledge-based competition (Winter, 1987; Nonaka, 1991); from managing culture (Barney, 1986b) to managing people (Pfeffer, 1994; Ulrich, 1997); from commitment (Caves, 1984; Ghemawat, 1991) to innovation (Schumpeter, 1934; Rumelt, 1984); from strategic intent (Hamel and Prahalad, 1989) to corporate vision (Collins and Porras, 1996), and from hypercompetition (D'Aveni, 1994) to co-opetition (Brandenberg and Nalebuff, 1996). How do we make sense of the plethora of theories? Despite some overlap and similarity in theoretical roots, foci, or priorities, these extant theories on competitive advantage, especially recent ones, tend to emphasize the uniqueness and newness of their respective approaches or messages, touting theirs as the new tools for the new era of business reality. Most of these theories and perspectives, however, could be termed as single-factor theory. That is, they often choose to focus on and underscore the supposed effect of one particular factor, be it industry structure, firm endowment, time, culture, or cooperation. The point is, however, that single-factor theories, useful as they may be for understanding certain particular competitive advantages, often cannot fully explain successful firms' persistent superior performance. The purpose of this article is to attempt a theoretical integration that helps put extant theories on competitive advantage into perspective. In doing so, it is expected that the explaining power of the various theories of competitive advantage can be amplified and our knowledge of firm performance enhanced. This article reviews and critiques major strategy theories on competitive advantage and advances an integrative framework that coalesces these extant theories. The organizing concept of the framework is competitive advantage system and the major components of the framework include firm action, resource and capability, and market position. Such a framework embodies an advantage-based view of the firm, which treats a firm as a system of competitive advantages, actual or potential. This article first reviews major extant theories on competitive advantage. Then it discusses the limitations of single-factor theories and the need for integrative theorizing, followed by the presentation of the integrative framework. Finally, it identifies major challenges in managing the firm's competitive advantage system. EXTANT THEORIES ON COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE Table 1 presents a brief summary of the major extant theories on competitive advantage in the strategy field, organized around three dimensions: a theory's view and treatment of the firm, its core theoretical concepts, and its dictation on the task of strategy. These extant theories serve as major building blocks of the advantage-based view of the firm. TABLE 1 A Summary of Major Extant Theories on Competitive Advantage View of Core Concepts Task of Strategy the Firm Market A Collection Industry Positioning Power of Product- Structure To put a View Market Market firm in a Activities Positions strong, Bargaining defensible Power position Entry/Mobility in an Barriers attractive Monopoly Rents industry Resource- A Bundle of Unique Resources Differentiating Based Idiosyncratic Core Competence (on resource) View Resources Firm Capabilities To exploit or a Set of Ricardian Rents unique Capabilities resources and capabilities and conceive and implement strategies that are non- duplicable Commitment A Carrier Commitment Selecting View of a Persistence Commitment Series of of Strategy To create a Irreversible Entry Barriers sustainable Investment Mobility position Decisions Barriers through a series of investment decisions that are irreversible Schumpeterian A Vehicle Innovation Innovating View for New To upset the Innovation Combination current industry and of Resources, equilibrium Creative New Processes and create new Destruction & Form of games where an Organization innovating Entrepreneurial firm wins Rents Efficiency A Mechanism of Economy in Economizing View Production and Transaction To achieve Transaction Operating first-order Efficiency economy and be Economizing as efficient Efficiency Rents as possible or Quasi-Rents Ecological A Specie or Evolution Co-Evolving View organism in a Co-Evolution To strive for Business Eco- Environmental leadership in System Selection as well as Business viability of a Eco-Systems business Keystone Specie eco-system Hyper- A Vigilant and Hypercompetition Fighting competition Paranoid 4 Competitive To constantly View Warrior Arenas fight and Competitive win individual Escalation battles so as New 7 Ss to win the whole Analysis game through Temporal time Advantage Co-opetition An Unitary and Competition & Co-opeting View Rational Cooperation To balance Player who Substitutes vs. …