Firm responses to social movement pressures: A competitive dynamics perspective

Why do firms respond to social movement pressures differently? This study investigates how the strategic motivation of firms, as captured by competitor activity and market dependence, influences the likelihood of their response to social movement demands. We examine this through a longitudinal analysis of wind power adoption by electric utilities in U.S. deregulated markets. We find that when either competitor actions aligned with movement demands or firm dependence on targeted markets increase, the positive effect of movement activism on firm response diminishes. In contrast, as strategic motivation declines, increases in movement activism become more influential at eliciting firm responses. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Exploring firm characteristics that differentiate leaders from followers in industry merger waves: a competitive dynamics perspective

Research in strategic management has shown that the timing of firm participation in a merger wave matters, as early movers have been shown to outperform later ones. However, while the consequences of the timing of action within a merger wave have been assessed, the causes that drive these timing effects remain unknown. We draw on the competitive dynamics perspective to investigate firm‐level factors that influence the large‐scale strategic behavior of leading or following within industry merger waves. We develop hypotheses based on the competitive dynamics argument that the awareness‐motivation‐capability of firms will influence the timing of competitive action. Consistent with this perspective, we show that a firm's strategic orientation, its structure, and its resource base influence the timing of firm entry in merger waves. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Managing for stakeholders,stakeholder utility functions,and competitive advantage

A firm that manages for stakeholders allocates more resources to satisfy the needs and demands of its legitimate stakeholders than would be necessary to simply retain their willful participation in the firm's productive activities. We explain why this sort of behavior unlocks additional potential for value creation, as well as the conditions that either facilitate or disrupt the value‐creation process. Firms that manage for stakeholders develop trusting relationships with them based on principles of distributional, procedural, and interactional justice. Under these conditions, stakeholders are more likely to share nuanced information regarding their utility functions, thereby increasing the ability of the firm to allocate its resources to areas that will best satisfy them (thus increasing demand for business transactions with the firm). In addition, this information can spur innovation, as well as allow the firm to deal better with changes in the environment. Competitive advantages stemming from a managing‐for‐stakeholders approach are argued to be sustainable because they are associated with path dependence and causal ambiguity. These explanations provide a strong rationale for including stakeholder theory in the discussion of firm competitiveness and performance. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The influence of executive cognition on competitive dynamics

Prior competitive dynamics research has drawn on theories of information processing to model the subjective antecedents of executives' retaliation choices. This prior work has made great progress in developing our understanding of the retaliation choices most firms will make to a given type of attack. What the information processing perspective has not been able to do is explain firm‐specific behavior to predict which competitive moves individual firms will challenge, or explain why individual firms differ in the types of actions that they are most likely to challenge. The goal of this paper is to sharpen the theoretical and empirical focus on predicting firm‐level retaliation proclivities. We leverage managerial cognition research to examine the relationship between firm‐level differences in the cognitive frameworks that executives possess, and firm‐level differences in whether and how quickly firms challenge a market move. Results from a longitudinal study of the airline industry suggest that the addition of a cognitive perspective provides important insights into competitive retaliation. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Strategic purity: A multi‐industry evaluation of pure vs. hybrid business strategies

Twenty‐five years of empirical research has failed to resolve a basic strategy question. Does strategic purity pay? Most theorists believe strategic purity—the extent to which a business pursues one type of generic strategy over another—contributes to better performance. By defining the strategy space consistent with the theory, and employing improved design and methods, our study of 2,351 businesses finds a significant relationship between strategic purity and performance. Purity does appear to pay. Some variations in strategic purity and performance relationship were observed across four major industry sectors: manufacturing, construction, retail, and business services. But in all instances pure strategies never did less well, and often did better than hybrid strategies. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The cornerstones of competitive advantage: A resource-based view

This paper elucidates the underlying economics of the resource-based view of competitive advantage and integrates existing perspectives into a parsimonious model of resources and firm performance. The essence of this model is that four conditions underlie sustained competitive advantage, all of which must be met. These include superior resources (heterogeneity within an industry), ex post limits to competition, imperfect resource mobility, and ex ante limits to competition. In the concluding section, applications of the model for both single business strategy and corporate strategy are discussed.     

STRATEGIC GROUPS AND RIVALROUS FIRM BEHAVIOR: TOWARDS A RECONCILIATION

This research examines the question of whether rivalry is greater between or within strategic groups by utilizing more direct, dynamic and fine-grained measures of rivalry. Examining the competitive actions of firms in different strategic groups to determine if competitive responses were more likely to occur from firms in the same strategic group, or from firms in different strategic groups, the research found that competitive responses cannot be predicted by strategic group membership. Importantly, however, strategic group membership is a predictor of the manner by which firms compete with one another, or the frequency with which they undertake competitive actions, cut prices, instigate warfare and imitate rivals. © 1997 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Revisiting the logical and research considerations of competitive advantage

This commentary addresses the main points made in the recent article by T. C. Powell on the logical and philosophical flaws in the main thesis of strategy research. Each one of Powell's three points is refutable. The main thesis of strategy research retains logical causation given a reasonable definition of the main explanatory variable. Strategy theory is falsifiable when the implied assumptions of the theory are exploited and the endogeneity of its explanatory variables is considered. The characterization of strategy research as pragmatic instrumentalism void of progress to the objective truth is a proposition without any logical or empirical support. Copyright © 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Let chaos reign,then rein in chaos—repeatedly: managing strategic dynamics for corporate longevity

Combining longitudinal field research and executive experience, we propose that corporate longevity depends on matching cycles of autonomous and induced strategy processes to different forms of strategic dynamics, and that the role of alert strategic leadership is to appropriately balance the induced and autonomous processes throughout these cycles. We also propose that such strategic leadership is the means through which leadership style exerts its influence on corporate longevity. Our findings can be related to organizational research on structural inertia, learning and adaptation, as well as to formal theories of complex adaptive systems. They also contribute to resolving the seeming contradiction between a study of corporations that attributes exceptional long‐term success to leadership style, and the more common proposition that strategy is the determinant of long‐term performance. Copyright © 2007 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.     

Total quality management as competitive advantage: A review and empirical study

Total Quality Management (TQM) has become, according to one source, ‘as pervasive a part of business thinking as quarterly financial results,’ and yet TQM's role as a strategic resource remains virtually unexamined in strategic management research. Drawing on the resource approach and other theoretical perspectives, this article examines TQM as a potential source of sustainable competitive advantage, reviews existing empirical evidence, and reports findings from a new empirical study of TQM's performance consequences. The findings suggest that most features generally associated with TQM—such as quality training, process improvement, and benchmarking—do not generally produce advantage, but that certain tacit, behavioral, imperfectly imitable features—such as open culture, employee empowerment, and executive commitment—can produce advantage. The author concludes that these tacit resources, and not TQM tools and techniques, drive TQM success, and that organizations that acquire them can outperform competitors with or without the accompanying TQM ideology.     

An examination into the causal logic of rent generation: contrasting Porter's competitive strategy framework and the resource‐based perspective

In this study we revisit some fundamental questions that are increasingly at the heart of current strategic management discourse regarding the relative impact of industry and firm‐specific factors on sustainable competitive advantage. We explore this issue by referring to respective assertions of two major perspectives that dominate the literature over the last two decades: the Porter framework of competitive strategy and the more recent resource‐based view of the firm. A composite model is proposed which elaborates upon both perspectives' divergent causal logic with respect to the conditions relevant for firm success. Empirical findings suggest that industry and firm specific effects are both important but explain different dimensions of performance. Where industry forces influence market performance and profitability, firm assets act upon accomplishments in the market arena (i.e., market performance), and via the latter, to profitability. The paper concludes with directions for future research that will seek to integrate both content and process aspects of firm behavior. Copyright © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

动态竞争环境下战略管理的分析框架

从外部环境用内部因素的关注、从静态资源到动态能力的分析,动态竞争理论将战略研究的重点转向企业间的竞争互动,注重企业战略管理过程中的行为特征;强调企业战略管理过程中互动的动态特征。互动性、层次性、合作性及其柔性构成了战略管理的重要特征,这为企业在动态环境下构建持续竞争优势提供了一个新的战略思维模式。     

Time delays,competitive interdependence,and firm performance

Research summary: Competitors' experiences of prior interactions shape patterns of rivalry over time. However, mechanisms that influence learning from competitive experience remain largely unexamined. We develop a computational model of dyadic rivalry to examine how time delays in competitors' feedback influence their learning. Time delays are inevitable because the process of executing competitive moves takes time, and the market's responses unfold gradually. We analyze how these lags impact learning and, subsequently, firms' competitive behavior, industry profits, and performance heterogeneity. In line with the extant learning literature, our findings reveal that time delays hinder learning from experience. However, this counterintuitively increases rivals' profits by reducing their investments in costly head‐to‐head competition. Time delays also engender performance heterogeneity by causing rivals' paths of competitive behavior to diverge. Managerial summary: While competitive actions such as new product launches, geographical expansion, and marketing campaigns require up‐front resource commitments, the potential lift in profits takes time to materialize. This time delay, combined with uncertainty surrounding the outcomes of competitive actions, makes it difficult for managers to learn reliably from previous investment decisions. This results in systematic underinvestment in competitive actions. The severity of the underinvestment grows as the time delay between an investment and its positive results increases. Counterintuitively, however, competitors' collective underinvestment increases profit‐making opportunities. In industries with large time delays, companies that do invest in competitive actions are likely to enjoy high returns on investment. It is also likely that rivals' paths of competitive behavior bifurcate. Together, these mechanisms generate large differences in competitors' profits. Copyright © 2016 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.     

Competitive dynamics,strategic consistency,and organizational survival

This study investigates strategic consistency in competitive behavior. We construct a logically consistent evolutionary model, providing a causal argument to link a level of strategic consistency to long‐term organizational survival. According to our results, strategic consistency seems to be related to both organizational survival and the most efficient change over time concerning the key elements of a firm's strategy. One of the benefits of the model is that some of the components and processes may be manipulated through experimental or simulation interventions. This means that the model can be formally tested in future studies and managers can use it to fine‐tune patterns of competitive behavior. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Competitive attack,retaliation and performance: An expectancy-valence framework

This research examines how competitive attacks can best reduce the chances of retaliation. An expectancy–valence model is developed that views retaliation as a function of the subtlety of an attack: that is, its visibility, the difficulty rivals might have in responding to it in kind, and the importance or ‘centrality’ to rivals of the market under siege. Motivational theories suggest that all three of these independent variables need to be in place in order to elicit a response—or conversely, that low visibility, substantial response difficulty, or minimal centrality would each by itself be enough to prevent retaliation. This notion was not supported. Each one of the independent variables could serve as the ‘weak link of the chain,’ increasing the chances of retaliation. However, as predicted by expectancy theory, these variables selectively demonstrated some interactions that compound the threat of retaliation. In combination, high visibility and low levels of difficulty were especially likely to evoke responses from rivals. Finally, there appears to be a real incentive to avoid retaliation given its negative associations with performance.     

Sustainable competitive advantage: combining institutional and resource-based views

This article suggests that the context and process of resource selection have an important influence on firm heterogeneity and sustainable competitive advantage. It is argued that a firm’s sustainable advantage depends on its ability to manage the institutional context of its resource decisions. A firm’s institutional context includes its internal culture as well as broader influences from the state, society, and interfirm relations that define socially acceptable economic behavior. A process model of firm heterogeneity is proposed that combines the insights of a resource-based view with the institutional perspective from organization theory. Normative rationality, institutional isolating mechanisms, and institutional sources of firm homogeneity are proposed as determinants of rent potential that complement and extend resource-based explanations of firm variation and sustainable competitive advantage. The article suggests that both resource capital and institutional capital are indispensable to sustainable competitive advantage. © 1997 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Strategy tools‐in‐use: A framework for understanding “technologies of rationality” in practice

In response to critiques of strategy tools as unhelpful or potentially dangerous for organizations, we suggest casting a sociological eye on how tools are actually mobilized by strategy makers. In conceptualizing strategy tools as tools‐in‐use, we offer a framework for examining the ways that the affordances of strategy tools and the agency of strategy makers interact to shape how and when tools are selected and applied. Further, rather than evaluating the correct or incorrect use of tools, we highlight the variety of outcomes that result, not just for organizations but also for the tools and the individuals who use them. We illustrate this framework with a vignette and propose an agenda and methodological approaches for further scholarship on the use of strategy tools. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Elevating Repositioning Costs: Strategy Dynamics and Competitive Interactions

Research summary: This article proposes an approach for modeling competitive interactions that incorporates the costs to firms of changing strategy. The costs associated with strategy modifications, which we term “repositioning costs,” are particularly relevant to competitive interactions involving major changes to business strategies. Repositioning costs can critically affect competitive dynamics and, consequently, the implications of strategic interaction for strategic choice. While the literature broadly recognizes the importance of such costs, game‐theoretic treatments of major strategic change, with very limited exceptions, have not addressed them meaningfully. We advocate greater recognition of repositioning costs and illustrate with two simple models how repositioning costs may facilitate differentiation and affect the value of a firm's capability to reduce repositioning costs through investments in flexibility. Managerial summary: This article illustrates how the decision to make a strategic change is affected by both the cost to the firm of making the various strategy modifications, as well as the cost to its rivals of changing their strategies in response. These “repositioning costs” are important because they shape the responses each competitor would likely make to a move by the other competitor, and should be anticipated when considering an initial change to one's own strategy. The paper shows how repositioning costs can be used strategically to facilitate differentiation, and to assess the value of potential investments in flexibility. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.