Strategic entrepreneurship: Creating competitive advantage through streams of innovation

In today's fast-paced competitive environment, firms face the need to be increasingly nimble and adaptive. While often able to establish a certain level of performance based upon existing technologies, firms are equally as often to be left flat-footed in the face of emerging, novel technologies. We discuss strategic entrepreneurship as the means through which firms simultaneously exploit their current competitive advantages while exploring for future opportunities. Achieving a balance between exploration and exploitation consists of more than merely allocating resources evenly between the two processes. As discussed, exploration and exploitation are operationally, structurally, and culturally distinct processes.     

Management priorities and management ethics

The management process affects the level of ethical performance in organizational life. As one part of this process, managers establish priorities which give direction to an organization. In business firms, management typically stresses the attainment of profits and other related economic and technical factors. Since little explicit recognition is given to ethics, the resulting climate makes it easy to ignore ethical factors. Changing this situation by making ethics a significant part of the corporate culture is difficult and requires a combination of management communication and management example. However, managers who choose to emphasize ethics and who skillfully articulate their importance can improve the integration of ethics into the day-to-day operating decisions of the firm. Justin G. Longenecker is Chavanne Professor of Christian Ethics in Business at Hankamer School of Business, Baylor University, Waco, Texas 76798, U.S.A. His most important publications are: Management, 6th ed. (Charles E. Merrill Publ. C., Columbus 1984), co-authored with Charles D. Pringle; Small Business Management, 6th ed. (South-Western Publ. Co., Cincinnati 1983), co-authored with H. N. Broom and Carlos W. Moore; and numerous journal articles, including: The Ethics of MBO, Academy of Management Review (April, 1982), pp. 305–312, co-authored with Charles D. Pringle.     

Managing country-of-origin choices: competitive advantages and opportunities

This study investigates the effects of country-of-design/country-of-assembly combinations on consumers' evaluative beliefs about and attitudes toward buying automobiles. The effects are compared across groups of consumers differing with respect to levels of consumer ethnocentrism. Two design countries and two assembly countries (Japan or US) were considered, yielding four possible design-country/assembly-country combinations. The results suggest that manufacturing products in the country in which they are sold not only provides closer access to the market, but also allows multinational manufacturers to ‘blur the boundaries’ regarding a potentially sensitive country-of-origin issue among highly ethnocentric consumers. At the same time, they can leverage their country-brand images to appeal to those customers who recognize a particular country's ability to design high quality cars, regardless of their country of assembly.     

Choosing and sharing

Implementing a project, like a nationwide nuclear waste disposal, which benefits all involved agents but brings major costs only to the host is often problematic. In practice, revelation issues and redistributional concerns are significant obstacles to achieving stable agreements. We address these issues by proposing the first mechanism to select the efficient site (the host with the lowest cost) while simultaneously allowing for the implementation of any individually rational division of the whole hosting cost. The subgame perfect Nash equilibria of our simple mechanism are efficient, budget-balanced and individually rational. Moreover, the truthful equilibrium is immune to coalitional deviations.     

Advertising agency operating efficiency

This study uses data envelopment analysis to evaluate the operating efficiency of a sample of 41 US advertising agencies, based on their profits and expenditures in six key areas (i.e., payroll to employees, other payroll-related expenses, administrative expenses, space and facilities expenses, corporate expenses, and professional fees). The analyses reveal that, on average, 5% of an agency's budget is wasted, incurring the greatest amount of waste in the administrative and corporate expenses. The tobit model also indicates that professional fees contributed the most agency inefficiency overall.