Organizational capabilities, appropriately dPfined, can meet the conditions, articulated by the resource-based view of the firm, for being a source of sustainable competitive advantage. However, this paper observes that there are limits to the extent of the importance of such capabilities. They are vulnerable to threats of erosion, substitution, and above all to being superseded by a higher-order capability of the 'learning to learn' variety. Thk suggests that there can be an infinite regress in the explanation for, and prediction of, sustainable competitive advantage. The problem is resolved by arguing that the value of organizational capabilities is context dependent, and by recognizing that the strategy field will never find the ultimate source of sustainable competitive advantage.

No abstract

This paper critically examines the contribution of aspects of the resource‐based view of the firm to global competition in particular, and to strategic management in general. Three concepts—core competence, organizational capability, and administrative heritage—are defined and compared with the current mainstream economic tradition of strategy. The value of these concepts in analyzing and explaining competitive strategy is determined through a detailed field‐based case study of three firms in the worldwide bearings industry. It is found that the resource‐based view of the firm complements economic analysis, and that both are essential to a complete understanding of global strategy.

This paper examines the unique functions of corporate headquarters in diversified firms and reports on a survey of the structure and staffing of more than 600 headquarters in Europe, the United States, Japan, and Chile. It explores the extent to which corporate headquarters are contingent on size of the company, corporate strategy (corporate portfolio and corporate structure and policies), and governance system (ownership and regulation, and country of origin). The results confirm that factors in each of these areas are important determinants of the size and structure of headquarters. Performance data suggest that these findings are not merely descriptive but that corporate headquarters should be designed to fit the corporate strategy. Although the results are capable of alternative interpretations, analysis provides no support for the view that 'lean and mean' headquarters lead to better performance.

No abstract