The dynamic interplay of capability strengths and weaknesses: investigating the bases of temporary competitive advantage

Abstract

Foundational RBV work suggests that firms possess capabilities that represent strengths and others that represent weaknesses. In contrast, contemporary research has examined capability strengths while largely ignoring weaknesses. Addressing this oversight, we examine the direct and integrated effects of sets of capability strengths and capability weaknesses on competitive advantage and its empirical correlate-relative performance. Additionally, we explore how environmental and firm-specific factors influence change in these drivers of competitive advantage over time. Results suggest that weakness sets have a negative effect on relative performance, while strength sets have an increasingly positive effect. The integrative effects of strength and weakness sets affect relative performance in a complex manner. For example, while high strength/low weakness firms perform at high levels, firms integrating high strength with high weakness perform well, but experience considerably more variance in their realized outcomes. Lastly, we find that the strength and weakness sets change significantly over time in markets where competition is more intense, thereby undermining the durability of competitive advantage. Our theory and results indicate that achieving temporary advantage is more difficult than previously thought and that the erosion of advantage occurs routinely as a result of dynamic and interactive rivalry.

Cross-listing and the scope of the firm

“…Although the firm raises more capital via cross-listing, it may not be able to immediately allocate additional funds to profitable projects in the short run. When the firm cannot leverage its resources into action, even achieving temporary advantage is difficult (Sirmon et al, 2010). Also, listing expenses are often prohibitive, forcing the firm to amortize these expenses in a number of years after the initial cross-listing.…”

“…But for other firms, the processes and changes may take longer, making it difficult to theorize a priori on the exact demarcation between the short run and the long run. But regardless of how long it takes, the need to make inter-temporal adjustments in the scope of the firm over time seems compelling (Helfat & Eisenhardt, 2004;Peng et al, 2005;Sirmon et al, 2010Sirmon et al, , 2011.…”

Inteligência competitiva no contexto das empresas mineiras de artefatos de estanho

“…Autores como Porter (1980), D´Aveni (1995, Ang (2008), Pachecode-Almeida (2010), Chen, Lin e Michel (2010), Sirmon et al (2010) e D´Aveni, Dagnino e Smith (2010), por exemplo, têm associado a intensidade competitiva com o grau da rivalidade existente entre os competidores que atuam dentro de uma determinada indústria. E a medida desta rivalidade tem sido determinada pelo número e tamanho dos respectivos competidores, pelos movimentos e contra-movimentos estratégicos realizados pelos mesmos dentro de um determinado período de tempo e pela taxa de crescimento ou expansão dos mercados consumidores, dentre outros (PORTER, 1980).…”

“…E nos mercados considerados como altamente competitivos, fatores como a criação contínua de novos produtos, alocação eficiente de recursos, conquista de novos mercados, desenvolvimento de competências essenciais, atendimento das necessidades dos clientes atuais, relacionamentos estratégicos com os fornecedores, eficácia das estratégias competitivas formuladas e o lançamento rápido de produtos inovadores podem ser determinantes para o sucesso competitivo das empresas em decorrência de um melhor posicionamento estratégico (PORTER, 1980;D´AVENI, 1995;ANG, 2008;CHEN;LIN;MICHEL, 2010;SIRMON et al, 2010). A Tabela 2 resume os dados referentes à importância da inteligência competitiva para a consecução dos respectivos fatores no contexto das empresas de estanho analisadas.…”

Konkurencinį pranašumą lemiantys veiksniai ir internacionalizacija: sąsajų tyrimas

“…Mokslininkų nuomone, konkurencinį pranašumą lemiantys veiksniai yra kompleksiškesni, nei manyta, todėl stiprios įmonės pusės nėra vieninteliai konkurencinį pranašumą lemiantys veiksniai, t. y. įmonės silpnos pusės sąveikauja su stipriomis apribodamos stipriųjų teikiamą pranašumą (Sirmon et al 2010). Diskutuojama apie tai, kad itin svarbu identifikuoti, kiek pačios įmonės sprendimai, konkurenciniai veiksmai ir elgsena neigiamai veikia konkurencinį pranašumą ir kas motyvuoja tokią įmonių elgseną (D' Aveni et al 2010).…”