煤炭企业如何发展自身的核心竞争力

一、核心竞争力是企业经营战略定位的核心和基础企业核心竞争力是企业在长期摸索和发展中形成的自身特有能力和优势,是企业籍此优势取得阶段性成功,并将在今后一段时间内保持主动、赢得胜利的核心能力.这种能力不同于一般的项目研发、市场营销和资产营运,它是建立在企业核心资源基础之上的智力、技术、产品、管理、文化的综合优势在市场上的反映,处于核心地位、影响到企业发展的全局.它包括内外两个层次:内部的主要是指企业自身的优势,包括各种能力、资源和知识的长期积累;外部的是指在外部竞争对手、替代产品的袭击下能否具备迅速反击之力.从企业核心竞争力不同表现形式角度可将企业核心竞争力分为核心产品、核心技术和核心能力三类.他们之间关系密切,产品来自技术,技术来自能力.比如说,隐含在企业产品中、具有自主知识产权的核心技术、专利,或者是某种技术的全新组合.从某种意义上说,这些竞争优势是企业是否具备核心竞争力,能否赢得高额或正常利润并在竞争中处于不败之地的关键所在.核心竞争力为企业的发展带来长期的竞争优势,依托核心产品的优势,企业可以取得相关产品或服务的领先地位并开拓新的市场,因此这种竞争力是企业竞争优势的根源.     

企业重组与核心能力的培养

核心能力是企业获得长期稳定的竞争优势的基础，其培育和发展是通过企业外部重组、企业内部重组和企业市场结构重组这几个层次得以实现的。该理论作为企业战略理论的新发展，对我国国有大型企业的战略性重组，具有颇为现实的指导意义。     

企业核心竞争力与战略管理

企业核心竞争力,即企业在发展过程中形成的不易被竞争对手效仿的能带来经济高速发展的独特能力。它是企业在一系列发展过程和决策中形成的,具有独特优势,由技术、文化或机制所决定的巨大的资本能量和经济实力。它是企业获得长期稳定的竞争优势的基础,是由企业战略和实施战略的团队执行力决定的。战略管理是企业核心竞争力的基础,企业核心竞争力是战略管理的体现。     

企业发展战略与核心能力体系

日益激烈的竞争要求企业从战略的高度去考虑未来的发展远景，现代企业已经很难仅仅依靠产品、技术或其它某一方面的特长而长期保持竞争优势，企业持续竞争优势的源泉在于它的某种综合技能体系，即核心能力体系。而这种核心能力是企业生命活动的自然产物。     

战略联盟-企业核心能力的提升

企业核心能力是企业取得竞争优势的基础，企业都致力于创造自己的核心能力；然而，国际经济一体化、科技进步、经营风险的增加使企业单靠自身的力量难以维持持久的竞争优势，战略联盟成为企业发展的重要战略；战略联盟是现代企业组织制度的创新，以获取企业核心能力为重要内容；企业的构建战略联盟时应谨慎决策，确保联盟发挥优势。     

谈企业核心竞争力的培育和发展

企业核心竞争力是指企业长期形成的蕴涵于企业内部的、企业独具的,支撑企业过去、现在和未来竞争优势,并使企业在竞争环境中能够长时间取得主动的能力。它是以技术创新能力为核心,通过企业战略决策、管理体制、产品结构、品牌影响、营销体系、文化理念等要素的整合而使企业获得持续竞争优势的能力,是企业在长期发展过程中积累和发展起来的一种资源优势。     

企业核心竞争力的窍门

■核心竞争力是别人所不具备的或者一时具备不了的独特优势和能■企业的核心竞争力是企业的价值核心,是贯穿于组织中的DNA。■企业核心竞争力是企业获取持续竞争优势的来源和基础。■惟有追求企业核心能力的提高才能谋求长期竞争优势。     

企业的核心竞争力如何提升

<正>核心竞争力,又称"核心竞争优势"、"核心(竞争)能力",指的是组织具备的应对变革与激烈的外部竞争,并且取胜于竞争对手的能力的集合;是一个企业能够长期获得竞争优势的能力;是企业所特有的、能够经得起时间考验的、具有延展性,并且是竞争对手难以模仿的技术或能力;是企业竞争力中那些最基本的能使整个企业保持长期稳定的竞争优势、     

提升航天企业核心竞争力的思考

航天企业为了应对国际、国内市场的挑战，正在积极打造和提升企业的核心竞争力，使企业在激烈的市场竞争中立于不败之地。一、核心竞争力的特征核心竞争力是企业所具有的一种或几种使其在为顾客提供价值过程中长期领先于其他竞争对手的能力。核心竞争力是公司内部的知识汇总，它有三大特征：（１）价值特征：创造独特价值。核心能力的价值特征表现在三个方面：一是在企业创造利润和降低成本方面具有核心地位，核心能力应当能显著提高企业的运营效率。二是能实现顾客所特别注重的价值，一项能力之所以是核心的，它给消费者带来的好处应是关键…     

企业核心能力形成的路径依赖性

核心能力理论是企业战略管理理论的最新发，而企业核心能力的形成过程，则具有明显的路径依赖性，如何利用这个特性，以形成具有竞争优势的核心能力，本文对此进行了研究。     

核心能力的构成维度及其特性

核心能力由文化、制度、技术、管理等四个维度构成，其中绝大部分具有“方法性”特征的隐性知识，具有难于仿制的、暗默的、集体共有的、深植的以及整合的特点。核心能力的技术、文化、制度、管理等构成维度的双重潜在性决定了核心能力同时也可能是核心刚性，核心刚性以范式刚性与能力惰性形式表现出来。中国企业核心能力的培育应从四个方面切入：在企业制度维度层面构建有效、科学的企业治理结构，是企业形成核心能力的前提；加强技术维度创新，致力于建立自主技术开发能力，并适时地变换渐进性创新及突破性创新两种模式以完成核心能力的培育与再造；塑造以创新、变革为基本内核的企业文化，并不断进行企业文化的创新与变革；加强管理维度的创新，对企业内外部的资源、知识、能力进行整合和协同，实现制度、技术、文化维度之间的相辅相成。     

Do Individual Employees' Learning Goal Orientation and Civic Virtue Matter? A Micro‐Foundations Perspective on Firm Absorptive Capacity

Research summary : In this study, we build on the micro‐foundations perspective and investigate how individual characteristics contribute to the development of firm absorptive capacity. In particular, we assess how individual learning goal orientation affects firm potential and realized absorptive capacity. Furthermore, we study how individuals' civic virtue acts as a micro‐level social integration mechanism that moderates the effect from firm realized absorptive capacity to potential absorptive capacity. Using the multilevel structural equation modeling technique and data from 871 core‐knowledge employees nested in 139 high‐technology firms, we find support to our major hypotheses. Together, this study finds support for the micro‐foundations' perspective and generates novel insights on how individual‐level factors could be linked with firm‐level heterogeneity in absorptive capacity. Managerial summary : We study how employees' characteristics contribute to a firm's absorptive capacity, that is, the ability of a firm to identify, assimilate, and exploit knowledge from the environment. Because firms have increasingly tapped into external resources to foster innovation over the past two decades, absorptive capacity is crucial to firm learning and success. Using data from 871 core‐knowledge employees in 139 high‐technology firms, we find that individual employees' learning goal orientation, the tendency to seek improvements in employees' competence and to understand or master new things advances the development of a firm's potential and realized absorptive capacity. More important, individual employees' civic virtue, the discretionary involvement in company issues, serves as a social integration mechanism that reduces the gap between firm potential and realized absorptive capacity. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Competence and Governance in Strategic Collaboration: The Differential Effect of Network Structure on the Creation of Core and Noncore Technology

Whereas most of the literature on the benefits of alliances for learning and innovation has taken on a competence perspective, this paper provides an alternative integrated framework based on both a competence and governance point of view. The former focuses on the role of knowledge flows as means to access new knowledge, whereas the latter is centered around the core concepts of opportunism and freeridership in knowledge exchange situations. Although it has generally been acknowledged that competence‐based benefits of collaboration may come at a price of elevated risks due to knowledge spillovers and freeridership, such a governance view remains understudied. This paper explains how a firm's alliance network structure affects benefits as well as risks of collaboration in the context of the creation of core and noncore technology. In the case of core technology, firms attach more value to reducing governance‐based risks relative to obtaining competence‐based benefits. The opposite is found when firms develop noncore technology. This paper contributes to the existing literature by going beyond the common idea that competence and governance perspectives are either complementary or competing. Instead, this study shows that for technology‐based collaboration, they can both apply at the same time, implying a trade‐off in some cases and offering synergy in other cases. Based on an empirical test in three different industries (pharmaceuticals, chemicals, and automotive), there is support for most of our hypotheses. Direct ties have an inverted U‐shaped effect on both core and noncore technology, and the effect is relatively stronger for the former. The results furthermore show that indirect ties play a positive role in noncore technology development and that this effect is not hampered by the number of direct ties a firm has. In contrast, indirect ties seem to hamper core competence development when companies have a lot of direct ties. Finally, firms are found to benefit from nonredundancy in their alliance network in their efforts to strengthen their core technology. The joint effect of these three network characteristics leads to optimal results for core and noncore technologies under quite different alliance network structures. This poses a problem for the ambidexterity of companies, when they simultaneously try to strengthen core and noncore technologies.     

Multimarket Contact and Rivalry over Knowledge‐based Resources

Research summary: Research shows that multimarket contact (MMC ) reduces rivalry involving downstream activities. Yet, studies showing that MMC can increase the threat of imitation suggest a need to better understand how MMC affects upstream rivalry over knowledge‐based resources. In this study, we argue that MMC increases rivalry over knowledge‐based resources since the deterrent threat of retaliation that typically leads to mutual forbearance in downstream activities will not be sufficient to restrain firms from protecting their knowledge from imitation in upstream activities. In support of these arguments we find that MMC increases the likelihood that a firm initiates patent litigation against a rival. This study suggests the relationship between MMC and rivalry may depend on the competitive domain and the type of resources over which firms are competing . Managerial Summary: How does market overlap or MMC affect rivalry between two competitors? Prior studies have largely found that an increase in market overlap decreases rivalry in less knowledge‐intensive context because of the deterrent threat of retaliation. However, in this paper, we argue that an increase in market overlap may not reduce rivalry in more knowledge‐intensive context because of heterogeneity in capabilities to protect knowledge. We find that a firm is more likely to initiate patent litigation against a rival as market overlap increases. Our findings suggest that the incentive to protect value across multiple product markets may surpass the motivation to cooperate with rivals and that managers should have a more nuanced view of how market overlap with competitors affects rivalry in more knowledge‐intensive contexts . Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Firm non‐market capabilities and the effect of supranational institutional safeguards on the location choice of international investments

Research Summary : We investigate the extent to which firms rely on supranational institutional safeguards versus their non‐market capabilities to offset the risks of investing abroad. We argue that firms with non‐market capabilities are insensitive to supranational institutional safeguards when choosing the location of their international investments. We show that supranational agreements between an investor's home and host nation, operationalized as bilateral investment treaties (BITs), increase the likelihood of investment, but there is substantial firm heterogeneity with respect to this relationship. Firms with various forms of non‐market capabilities are not sensitive to BITs, whereas other firms are more likely to invest under BITs. We advance the understanding of how firm non‐market capabilities can substitute for supranational institutional arrangements in addressing risks associated with host country institutional weaknesses. Managerial Summary : The risk of expropriation is one of the main concerns companies have when investing abroad. Because of this, many countries implement bilateral investment treaties (BITs) to safeguard foreign investments, alleviate foreign investor concerns, and promote investments. We show that only those companies without political competence or political connections favor countries with BITs when choosing where to invest. Companies with political competence or political connections, on the other hand, ignore BITs and apparently rely on their ability to influence governments whenever their foreign investments face expropriation threats. As a result, politically connected or competent companies can enter markets most of their competitors lacking these capabilities shy away from. They can, therefore, do business in environments in which they face less competition.     

A competition‐based explanation of collaborative invention within the firm

Existing literature shows that collaborative invention within the firm enhances innovativeness by facilitating knowledge recombination. Despite such benefit, firms vary in their use of collaborative invention when drawing on their individual inventors' knowledge. In addressing this puzzle, we argue that competition from rival products building on similar knowledge compels firms to favor search depth over exploratory search and respond expeditiously, thus reducing a firm's inclination toward collaborative invention. In contrast with prior research's focus on how upstream resources influence a firm's position in downstream markets, this study shows that downstream competition drives heterogeneity across firms in their utilization of upstream resources. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Firm‐specific knowledge assets and employment arrangements: Evidence from CEO compensation design and CEO dismissal

Research summary : We argue that firms with greater specificity in knowledge structure need to both encourage their CEOs to stay so that they make investments with a long‐term perspective, and provide job securities to the CEOs so that they are less concerned about the risk of being dismissed. Accordingly, we found empirical evidence that specificity in firm knowledge assets is positively associated with the use of restricted stocks in CEO compensation design (indicating the effort of CEO retention) and negatively associated with CEO dismissal (indicating the job securities the firm committed to CEOs). Furthermore, firm diversification was found to mitigate the effect of firm‐specific knowledge on both CEO compensation design and CEO dismissal, as CEOs are more removed from the deployment of knowledge resources in diversified firms. Managerial summary : A firm's knowledge structure, that is, the extent to which its knowledge assets are firm‐specific versus general, has implications for both CEO compensation design and CEO dismissal. In particular, we find that a firm with a high level of firm‐specific knowledge has the incentive to retain its CEO through the use of restricted stocks in CEO compensation. Such a firm is also likely to provide job security for its CEO, leading to a lower likelihood of CEO dismissal. These arguments, however, are less likely to hold in diversified corporations as CEOs in such corporations are more removed from the deployment of knowledge assets. A key managerial implication is that CEO compensation and job security design should be made according to the nature of firm knowledge assets. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Building absorptive capacity through firm openness in the context of a less-open country

We explore the roles that potential and realized absorptive capacity play in enhancing firm performance, and examine external knowledge search strategies as antecedents of absorptive capacity. In this way, we endeavor to open the black box that sits between external knowledge search and performance, and suggest that the establishment of deep and broad relationships with external sources has differing impacts on potential and realized absorptive capacity for the firm. We argue that distinguishing clearly between potential and realized absorptive capacity may provide new insights into understanding why some companies are more successful than others at benefiting from external knowledge. A sample of 171 suppliers operating in the Iranian automotive industry is used to test the proposed theoretical model, through a two-stage least squares approach. Surprisingly, our results indicate that only the firm's capability to acquire and assimilate new ideas from the external environment (potential absorptive capacity) is related to performance for these firms operating in Iran, which been isolated from global markets due to international sanctions. Our findings emphasize the notion that potential and realized absorptive capacity represent distinct capabilities, with different antecedents and different impacts on firm performance.     

Strategic incentives to human capital

Motivating human capital in knowledge‐intensive activities is a serious managerial challenge because it is difficult to link rewards to actions or performance. Firms instead might motivate knowledge workers by offering them opportunities to increase personal benefits (e.g., learning, satisfaction) through autonomy in the decision‐making process. Our model shows that firms can offer less autonomy in projects closer to their core business: Because firm specialization raises the value of the project's outcomes, it also increases the benefits for knowledge workers, who derive motivation even though they make fewer decisions to support their realization of personal goals. Projects farther from the core offer weaker firm contributions, so firms can motivate knowledge workers by allowing them to benefit from greater autonomy. We discuss several implications of our analysis. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The problem of unobservables in strategic management research

In this paper we argue that unobservable constructs lie at the core of a number of influential theories used in the strategic management literature—including agency theory, transaction cost theory, and the resource-based view of the firm. The debate over how best to deal with the problem of unobservables has raged in the philosophy of science literature for the best part of the current century. On the one hand, there are the positivists, who believe that theories containing unobservable constructs are only useful as tools for making predictions. According to positivists, such theories do not inform us about the deep structure of reality. On the other hand, there are the realists, who believe that our theories can give us knowledge about unobservables. Herein we review this debate, we argue for adopting a realist position, and we draw out the implications for strategic management research.