Realizing a hybrid competitive strategy and achieving superior financial performance while internationalizing in the high-technology market

Gabrielsson, Mika; Seppälä, Tomi; Gabrielsson, Peter

doi:10.1016/j.indmarman.2015.07.001

Cited by 48 publications

(55 citation statements)

References 105 publications

(214 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Nevertheless, only 11% of the responses were unfavorable. The findings reveal that the consumers agree to pay a higher price for the differentiated product like Magnum that is consistent with findings of (Gabrielsson et al, 2016) that consumers would pay a higher price for an added value.…”

Section: Questionsupporting

confidence: 88%

“…The literature was also briefly discussed that identified the competing strategies of (Porter & Heppelmann, 2014;Shani & Chalasani, 1992) and it also identified that most of the companies compete with either differentiation or low-cost leadership. Besides, it was also found in the literature that the companies do not only achieve differentiation by creating value in the product, but they also add features to the product to create differentiation (Gabrielsson et al, 2016). Another finding was that the companies could achieve a sustainable competitive advantage over their counterparts when they create a product that is valuable, rare, difficult to imitate and organized by utilizing resources effectively.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In contrast, there are researchers who agree with the fact that the differentiation can be achieved through the additional features and complimentary services, but it does not require additional resources. Particularly, it has been found in the study conducted by researchers Gabrielsson, Seppälä & Gabrielsson, (2016); McAuley, (2014) who revealed that there are companies who have added value in the services for their core products to create differentiation. In this context, researchers Mathooko & Ogutu (2015); Sacks et al, (2015) key to differentiation is understanding the company, customers, and all the stakeholders and create value to ensure the business success.…”

Section: Successfulness Of Differentiation Strategymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Analyzing the differentiation strategies of big companies competing with each other

Ze¹,

Abbas²,

Hussain

et al. 2018

Strategic Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of the research was to evaluate the competitive strategies of the two big companies in Pakistan. To achieve this aim, the two competing companies in the ice cream sector were evaluated that include Unilever Pakistan and Engro for their brands Magnum and Omore respectively. The primary research was conducted using a questionnaire survey as the research instrument. The instrument was evaluated for its reliability and then the research was conducted with 100 consumers. The findings were relevant to the literature discussed in the research that the product is differentiated by adding value to add. Additionally, it was also found that to create value it is not limited to add value through quality, but it can also be differentiated by adding features into the product to add value. Nevertheless, the findings from the study revealed that the consumers in Pakistan prefer the differentiated product. Particularly, the consumers preferred Magnum ice cream over Cornetto and Omore because it was rich in taste and quality. Although, consumers also regarded it as expensive but they also responded to a survey that it offers value for the price. Notably, the consumers were also found preferring a low-cost product which indicates that in Pakistan the competitive strategy that is successful is differentiation and that Unilever Pakistan capitalizes with differentiation through Magnum and also serves lowcost markets and competes with OMORE brand. The recommendations were proposed for further research.

show abstract

Section: Questionsupporting

confidence: 88%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Successfulness Of Differentiation Strategymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Analyzing the differentiation strategies of big companies competing with each other

Ze¹,

Abbas²,

Hussain

et al. 2018

Strategic Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It is worth nothing that the decision to apply this duopoly strategy, i.e., cost leadership and differentiation and overlooking the focus strategy in Porter's classification was made to be consistent to the pertinent literature in the area of technological and IT related businesses (e.g., Kim et al, 2004a;Raisinghani et al, 2007;Gabrielsson et al, 2016) as well as SME context (e.g., Linton and Kask, 2017;Pett and Wolff, 2017). According to these studies, focus is a necessary condition for any high tech SME to become successful, so it is not a strategic option anymore; those SMEs failing to benefit from the abundant advantages of the Internet and other Information Technologies to carve out a market segment may not be able to create value.…”

Section: Research Context and Measurementmentioning

confidence: 99%

SMEs’ dynamic capabilities and value creation: the mediating role of competitive strategy

Rashidirad

Salimian

2020

EBR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The purpose of this research is to explicate the role of dynamic capabilities in the ability of small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) to create value and also investigate the relationship among different dynamic capabilities, competitive strategy and SMEs’ value sources. Design/methodology/approach Empirical evidence based on a survey conducted on a sample of 441 UK-based SMEs was used to test the research hypotheses. Findings The findings illustrate that sensing, learning, integrating and coordinating capabilities play a significant role in SMEs’ value creation, and competitive strategy mediates the impact of dynamic capabilities on value creation. Research limitations/implications This study demonstrates the benefits of understanding the relationship among the four types of dynamic capabilities, competitive strategy and value creation. Moreover, this study contributes to the notion of the contingency nature of dynamic capabilities. Practical implications It offers managers insight into the aspects on which to focus their efforts to enhance their firm’s capacity of value creation. Originality/value While much of the prior studies have conceptually/qualitatively investigated the financial return of uni-dimensional dynamic capabilities of large firms in the manufacturing sector, this study made a significant effort to quantitatively examine the non-financial value potential of SMEs in service sector through four processes of dynamic capabilities.

show abstract

“…Thus, the fundamental idea is that lowering costs and differentiation due to product/service improvements (both gradual and radical ones) are the main strategies for pursuing competitive advantage. While the earlier research suggests that firms adopt either one of these strategies (Porter, 1985;Day, 1989), the hybrid view argues that both of them can be used at the same time (for a recent discussion, see Pertusa-Ortega et al, 2009;Claver-Cortés et al, 2012;Gabrielsson et al, 2016). From the entrepreneurial ecosystem perspective, these strategies involve different collaborative and interaction dispositions.…”

Section: Hypotheses Developmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Does collaboration with public and private sector actors in public procurement of innovations improve SME competitiveness?

Reijonen¹,

Saastamoinen²,

Tammi³

2018

Geography, Open Innovation and Entrepreneurship

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The merits of public procurement of innovations (PPI) as a demand-side innovation policy instrument have been identified in both political and academic discussion. In particular, small and medium-sized enterprises' (SMEs) involvement in PPI could be a valuable tool in promoting SME innovations. As such, PPI could play an important role in the entrepreneurial ecosystem in which interdependent actors collaborate. However, the impact of collaboration among entrepreneurial ecosystem actors in the context of PPI on SMEs' competitiveness lacks empirical assessment. This paper addresses this gap in the literature with a survey of Finnish SMEs. We propose a construct for SMEs' improved competitiveness which can be attributed to the involvement in public procurement. A statistical analysis applying a path model suggests that after controlling for firm size and age, innovativeness and industry, collaborating with the public sector customer in developing new products/services, improving production processes and making improvements to existing products/services in response to the public sector customer's demand is associated with improved competitiveness. As a managerial implication, the results suggest that PPI has merits in promoting the competitiveness of SMEs through innovations.

show abstract

Realizing a hybrid competitive strategy and achieving superior financial performance while internationalizing in the high-technology market

Cited by 48 publications

References 105 publications

Analyzing the differentiation strategies of big companies competing with each other

Analyzing the differentiation strategies of big companies competing with each other

SMEs’ dynamic capabilities and value creation: the mediating role of competitive strategy

Does collaboration with public and private sector actors in public procurement of innovations improve SME competitiveness?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About