Leveraging supplier capabilities: The role of locus of capability deployment

This study adds to the resource‐based view by studying how client firms may gain performance benefits from supplier IT capabilities in market‐based arrangements where the supplier's IT capabilities are readily available to multiple client firms. I argue that the locus of supplier capability deployment, i.e. whether supplier capabilities are deployed at the client (in‐sourcing) or supplier (outsourcing), has implications for client firm performance. The findings show that in‐sourcing leads to complementary effects between supplier IT capabilities and client operational capabilities. In contrast, clients with weaker operational capabilities benefit from outsourcing the respective activity to the supplier, and may even be able to reduce their capability disadvantage through outsourcing. The data on 964 U.S. credit unions contracting with 22 technology solution providers is archival. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Revisiting the role of the environment in the capabilities–financial performance relationship: A meta‐analysis

Within the capabilities‐based view of the firm, there is debate about the relative importance of ordinary and dynamic capabilities for firm performance and about the extent to which their performance effects are contingent on environmental conditions. We meta‐analyze 115 studies to investigate the relationship between both ordinary and dynamic capabilities and the financial performance of firms in relatively stable versus changing environments. The results suggest that the performance effects of both types of capabilities are positive and similar in magnitude. Environmental dynamism reinforces the effects of both ordinary and dynamic capabilities. Furthermore, the two types of capabilities are closely associated. Our findings provide support for a moderate capabilities‐based view of the firm, rather than one that considers dynamic capabilities as superior to ordinary ones. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

A capabilities‐based perspective on target selection in acquisitions

We develop a capabilities‐based theory of acquirer target selection, arguing that acquirers will pursue both low capability targets in existing contexts to deploy existing capabilities, and high capability targets in new contexts to acquire new capabilities. These arguments are formalized in an analytical model that jointly considers the benefits and costs of acquisition as a function of target capability level and context. The predictions from this model are tested in the Chinese brewing industry (1998–2007), with results showing that acquirers strongly prefer inferior targets in existing geographic markets, but are relatively more likely to choose superior targets in new markets, especially if they have strong acquisition capabilities. Our study provides insight into the factors driving target selection, and contributes to a capabilities‐based understanding of acquisitions. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Marketing capabilities: Antecedents and implications for B2B SME performance

The study provides a new perspective on SME marketing strategies in the B2B context. Using a resource-based view of the firm, the study develops a structural model linking marketing capabilities and marketing performance. A study of 367 SME Australian firms reveals that two key marketing capabilities, namely branding and innovation, have major performance outcomes in the SME B2B context. This is the first SME study to evaluate concurrently the contribution of innovation and branding marketing capabilities, with innovation capability the strongest determinant of SME performance. The study also finds market orientation and management capability act as enabling mechanisms for building marketing capabilities. Disaggregation tests indicate that the same findings apply to three size categories denoting micro firms (less than 20 staff), small firms (20-99 staff) and medium-sized firms (100-499 staff).     

An empirical analysis of sustained advantage in the U.S. pharmaceutical industry: impact of firm resources and capabilities

The authors test a model of the relationships among firm resources, firm capabilities, and sustained competitive advantage between 1971 and 1989. Sustained comparative advantage was captured by two variables: therapeutic differentiation and global NCEs. The results show that R&D and salesforce expenditures have indirect and direct effects, respectively, on sustained competitive advantage. Firm capabilities were differentiated into component and integrative capabilities. Component capabilities were captured by the firm’s internal R&D efforts and therapeutic market focus, while integrative capabilities were concerned with the firm’s ability to obtain FDA approvals and to develop radical new drugs. Findings on each of these four capabilities on therapeutic differentiation and global NCEs are mixed. The direct and indirect effects of these resources and capabilities on therapeutic differentiation and global NCEs suggest important managerial implications in the way firms coordinate and combine their assets so as to achieve sustained competitive advantage. Copyright © 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Entry into Nascent Industries: Disentangling a Firm's Capability Portfolio at the Time of Investment Versus Market Entry

Research summary : This article examines the capability antecedents of firm entry into nascent industries. Because a firm's technological investments in nascent industries typically occur before market entry, this study makes a distinction between firm capabilities at the time of market entry and at the time of initial investment. At the time of market entry, core technical capabilities and complementary assets influence the likelihood of entry. However, at the time of investment, a firm's integrative capabilities as well as the initial stocks of related technical capabilities and complementary assets become critical, as they enable endogenous development of core technical capabilities and complementary assets by the time of entry. The empirical sample consists of firms involved in field experiments in agricultural biotechnology during the period 1980–2010. Managerial summary : New product commercialization in a nascent industry typically requires access to not only core technologies of the focal industry, but also supporting commercialization assets. However, firms may not possess these critical capabilities when they first invest in the industry. Instead, empirical evidence from the context of agricultural biotechnology shows that at the time of first investment, a firm's integrative capabilities partly explain their likelihood of entry. Integrative capabilities encompass a set of practices that enable effective coordination and communication, and in turn put firms in an advantageous position to develop the needed capabilities by the time of entry. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Customer capabilities,switching costs,and bank performance

Customers develop switching costs when they invest time and effort to develop capabilities required to optimally use a given product. Such capabilities are likely to be firm specific and cannot be transferred perfectly to competitors' product offerings. Customers who face switching costs are likely to remain with the same firm and consume complementary products that meet their needs. Thus, firms can achieve competitive advantage by exploiting customers' switching costs. In this paper, we hypothesize that the extent to which firms can benefit from customers' switching costs is contingent upon the firms' internal cross‐selling capabilities. We use online banking data to test our hypotheses and find that customers' switching costs contribute to banks' profitability only in the presence of high levels of internal cross‐selling capabilities. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Mapping technological capabilities into product markets and competitive advantage: the case of cholesterol drugs

While a lot of attention has been paid to those characteristics of capabilities that give firms a competitive advantage, a lot less attention has been given to supporting empirical evidence and to the deployment of these capabilities. This paper presents a model for mapping firm capabilities into customer value and competitive advantage in different markets. With empirical evidence from cholesterol drugs, I illustrate how the model can be used to estimate customer value and competitive advantage from technological capabilities. Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Where do capabilities come from and how do they matter? A study in the software services industry

Recent years have witnessed a surge of interest in the notion of capabilities as an important source of competitive advantage. This recognition has, in turn, placed emphasis on the question of where and how these capabilities emerge and how they influence firm performance. The present paper is an attempt to address this question. Using a large sample of detailed project‐level data from a leading firm in the global software services industry, we attempt to empirically study the importance of capabilities. We find that two broad classes of capabilities are significant. The first class, which we label client‐specific capabilities, is a function of repeated interactions with clients over time and across different projects. This learning from repeated interactions with a given client reduces project execution costs and helps improve project contribution. The second class, termed project management capabilities, is acquired through deliberate and persistent investments in infrastructure and systems to improve the firm's software development process. Our empirical results suggest that the marginal returns to acquiring different capabilities may be different and an understanding of such trade‐offs can improve firm decisions to improve and/or acquire such capabilities. We discuss the key contributions of our paper and the implications for future research on capabilities. Copyright © 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Product‐market strategy and the marketing capabilities of the firm: impact on market effectiveness and cash flow performance

We report on two studies (a single and a multi‐industry) that empirically investigate a nomological network of relationships between strategic business unit product‐market strategy (differentiation, cost‐focus, and product‐market scope), marketing capabilities (architectural and specialized capabilities, as well as their integration), and business unit performance (market effectiveness and subsequent one‐year objective cash flow), along with a series of controls. Addressing important lacunae in the resource‐based view our main research objective is to augment understanding of how critical firm‐level marketing capabilities enable the realization of strategy, thus, further advancing both the resource‐based view and more recent capabilities theorizing. Specifically, we test seven hypotheses and find strong evidence that both architectural and specialized marketing capabilities, and their integration, positively mediate the product‐market strategy and derived business unit performance relationship. In contrast to many extant studies, both survey and objectively measured data are combined, and because the secondary data collected contains both resource‐level (input) data and subsequent one‐year financial data, a higher level of confidence may be attributable to our findings. Copyright © 2009 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.     

A framework linking intangible resources and capabiliites to sustainable competitive advantage

This article is concerned with the role of intangible resources in business strategy. In particular it is concerned with identifying the intangible sources of sustainable competitive advantage. Sustainable competitive advantage results from the possession of relevant capability differentials. Regulatory and positional capabilities are concerned with intangible assets; functional and cultural capabilities are concerned with competencies. A framework linking intangible resources to capabilities has been devised and is used as the basis of a new technique for identifying the relative contribution which the different intangible resources make to competitive advantage. The results of the use of this technique in six case studies are reported.     

Strategic capability architecture: The role of network capability

A firm's network capability refers to its ability to build, handle and exploit relationships. These capabilities are interwoven in a complex configuration with the other capabilities and competencies of the firm and in practice, are very difficult to separate from them. Rather than assuming that firms inherently possess network capability, our aim is to discover if the shared managerial logic of top management teams confirms its presence. In order to understand how managers perceive, process and interpret network capability, we guided the management teams of five industrial suppliers through a novel five-step process of introducing, identifying, critically screening, challenging and verifying the capabilities of the firm. The paper introduces a framework for strategic capability architecture and investigates how network capability emerges from among the configuration of other capabilities in industrial firms. We found that network capabilities are central to the formation of customer capabilities. Network capabilities also play an important role as assets contributing to the formation of other capability sets. Furthermore, we found that the networking capabilities act in unison with other capabilities through three different strategic logics termed partnering, value streaming, and horizontal allying.     

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.     

CAPABILITIES,TECHNOLOGICAL DIVERSIFICATION AND DIVISIONALIZATION

This paper develops and tests the hypothesis that greater R&D diversification is associated with less divisionalization in multidivisional firms. It argues, from transaction cost theory, that the extent of divisionalization of a large firm is indicative of its emphasis on interdivisional coordination, since fewer divisional boundaries reduce interdivisional bargaining costs. Also, greater interdivisional coordination is required to pursue strategies which exploit R&D undertaken in diverse but complementary fields, that is, strategies aimed at broadening technological capabilities. Conversely, less interdivisional coordination is required for more specialized R&D, that is, for strategies aimed at deepening existing capabilities. The hypothesis finds support in patent and organizational data.     

EVIDENCE ON THE ROLE OF FIRM CAPABILITIES IN VERTICAL INTEGRATION DECISIONS

The capabilities approach to the firm postulates that firms vertically integrate activities for which they possess capabilities that are superior to potential suppliers'. The comparative contracting approach, in contrast, emphasizes high asset specificity as leading to vertical integration. This paper compares the two sets of explanations on make-or-buy decisions made by a large firm. It finds that in some cases asset specificity alone is determinant, but in others capabilities and combinations of considerations are explanatory. Analysis of the data also provides insights about the mechanisms through which capabilities operate. In particular, the similarity of the knowledge bases associated with various activities, and the time required to acquire knowledge, appear as important indicators of the importance of capabilities to vertical integration decisions.     

Capabilities, innovation and competitive advantage

This special issue was aimed at advancing the literature examining the role of capabilities in innovation-based competitive strategy. Whilst the innovation literature has over the years moved away from its ‘product innovation’ pre-occupation to capture the role of other forms of innovation in value creation, the capability view has progressed from its ‘rigid’ or ‘static’ view to a ‘dynamic’ view in an effort to capture market dynamism. Despite the recent theoretical advancements the dynamic capability view still lacks a strong empirical base. Contributors to the capability literature over the recent years have adopted multiple research methods to capture capabilities that include cross-sectional designs, case studies and longitudinal studies. Within this backdrop, the articles that were selected for this special issue covers both conceptual and empirical approaches to examine the relationship between capabilities and technical and non-technical innovations and performance outcomes. This essay provides a future research agenda to advance this promising research field. It highlights the need for clearer conceptualizations and development of measures of dynamic capabilities, environmental conditions that underpin the development of dynamic capabilities within the firm and research into the much debated relationship between dynamic capabilities and competitive advantage and organizational performance.     

Absolute and relative resources as determinants of international acquisitions

Although it is established that firms sometimes expand abroad to augment their capabilities, previous studies have generally focused on technological determinants of foreign expansion. We analyze capability‐seeking aspects of foreign direct investment by examining the relationship between upstream (technological) and downstream (marketing) capabilities and the choice between acquisition and greenfield modes of international entry. In analyzing 2175 entries by British, German, and Japanese investors into the United States, we find that for downstream capabilities, which tend not to be geographically fungible, the absolute level of capabilities in the entered industry explains the mode choice. However, for upstream capabilities, which tend to be geographically fungible, the acquisition motive stems from a relative capability differential between host and home country firms. These results have implications for the concept of fungibility in the resource‐based view of the firm as well as for the literature on sourcing of resident assets by foreign firms, which has thus far ignored issues of entry mode and downstream assets. Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Firm capabilities and technology ladders: sequential foreign direct investments of Japanese electronics firms in East Asia

This paper investigates how investments in capabilities offer platforms for the upgrading or downgrading of overseas subsidiaries' activities along a ‘technology ladder’ in response to macroeconomic changes. By analyzing panel data on Japanese electronic firms in East Asia from 1988 to 1994, the empirical results confirm the importance of capabilities at host country, parent company, and local subsidiary levels in sequential foreign investment decisions. The results show that subsidiary capabilities offset macroeconomic factors influencing location decisions of multinational corporations. Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Embedded ties and the acquisition of competitive capabilities

We build on previous research that explores the external acquisition of competitive capabilities through the embedded ties that firms form in networks and alliances. While information sharing and trust have been theorized to be key features of the interorganizational ties that facilitate the acquisition of competitive capabilities, we argue that these mechanisms provide an incomplete explanation because they do not fully address the partially tacit nature of the knowledge that underlies competitive capabilities. Joint problem‐solving arrangements play a prominent role in capability acquisition by promoting the transfer of complex and difficult‐to‐codify knowledge. Drawing on a set of case studies and a survey of 234 job shop manufacturers we find support for the role of joint problem solving with suppliers in facilitating the acquisition of competitive capabilities. Copyright © 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.