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.     

企业的异质性假设和企业竞争优势的内生性分析

与完全竞争模型的描述根本不同，现实企业之间普遍存在着利润差距在企业内质性假设条件下，无论是新古典经济、传统产业组织理论的SCP分析范式，还是企业竞争战略的产业分析方法，都把企业的利润归结为外在的市场结构因素，而动态地看，现实企业是异质的，它表现为企业长期发展过程中积累的核心知识和能力的差异。作为企业实施竞争战略的关键性要素，核心知识和能力是非竞争性的，难以模仿和替代。它构成了企业长期利润或竞争优势真正基础。在企业异质性假设条件下，企业的竞争行为及其竞争优势是内生性的。     

The implications of strategy and social context for the relationship between top management team heterogeneity and firm performance

This research reexamines the link between top management team (TMT) heterogeneity and firm performance. Specifically, I theorize that the effects of education, work experience, and tenure on performance will depend upon the top management team's strategic and social context. In a test of such theorizing, I find that (1) the positive relationships between TMT educational, functional, and tenure heterogeneity and performance are contingent on complexity, as indicated by a firm's international strategy and, (2) such relationships are clearly stronger in short‐tenured top management teams. The theory and results presented here provide impetus for future studies, as well as suggest to upper echelon researchers that they think more critically about the conditions under which demographic characteristics are most likely to influence organizational outcomes like performance. Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Industry learning environments and the heterogeneity of firm performance

This paper characterizes interindustry heterogeneity in rates of learning‐by‐doing, and examines how industry learning rates are connected with firm performance. Using plant‐level data from the U.S. manufacturing sector, we measure the industry learning rate as the coefficient on cumulative output in a production function. We find that learning rates vary considerably among industries and are higher in industries with greater R&D, advertising, and capital intensity. More importantly, we find that higher rates of learning are associated with wider dispersion of Tobin's q and profitability among firms in the industry. These findings suggest that learning intensity represents an important characteristic of the industry environment that affects the range of firm performance. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

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.     

The effect of CEOs on firm performance

The extent to which CEOs influence firm performance is fundamental to scholarly understanding of how organizations work; yet, this linkage is poorly understood. Previous empirical efforts to examine the link between CEOs and firm performance using variance decomposition, while provocative, nevertheless suffer from methodological problems that systematically understate the relative impact of CEOs on firm performance compared to industry and firm effects. This study addresses these methodological problems and reexamines the percentage of the variance in firm performance explained by heterogeneity in CEOs. The results of this study suggest that in certain settings the ‘CEO effect’ on corporate‐parent performance is substantially more important than that of industry and firm effects, but only moderately more important than industry and firm effects on business‐segment performance. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Top management team compensation: the missing link between CEO pay and firm performance?

In this research we discuss the relationship between CEO and top management team (TMT) member compensation, and explore the implications of TMT pay for firm performance. Specifically, we suggest that firm performance may benefit due to agency and group behavioral issues when top management team member pay is aligned—alignment is defined as the degree to which TMT member pay reflects (1) shareholder interests and (2) key political and strategic contingencies within the firm. In support of our theorizing, we found CEO pay to be related to TMT pay; TMT compensation, in turn, predicted performance (i.e., return on assets and Tobin's q) when aligned with shareholder interests and internal contingencies. Moreover, the effect of CEO pay on future firm performance was dependent on top team pay. Copyright © 2002 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.     

Leadership succession and firm performance in an emerging economy: Successor origin,relational embeddedness,and legitimacy

We examine how leadership transition affects firm performance in emerging economies. Building upon the social embeddedness and neo‐institutional perspectives, we argue for the importance of alignment between successor origin and social context for firm performance. We suggest that as a baseline outside successors enhance firm profitability because of the large‐scale and rapid changes in emerging markets. However, this outsider premium is reduced in firms embedded in family and business group relationships, where family and inside successors can better access network resources. But the outsider premium is amplified in firms embedded in a mature market‐based logic, such as high tech or foreign invested firms, because the perceived legitimacy of outsiders facilitates resource acquisition. Our arguments are supported through the analysis of Taiwanese listed firms between 1996 and 2005. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Clarifying the conditions and limits of the contributions of ordinary and dynamic capabilities to relative firm performance

Strategy scholars have argued that capabilities can influence firm performance through a variety of means and mechanisms. However, the role of capabilities and their proposed contributions have been narrowly theorized and insufficiently tested. We contribute to resolving these issues by considering the conditions under which ordinary and dynamic capabilities contribute to higher relative firm performance. We do so by examining the positive and negative contributions of capabilities to relative firm performance as well as the effects of environmental dynamism and the degree of capability heterogeneity. We utilize measures of relative firm performance at both the process and firm level within a sample of Chilean firms, which due to a dynamic environment allows for a clearer link between the environment and the use of capabilities. We find that environmental dynamism negatively affects the contribution of ordinary capabilities and positively affects the contribution of dynamic capabilities to relative firm performance. Further, heterogeneity strengthens the contribution of dynamic capabilities to relative firm performance, but is less important for ordinary capabilities. Interestingly, we find support for the direct effects of capabilities to be stronger with a process‐level performance measure, whereas the influences of environmental dynamism and heterogeneity are stronger with a firm‐level measure. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Market orientation,marketing capabilities,and firm performance

Drawing on traditional resource‐based theory and its recent dynamic capabilities theory extensions, we examine both the possession of a market orientation and the marketing capabilities through which resources are deployed into the marketplace as drivers of firm performance in a cross‐industry sample. Our findings indicate that market orientation and marketing capabilities are complementary assets that contribute to superior firm performance. We also find that market orientation has a direct effect on firms' return on assets (ROA), and that marketing capabilities directly impact both ROA and perceived firm performance. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

高层管理团队认知研究综述

自1984年Hambrick和Mason提出高层梯队理论以来,学术界掀起了对高层管理团队研究的热潮,近来对高层管理团队认知成为学者们研究的热点并取得了大量的研究成果。通过对这些成果进行综述,探讨认知派别、共享心智模型、社会认知等认知理论对企业战略决策进而对组织绩效的影响,分析已有研究中存在的局限并提出从人力资本的视角,将高层管理团队的认知特征与人力资本的产权与积累状况联系起来,明确高层管理团队认知特征与战略决策之间的作用机制。     

Agglomeration economies,firm heterogeneity,and foreign direct investment in the United States

An overlooked aspect of agglomeration economies, which are positive externalities that stem from the geographic clustering of industry, is that firms contribute to the externality in addition to benefiting from the externality. This insight suggests that if firms are heterogeneous they will differ in the net benefits they receive from agglomerating. We argue that firms with the best technologies, human capital, training programs, suppliers, or distributors will gain little, yet competitively suffer when their technologies, employees, and access to supporting industries spill over to competitors. Therefore, these firms have little motivation to geographically cluster despite the existence of agglomeration economies. Conversely, firms with the weakest technologies, human capital, training programs, suppliers, or distributors have little to lose and a lot to gain; therefore, these firms are motivated to geographically cluster. As a result, when firms are heterogeneous we expect agglomeration to be characterized by adverse selection. We find supportive evidence of these arguments by examining the location choice and survival of foreign greenfield investments in U.S. manufacturing industries. Copyright © 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Examining the effect of complexity in strategic group knowledge structures on firm performance

A developing stream of research in the strategy field explores the competitive structure of industries from the perspective of industry participants. This work has demonstrated that managers develop strategic group knowledge structures in order to make sense of their competitive environment. This study extends this line of research by examining the complexity evident in the strategic group knowledge structures developed by firms' top management teams and assessing the relationship between complexity in these knowledge structures and subsequent firm performance. Specifically, we examine the complexity of top managers' knowledge structures regarding their competition using a sample of 76 top management teams from banks in three U.S. cities. Using hierarchical regression, we find a significant relationship between the complexity of cognitive strategic groups and subsequent firm performance. These results suggest that the structure of the cognitive templates that top managers use to understand their environment and the actions of their competitor influence the degree of strategic success of their firm. Copyright © 2002 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.     

Structure and process of diversification,compensation strategy,and firm performance

This study tests six hypotheses on the extent to which a match between compensation and diversification strategies affects firm performance. Using both archival and survey data, results generally support the notion that a firm's compensation strategies make a greater contribution to firm performance if these are attuned to extent and process of corporate diversification. The paper concludes with a set of recommendations for future research on compensation-diversification strategy relations and their interactive effect on firm performance.     

CEO founder status and firm financial performance

Founders create their organizations, yet are often expected to eventually become liabilities to these same organizations. Past empirical research on the relationship between CEO founder status (i.e., is the CEO also the founder?) and firm performance has yielded inconsistent results. This study of 94 founder‐ and nonfounder‐managed firms finds that founder management has no main effect on stock returns over a 3‐year holding period, but that firm size and firm age moderate the CEO founder status–firm performance relationship. Copyright © 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Foreign and domestic ownership,business groups,and firm performance: evidence from a large emerging market

We adopt a multi‐theoretic approach to investigate a previously unexplored phenomenon in extant literature, namely the differential impact of foreign institutional and foreign corporate shareholders on the performance of emerging market firms. We show that the previously documented positive effect of foreign ownership on firm performance is substantially attributable to foreign corporations that have, on average, larger shareholding, higher commitment, and longer‐term involvement. We document the positive influence of corporations vis‐á‐vis financial institutions with respect to domestic shareholdings as well. We also find an interesting dichotomy in the impact of these shareholders depending on the business group affiliation of firms. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Alliance partners and firm performance: resource complementarity and status association

Bridging the resource‐based view and the institutional perspective, this study explores the performance consequences of firms' alliance partner selections by examining the interactions of resource complementarity and institutional associations (reflected through both societal and network status) between the firm and its partners. The integrative framework suggests that a joint consideration of resource complementarity and status effects, as well as important firm‐ and environmental‐level contingent factors, are critical for understanding the underlying mechanisms of alliance formations and their effects on firm performance. Further, our study suggests that it is necessary to consider both societal and network status as they can have distinct effects under certain conditions. Our analyses of four U.S. industries (computer, steel, pharmaceutics, crude petroleum and natural gas) over a span of 13 years largely support our framework. Copyright © 2009 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.