Search results

Part I of this chapter applies the principles of the philosophy of science and the derived scientific method to analyze the foundational concepts and core proposition of the Resource-Base View (RBV) as popularized by Barney (1986, 1991, 1997). This analysis identifies seven fundamental conceptual deficiencies and logic problems in Barney's conceptualization of “strategically valuable resources” and in Barney's VRIO framework for identifying strategically valuable resources that can be sources of sustained competitive advantage. Three problems – the Value Conundrum, the Tautology Problem in the Identification of Resources, and the Absence of a Chain of Causality – relate to the RBV's and VRIO's failure to provide an adequate conceptual basis for identifying strategically valuable resources. The Uniqueness Dilemma, the Cognitive Impossibility Dilemma, and an Asymmetry in Assumptions about Resource Factor Markets result in an inability of the VRIO framework to support identification of resources that can be sources of sustained competitive advantage. More fundamentally, the core proposition of the RBV – that resources that are strategically valuable, rare, inimitable, and organizationally embedded are sources of sustainable competitive advantage – is argued to result directly in the Epistemological Impossibility Problem that precludes use of the scientific method in RBV research. This chapter argues that until these conceptual deficiencies and logic problems are recognized and remedied, the RBV – in spite of its current popularity – is and will remain theoretically sterile and incapable of contributing in any systematic way to the development of strategy theory.

Part II of this chapter then suggests how foundational concepts developed within the competence perspective on strategy provide essential remedies for the identified deficiencies and problems in the RBV – and thereby provide a more conceptually adequate basis for representing the nature of firms in the scientific study of their interactions and competitive outcomes.

This research draws on the resource-based view of the firm from strategic management and applies it to a study of competitive advantage in the project management context. The relationship between the characteristics of project management resources, focusing on organizational support for the project management process, and outcomes of the project management process are examined.

This study uses data gathered from 437 North American project management professionals with an existing survey tool that was used in a prior smaller sample study. The study uses Barney’s VRIO framework that assesses resources as valuable (V), rare (R), inimitable (I) and organizationally supported to leverage their value (O). The conceptual model hypothesizes relationships between the project management asset characteristics (valuable, rare, and inimitable), organizational support for the project management process, and project management performance outcomes (both project and firm level). Hypotheses are tested using factors extracted from a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). The factors extracted include two factors representing valuable project management asset characteristics, one factor representing rare project management asset characteristics, one factor representing inimitable project management asset characteristics, two factors representing organizational support for the project management process, one factor representing project-level performance and one factor representing firm-level performance.

Project management assets that are considered valuable and organizational support for the project management process are found to contribute positively to project management process outcomes. No advantage was perceived from rare and inimitable project management assets. Project-level performance was found to significantly mediate the relationship between organizational support and firm-level performance.

This study draws managerial attention to organizational support for the project management process as a source of competitive advantage through its positive affect on both project-as well as firm-level performance.

The study uses a survey tool from previous research with a new, larger dataset to contribute to the understanding of the importance of organizational support for the project management process in a quest for both project success as well as a firm's competitive advantage.

The purpose of this paper is to study how project-level performance mediates the effect of project management assets on firm-level performance by examining the direct and mediated relationships between the project management process characteristics: valuable, rare, inimitable and organizationally supported on project-level and firm-level performance outcomes.

This paper analyzes data from an online survey completed by 198 North American Project Management Institute® members. Linear regression and Sobel Tests are used to examine the relationships between nine factors extracted from an exploratory factor analysis that comprise project management asset characteristics, one factor that comprises project-level performance outcomes, and one factor that comprises firm-level performance outcomes.

Not only does project-level performance positively and significantly affect firm-level performance, but project-level performance also significantly mediates the effect of project management asset characteristics (for all nine factors) on firm performance.

Limitations of this study include sample size and self-report bias, calling for a larger sample in ongoing research.

This study contributes to the stream of literature on project management assets as sources of competitive advantage and makes the case for sustained organizational investments in the project management process.

This paper contributes to the limited, but increasing interest in applying the resource-based view of the firm to project management capabilities as a source of competitive advantage.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate if shared brands provide sustainable competitive advantage according to an adapted valuable, rare, imitability/replaceability and organization (VRIO) model to the Brazilian wine sector in the opinion of the government agencies, associations and managers of the wineries.

This study was based on a qualitative and exploratory research, based on in-depth interviews. Fine wines that have geographical indications and are located in the Brazilian state of Rio Grande do Sul were analyzed and content analysis was used to explore data.

It was concluded that shared brands in the Brazilian wine sector can be considered a source of sustainable competitive advantage according to the resource-based view.

Qualitative research has the aspect of the subjectivity of the researcher when analyzing the data.

The government agencies, associations and wineries can improve the production process and seek certified products for commercialization in the domestic and foreign markets. These contributions may also, in practice, be used by other sectors and countries.

This work contributes to the understanding of the shared brand’s concept, including geographical indications, collective brands and the sector brands. The proposition that shared brands provide sustainable competitive advantage, according to an adapted VRIO model was confirmed. Barney’s VRIO framework (Barney, 1991, 1995) hitherto thought for individual companies, has the letter “O” of Organization replaced by the letter “A” of Association, becoming VRIA. The authors found that the four conditions that form the here proposed acronym VRIA are valuable, rare, imperfectly imitable/replaceable and association.

The purpose of this paper is to blend a resource-based view of the firm with the 5R Model of Organizational Identity Processes to offer a new Strategic Identity Management Framework to help organizations uncover, analyze and optimize their identity as a resource for creating sustainable competitive advantage.

This conceptual paper relied upon an examination of literature about sustainable competitive advantage, the resource-based view of the firm and the 5R Model of Organizational Identity Processes.

Synergies were found between the VRIO model and the 5R Model of Organizational Identity Processes. A new Strategic Identity Management Framework was created and a case study was used to illustrate its application.

Research is needed to validate, confirm and extend the use and application of the new framework within organizations.

The framework is anticipated to be particularly useful for middle managers because they are tasked with translating high-level strategies into action and leading lower level employees toward enacting the new or adapted identity claims.

Although ample organizational identity research exists, a framework for assessing identity claims for the purpose of achieving competitive advantage was lacking.

The purpose of this paper is to propose a quantitative model to help managers diagnose what dynamic capabilities a firm needs to address the demands of a rapidly changing environment.

A two-firm model based on the VRIO framework is built using quantitative techniques to assist top management in formulating and implementing strategies regarding when and how to develop a firm’s dynamic capabilities for achieving a competitive advantage. This model is developed by considering both internal and external competences, with the former measured by the features of the organizational capabilities of the focal firm and latter evaluated by comparing the relative utilities of the dynamic capabilities of the two competing firms.

Three resource allocation strategies are introduced to guide a firm to leverage dynamic capability that generates strong organizational performance. The first two strategies are, respectively, synergy oriented, focussing on acquiring various knowledge or experiences of a capability, and uniqueness oriented, emphasizing the depth of knowledge and technology of the capabilities. The third one is a hybrid of the first two strategies.

The proposed model is useful to help top management determine how and when to renew, bundle, and leverage resources and capabilities in a dynamic environment. It enables decision makers to detect changes in the competitive environment and take corrective action in a timely and appropriate manner.

A new grouping of the eight schools of thought on business management is introduced. Their advancement is initially assessed with the help of a frame of reference, which is based on the principles inherent in Beer’s viable system model. It is proposed that a high degree of systemic advancement is one of the necessary attributes of any business-management concept that will be proven to be highly applicable to managing a firm’s dynamic business in practice. The first assessment reveals that the systemic advancement of the representative concepts varies a lot as follows. Porter’s chained frameworks (representing 1st Porterian school), Barney’s VRIO framework (2nd resource-based school), Sanchez and Heene’s concepts (3rd competence-based school), von Krogh et al.’s concept (4th knowledge-based school), and Hedlund’s heterarchy (5th organization-based school) are fairly systemic, respectively. Martin’s cascade (6th process-based school) is less systemic. Instead, Hamel’s revolutionary concept (7th dynamism-based school) and Brown and Eisenhardt’s competing on edge strategy (8th evolutionary school) are highly systemic. Thus, some promising ways to advance, in particular, the competence-based school of thought on business management are suggested.

The aim of this paper is to examine the links between project management process characteristics and project-level and firm-level performance outcomes to test the hypotheses that project management assets being valuable, rare, inimitable and having organizational support leads to competitive advantage.

This paper analyzes data from responses to an online survey by 198 North American Project Management Institute® members. Regression analysis is used to examine the relationship between six factors extracted from an exploratory factor analysis that comprise the three project management asset characteristics – valuable, rare and inimitable, three factors that comprise organizational support for the project management process, and two factors that comprise project management performance outcomes – project-level and firm-level performance.

Organizational support for the project management process, specifically project management integration, was found to significantly contribute to both project-level and firm-level performance. Of the asset factors examined, valuable project management knowledge was found to contribute to project-level and firm-level performance, though information technology (IT) tools did not. Inimitable proprietary tangible assets were found to contribute to both project-level and firm-level performance, and inimitable embedded intangible assets were also found to contribute to firm-level performance. Rare knowledge sharing tools and techniques were found to negatively contribute to project-level performance.

Limitations of this study include sample size, response rate and self-report bias, calling for a larger sample in ongoing research.

This study draws managerial attention to project management assets as sources of competitive advantage, highlighting the need to have organizational support for the project management process through organizational integration, and emphasizing the importance of valuable project management knowledge-based assets and inimitable project management assets that are proprietary and tangible as well as those that are embedded and intangible.

Few papers have applied the resource-based view of the firm to examine project management capabilities as a source of competitive advantage. This paper contributes to the literature on the resource-based view of the firm and to an improved understanding of project management as a source of competitive advantage.

The purpose of this paper is to present a conceptual framework to classify project management resources as sources of competitive advantage.

The paper draws on the resource‐based view of the firm and project management literature to explore the level of competitive advantage from 17 project management resources based on their degree of complexity and level of leverage in the project management process. This exploratory study drew on a small sample of practitioners in the classification.

The paper proposes a conceptual model to show the relationship between four categories of resources and their contribution to competitive advantage by being valuable, rare, inimitable, and organizationally supported.

This paper is exploratory in nature and uses a small sample of practitioners.

The authors believe that the classification of project management resources based on complexity and leverage provides a useful framework for managers considering the impact of investment in these resources for competitive advantage.

This paper provides a classification of project management resources based on the complexity of the resource and its leverage in the project management process. It is posited that resources that are complex and can be highly leveraged to develop further resources warrant attention as sources of competitive advantage.

The purpose of this paper is to draw on the resource-based view of the firm from strategic management and apply it to a study of competitive advantage in the project management context. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) is used to examine the factors that constitute strategic characteristics of project management resources and outcomes of the project management process.

This study gathered data from 437 North American project management professionals using an existing survey tool from prior research involving a smaller sample.

The final model derived from CFA demonstrated construct validity, meaning acceptable convergent and discriminant validity. It showed only minor differences from a prior exploratory factor analysis (EFA). The final model consisted of two factors representing valuable project management characteristics, one factor representing rare project management characteristics, one factor representing inimitable project management characteristics, three factors representing organizational support for project management assets, one factor representing project-level performance and one factor representing firm-level performance.

Limitations of the study include self-report bias and the use of a panel for data collection.

This study draws managerial attention to project management characteristics that constitute a source of competitive advantage.

The study validates a survey tool from previous research, reflects few deviations from factor structure of the prior EFA, and sets the stage for future research to elaborate on the conceptual model. It extends understanding of the characteristics of project management assets that lead to a firm’s competitive advantage.