Competitive positioning within and across a strategic group structure: the performance of core,secondary, and solitary firms

Drawing from economic and cognitive theories, researchers have argued that firms within an industry tend to cluster together, following similar strategies. Their positioning in strategic groups, in turn, is argued to influence firm actions and firm performance. We extend this research to examine performance implications of competitive positioning not just among but also within groups. We find that performance differences within groups are significantly larger than across groups, suggesting that some firms within groups develop better resource or competitive positions. We also find that secondary firms within a group outperform both core firms within the group and solitary firms, the latter being those not belonging to any multifirm strategic group. This suggests that secondary firms may be able to effectively balance the benefits of strategic distinctiveness with institutional pressures for similarity. We conclude that the primary implication of strategic groups does not relate to the ability of firms to create stable, advantageous market segments through collusion. Instead, strategic groups represent a range of viable strategic positions firms may stake out and use as reference points. Moreover, our results concerning secondary firms indicate that firm positioning within a group structure can have performance implications. Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Cointegration of firm strategies within groups: a long‐run analysis of firm behavior in the Japanese steel industry

This paper uses cointegration analysis to study the competitive interaction among firms within the integrated and minimill groups in the Japanese steel industry. The use of cointegration analysis overcomes some of the limitations associated with prior attempts at modeling firm behavior within groups, and allows us to model strategies that take considerable time to adjust. Results indicate that several strategies displayed slow adjustment characteristics. All of the strategies that displayed these properties were cointegrated within the group. Finally, over the long run, the rate of strategic response to ‘shocks’ in the system varied across members and strategies: some converged, while others diverged from the group relationship. We conclude by discussing the relevance of our findings to research on strategic groups and competitive dynamics among firms. Thus the paper contributes to the literature on strategic groups and competitive dynamics, and illustrates the use of cointegration analyses to study the competitive behavior of firms. Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Nested identities as cognitive drivers of strategy

Research Summary: Organizations face tensions to conform to industry norms for legitimacy yet differentiate for competitive advantage when implementing strategies. We suggest this tension is due to and resolved through organizations’ cognitive negotiations of multiple levels of identity. Through an inductive study in the recreational vehicle industry, we find that organizations concurrently draw on identities at the organizational, industry, and strategic group levels to formulate and enact specific competitive actions. Specifically, we find that organizational identity relates to decisions on product offerings; industry identity relates to downstream strategy; and strategic group identity relates to upstream strategy, firm boundaries, and expansion mode. Our findings highlight the importance of strategic group identity and inform a grounded model describing how organizations draw upon different levels of identity to influence strategy. Managerial Summary: Many managers experience tensions of differentiating their firms’ competitive actions from rivals, while conforming with industry norms and practices. In this article, we argue that a manager can navigate these tensions by understanding their firm, strategic group, and industry identities and how these identities interrelate. Through a qualitative case study of the U.S. recreational vehicle industry, we show that each level of identity influences different competitive actions, with firm identity connected to product offerings, industry identity related to managing downstream distribution, and strategic group identity related to firm boundary and acquisition strategies. Overall, strategic group identity is the most critical for managers as this level filters how they view competitors and provides the rules of competition.     

Strategic groups as subsets of strategic scope groups in the Belgian brewing industry

This research report proposes a distinction between strategic scope groups and strategic groups whereby strategic groups are delineated within strategic scope groups. A strategic scope group (SSG) includes firms within an industry that define their business using a four-dimensional ‘strategic space’ consisting of buyer types, product types, geographical reach and level of vertical integration, in a similar way. Within each SSG there may be several strategic groups (SGs). An SG includes firms within an SSG that deploy their resources in a similar way and that compete in the same way. While all firms within an SSG may compete against each other, firms within the same SG compete against each other in a similar way. Within the brewing industry in Belgium five SSGs could be identified. These SSGs differ statistically significantly on a risk-adjusted return on assets measure. SGs themselves did not differ on this performance measure. One may therefore conclude that mobility barriers between SSGs are higher than they are between SGs. © 1997 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Rivalry within strategic groups and consequences for performance: the firm‐size effects

Our study examines how, in a given industry, rivalry functions within strategic groups defined according to the size of their member firms and how this rivalry affects performance. We hypothesize that, owing to several forms of group‐level effects including market power, efficiency, differentiation, and multimarket contact, strategic groups that comprise smaller firms will exhibit both increased rivalry and decreased performance compared with strategic groups that comprise larger firms. We test our hypotheses by estimating the effect of group‐level strategic interactions (i.e., conjectural variations) on firm performance. Ultimately, our analysis of empirical data on loans in the Spanish banking industry demonstrates that increased rivalry and decreased performance indeed characterizes firms belonging to a strategic group that comprises smaller firms. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Strategic groups: A cognitive perspective

The strategic group concept provides an attractive middle ground between firm and industry for both theory development and empirical analysis. To date, this concept has been defined by researchers in terms of secondary accounting and financial data, and a number of critics have questioned the validity of this work. Our research shows that industry participants share perceptions about strategic commonalities among firms, and that participants cluster competitors in subtle ways not reflected in extant academic research on strategic groups. Decision makers' perceptions and cognitions are phenomena that can be expected to influence industry evolution. They are of research interest as an additional source of data on firm commonalities which helps address concerns about previous strategic group research.     

Strategic groups,competitive groups and performance within the U.K. pharmaceutical industry: Improving our understanding of the competitive process

Strategic group research originated in the 1970s and a number of notable studies centered on the U.S. pharmaceutical industry. Results were, however, conflicting. This paper explores the nature of strategic groups in the U.K. pharmaceutical industry. The study confirms the presence of between six and eight strategic groups across the period studied, 1998–2002. The study also demonstrates a statistically significant relationship between these strategic groups and performance using three performance measures. The paper then compares strategic groups with competitive groups and concludes that the distinction is important and may explain the contradictory findings in earlier strategic group research. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Dynamic strategic groups: deriving spatial evolutionary paths

Recent theoretical developments in the domain of strategic groups, specifically those related to cognitive groups and strategic group identity, seem to suggest that strategic group membership is likely to be relatively stable over time and that firms in a strategic group co‐evolve. Yet appropriate data analytic approaches that use information about firms over time to identify stable strategic groups and their evolutionary paths have been lacking. To overcome such limitations, this research proposes a new clusterwise bilinear multidimensional scaling model that can simultaneously identify (1) the number of strategic groups, (2) the dimensions on which the strategic groups are based, and (3) the evolution of the strategy of these groups over time. Our discussion encompasses various alternative model specifications, together with model selection heuristics based on statistical information criteria. An illustration of the proposed methodology using data pertaining to strategic variables for a sample of public banks in the tristate area of New York, Ohio, and Pennsylvania across three time periods (1995, 1999, and 2003) identifies two underlying dimensions with five strategic groups that display very different evolutionary paths over time. Post hoc analysis shows pronounced differences in firm performance across the five derived strategic groups. This article concludes with a discussion of the implications of the findings, as well as potential future research directions. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Does group membership matter? Evidence from the Japanese steel industry

In this study we address criticism that performance differences among strategic groups found in past research may be spurious and attributable to firm effects. The Japanese steel industry provides the setting for the study. Our analysis is based on data from the carbon steel sector of the Japanese steel industry for the periods 1980–87 and 1988–93. A one-way ANOVA indicated that the average performance of firms in the two technology-based groups in this industry—the integrated mills and the minimills—were significantly different during the two periods. Subsequently, we performed a regression analysis to examine the residual group effect after controlling for both environment and firm-specific effects. We found that even after controlling for both environment and firm-specific effects group membership was significantly associated with firm performance. Copyright © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Strategic groups and competitive enactment: a study of dynamic relationships between mental models and performance

This study used computer-assisted content analysis of more than four hundred presidents' letters to shareholders to examine empirical linkages between cognitive strategic groups clustered by themes in the reports and strategic groups clustered by performance. We found these groups converged as predicted by the literature, and that mental models and performance are involved in a recursive process of competitive enactment which contributes to strategic group stability. Our research used inductively derived themes from the letters to structure a mental model widely shared in the pharmaceutical industry, and then employed thematic variations to find stable clusters of companies. These thematic clusters were triangulated with the strategic groups from a published study of the same industry, in the same period, and were shown to converge. Additionally, longitudinal linkages between earlier mental models of strategic goals and later reports of performance were found. The findings of our large-scale empirical study support strategic group theory, demonstrate a novel approach to data mining, and pose questions for future research. Copyright © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

GETTING TO KNOW YOU: A THEORY OF STRATEGIC GROUP IDENTITY

This paper develops a theory of strategic group identity that explains how strategic groups emerge in an industry and how they can affect firm behaviors and outcomes. In so doing, it provides a theoretical basis for the existence of strategic groups. We argue that managers cognitively partition their industry environment to reduce uncertainty and to cope with bounded rationality. Social learning theory and social identification theory are used to describe how cognitive groups coalesce into meaningful substructures and how a group-level identity emerges. We describe the ways in which macro level factors condition the development of groups and their identities. We introduce the notion of a strong identity, which characterizes any group sufficiently recognized and attended to by members to affect individual action. Groups with ‘weak identities’ are no more than transient agglomerations of firms and do not exist in any meaningful sense. These ideas are developed into propositions that describe the conditions under which groups with strong identities are likely to emerge. A second set of propositions describes their transformation over time. Identity strength is linked to both positive and negative outcomes in a final set of propositions. We show how strategic groups with strong identities can affect firm performance, resolving a longstanding problem which has plagued strategic groups research and conclude by suggesting some approaches for measurement and future research. © 1997 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Asymmetric rivalry within and between strategic groups

Our study examines asymmetric rivalry within and between strategic groups defined according to the size of their members. We hypothesize that, owing to several forms of group‐level effects, including switching costs and efficiency, strategic groups comprising large firms expect to experience a large amount of retaliation from firms within their group and accommodation from the group comprising smaller firms. Small firms, on the other hand, expect to experience a small amount of retaliation from the group comprising large firms and no reaction from the other firms in their group. We estimate the effect of group‐level strategic interactions on firm performance. Our analysis reveals that the rivalry behavior within and between groups is asymmetric, which supports the dominant‐fringe relation between firms, as described in our hypothesis. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Management heterogeneity,competitive interaction groups,and firm performance

One of the fundamental problems in strategic management is to map a heterogeneous set of firms in an industry into subsets of firms within which firms are homogeneous in their conduct and performance. The strategic group concept provides an answer to this intriguing question. Researchers in strategic group theory argue that firms within the same strategic group are behaviorally similar and thus tend to compete more fiercely within the group than across groups. In this paper, we focus on the question whether firms within the same group show similar decision‐making characteristics. Strategic‐choice theorists argue that top management teams in firms have substantial discretion in determining the future strategic contour of firms. Upper‐echelon theorists also argue that top managers are the strategists who set the direction of firms and the pace of competition in the industry. Further, they argue that top management team characteristics are an important element that determines the market niche in which a firm competes and the strategic direction a firm follows. Based on these arguments, we expect that there will be a significant link between grouping of firms by the patterns of competitive interactions and grouping of firms by top management team heterogeneity. Moreover, we argue that the closer the TMT heterogeneity of a firm is to the dominant heterogeneity in the competitive interaction group, the better it performs. Copyright © 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Do strategic groups exist? an economic framework for analysis

This paper offers a framework and methodology for resolving the question regarding the existence of strategic groups. We say that a strategic group exists if characteristics of the group affect firm performance independently of firm-level and industry-level effects. We argue that group-level effects are a byproduct of strategic interactions among members, and develop an empirical testing model, based on the ‘New Economics of Industrial Organization,’ to distinguish true group effects from spurious effects. From this model, we derive a series of logically consistent propositions, suggesting that while strategic interactions are critical for a group-level effect on profits, mobility barriers are necessary to preserve both groups and their effects over time. A review of prior empirical studies of strategic groups suggests that the inconclusive nature of prior research has been due more to the lack of a theoretical foundation for empirical analysis than to the nonexistence of groups. To the extent that our methods have been employed, there is limited evidence that a rigorous search for strategic groups may prove fruitful. © 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Firm,strategic group,and industry influences on performance

A long‐standing debate has focused on the extent to which different levels of analysis shape firm performance. The strategic group level has been largely excluded from this inquiry, despite evidence that group membership matters. In this study, we use hierarchical linear modeling to simultaneously estimate firm‐, strategic group‐, and industry‐level influences on short‐term and long‐term measures of performance. We assess the three levels' explanatory power using a sample of 1,165 firms in 12 industries with data from a 7‐year period. To enhance comparability to previous research, we also estimate the effects using the variance components and ANOVA methods relied on in past studies. To assess the robustness of strategic group effects, we examine both deductively and inductively defined groups. We found that all three levels are significantly associated with performance. The firm effect is the strongest, while the strategic group effect rivals and for some measures outweighs the industry effect. We also found that the levels have varying effects in relation to different performance measures, suggesting more complex relationships than depicted in previous studies. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Strategic groups: Theory,research and taxonomy

This paper discusses the concept of strategic groups, focusing upon the importance of intra-industry strategic groupings in understanding differences across firms within an industry. The problems involved in identifying strategic groups within industries are examined through a comprehensive review of recent studies. It is demonstrated that much of the research has used surrogates for elements of a firm's strategic direction, e.g. vertical integration, product range, R & D expenditure, to suggest bases by which creative and sustainable groups are formed. The authors argue that certain theoretical concepts such as mobility barriers, isolating mechanisms and controllable variablesprovide much firmer bases for identifying strategic groups within industries. Thus, taxonomies for understanding the nature of strategic group formulation can be developed. Implications of the strategic group concept for such strategic issues as the structure-performance linkage, firm mobility, patterns of rivalry, industry evolutionand firm growthare then examined. The paper concludes by indicating fruitful directions for strategic group research in the context of the strategic management field.     

Hybrid strategic groups

The notion of strategic groups has recently emerged as a critical perspective for uncovering firms' strategic postures/recipes and competitive market structures. Firms within strategic groups generally adopt similar strategic recipes and compete more intensely than firms across strategic groups. Building on recent research, the authors develop the concept of hybrid strategic groups, which blend the strategic recipes of more than one group, in contrast to existing conceptualizations of strategic groups, where either firms tightly follow the recipes of a strategic group (i.e., core firms) or firms loosely follow the recipes of a strategic group (i.e., secondary firms). Thus, competition among firms depends not only on the strategic group but also on the overlap of that strategic group with other strategic groups. The authors devise a combinatorial optimization-based classification procedure utilizing a bilinear model that accommodates multiple variable batteries that can estimate hybrid strategic groups. The proposed methodology is illustrated by using archival data on public banks. For this illustration, the hybrid strategic group solution outperforms ordinary cluster analyses and offers critical insights into the nature of competition among firms. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Convergence across alternative methods for forming strategic groups

We studied the convergence of three different methods for identifying group structure (strategic groups) in a single competitive environment. Using a version of the MTMM matrix, we tested the convergent validity of the concept of strategic groups in a mature, geographically delimited competitive environment. We find significant evidence of convergence between competitive structures identified using archival and perceptual data as well as those identified using archival measures of strategy and direct measures of competitors. There is limited evidence of convergence between competitive structures identified from perceptual and direct measures. Taken as a whole, these results are consistent with the emerging theory of strategic groups. We conclude that strategic groups are a theoretical construct and not a methodological artifact, as is suggested by some authors. © 1997 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Asymmetric rivalry between strategic groups: response,speed of response and ex ante vs. ex post competitive interaction in the spanish bank deposit market

The objective of this study is to examine asymmetric rivalry between strategic groups in a given industry. Two research hypotheses argue for the existence of asymmetric rivalry in the sense that strategic groups of small companies have a greater degree of response but a slower speed of response to the actions of strategic groups of large companies, than vice versa. To test this, we use an ex post approach that examines the news releases published on the strategic actions and reactions of firms. A third hypothesis compares ex ante competitive expectations with ex post asymmetric rivalry between strategic groups. To test this, we compare ex post news on actions/reactions with an ex ante approach that estimates conjectural variations. The empirical application carried out on bank deposits in the Spanish market defines strategic groups in terms of size due to the historical and institutional conditions of the industry (deregulatory change). The results obtained show that rivalry patterns between strategic groups in terms of company size can be predicted as asymmetric in the sense that smaller bank strategic groups have a greater degree of response (Stackelberg ‘leader–follower’ competitive interaction), and a slower speed of response to the actions of larger bank strategic groups than is found the other way around. Moreover, ex ante expectations of aggressiveness on the part of larger strategic groups characterize greater ex post reactions from the smaller‐size strategic groups. Therefore, the size distribution of strategic groups is valuable to research on complex industries with deregulation changes. Copyright © 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.