Purpose -The purpose of this paper is to answer the question: how to extend resource-based theory to take into account the contribution of all kinds of resources (including the less regarded ones) to performance? While recognising the importance of strategic resources in building and sustaining a competitive advantage, the authors contend that a symmetric analysis of more available resources can shed new light on the sources and mechanisms of superior performance. Thus, they aim to contribute to an extended theory of resources. Design/methodology/approach -Based on literature review and theorization process, the authors introduce alongside strategic resources, the concepts of "ordinary resources" and "junk resources", showing how they may contribute to performance with an appropriate business model. Several illustrative cases are discussed to demonstrate that such resources need to be studied by resource-based theory (RBT). Findings -The authors propose shifting the focus of RBT from the study of strategic resources alone in order to consider other types as well: ordinary and junk resources. Such an approach involves significant implications for strategic management theory and management practices. Practical implications -The paper describes the conditions under which ordinary and junk resources (more available to most firms than strategic resources) may generate a competitive advantage. The extended resource-based theory can have implications for society as it may influence managers' and public attitudes towards underestimated resources and lead to new business models. Originality/value -The approach developed in this article also goes beyond traditional critiques of RBT.

Résumé Boudée par la littérature mais prisée des entreprises, la notion de «  business model  » souffre d’une certaine confusion. Il s’agit pourtant d’un riche outil d’analyse. Démonstration.

Business model has allowed strategic management to depart from the "one best way" of traditional approaches, integrating the various ways to deploy resources, to create and capture value. Hence, the "business model thinking" has induced major change in strategic management over the last ten years. In this essay, we take a pragmatist approach to tentatively detail the main features of the environment of the organization introduced by business model thinking. We advance that adopting a business model perspective does not mean that the environment is neglected in the strategy process. However, the environment is not considered as deterministic, and the organization does not have to fit with it or to try to change it. Through a pragmatist lens, the business model is conceived as performing the ecosystem of an organization within a broader environment. Therefore, we argue that the business model selects the relevant competitive landscape. This view has three main consequences. First, the environment is not the same for every organization in a given industry and the traditional concepts of strategy (entry barriers, competition intensity, bargaining power with suppliers or customers…) should be applied after the choice of business model has been made and not ex ante at the industry level. Second, the ability to implement a business model relies essentially on the negotiations and interactions with the stakeholders selected through the choice or design of the business model. Third, business models and ecosystems are not static but co-evolve. Once defined, ecosystems progressively constrain the business models. But ecosystems also change through mutual interaction and therefore offer new opportunities for the evolution of the business models.

Depuis le début des années 2000, de plus en plus de chercheurs s'intéressent à la perspective de la pratique en stratégie, c'est-à-dire à la manière dont les gestionnaires font la stratégie dans leurs activités quotidiennes (

No abstract