Search results

This study aims to investigate the relationship between strategy intent (product-service innovation intention) and outcome (product-service innovation outcome), and the role that external sources of innovation play in influencing this relationship.

Using data obtained from the community innovation survey, we apply a logit regression to a sample of 1,419 Portuguese firms. By examining the moderating effect of open innovation breadth, we assess how the relationship between differentiation intent and outcome is contingent upon the involvement of external stakeholders.

Our findings reveal that the relationship between differentiation intent and outcome is contingent upon the moderating effect of open innovation breadth. Our analysis suggests that the negative influence of different sources of innovation can be addressed by adopting a paradox lens.

This research provides valuable insights for managers. By simultaneously pursuing a differentiation strategy and engaging in collaboration with external sources, firms may compromise their ability to effectively differentiate their offer. Managers should consider the potential tensions arising from internal and external stakeholder relationships to optimize their innovation strategies.

This study contributes to the existing literature by shedding light on the role of external innovation sources in influencing the relationship between differentiation intent and outcome and the importance that information systems may have in this relationship. By exploring the moderating effect of open innovation breadth, we provide a nuanced understanding of how firms can navigate organizational tensions and leverage innovation for competitive advantage.

The purpose of this paper is to provide an organizing lens for viewing the distinct contributions to knowledge production from those research communities addressing the impact of competitive strategy on company performance in general, and the influence of cost leadership and differentiation strategy on organizational performance in detail.

The research methodology was based on the PRISMA review, and thematic analysis based on an iterative process of open coding was analyzed and then the sample was analyzed by illustrating the research title, objectives, method, data analysis, sample size, variables and country.

The main factor that influenced the competitive strategy is strategic growth; strategic growth has a significant influence on competitive strategy. Furthermore, competitive strategy will boost firm network, performance measurement and organization behavior. In the same way, the internal goal factor will enhance organizational effectiveness. Also, a differentiation strategy will support management practice factors, strategic positions, product price, product characteristics and company performance.

This study contributes to the literature by identifying a framework of competitive strategy factors, company performance factors, cost leadership strategy factors, differentiation strategy factors and competitive strategy with global market factors. This study provides a complete picture and description of the resulting body knowledge in competitive strategy and organizational performance.

This study aims to examine the effect of entrepreneurial orientation (EO) on the export performance of apparel small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and the role of multiple differentiation strategy as a mediation effect between their relationships. It has also investigated the moderation impact of export market category between EO and performance relationship. The multiple differentiation strategy comprises the product (PDD), customer (CTD), service (SVD) and brand (BDD) differentiations.

A cross-sectional survey was carried out by providing a questionnaire to senior managers and owners of the apparel SMEs from the developed and developing markets exporters. The primary data of 550 was treated by the partial least squares-structural equation modelling) technique for final analysis.

The study revealed EO’s positive and significant effect on SMEs’ export performance. The study has found the mediation effect of product, customer and brand differentiation strategies between EO and export performance relationships from the mediation analysis. In contrast, service differentiation has found no mediation effect. However, the moderation effect (export market category) has revealed an insignificant effect between EO and performance association.

The findings of this study are based on one country data analysis. This study has been conducted in the SMEs of the apparel industry in Bangladesh, considering only owners and senior-level managers of the firms.

This research has drawn the attention of managers/owners to EO and multiple differentiation strategies enhancing export performance from the developing country context, such as Bangladesh. Multiple differentiation as a competitive strategy is the pioneer application of mediating effect between EO and export performance relationships. Moreover, this research has investigated the effect of the export market category as a moderator. Dearth research has applied the export market category to investigate the moderation effect between EO-performance models. Therefore, current research has theoretical and practical contributions to the international entrepreneurship and strategic management literature.

This study aims to examine the effect of entrepreneurial orientation (EO) on performance and mediation differentiation strategies and market development in small and medium enterprises (SMEs).

This research was conducted using a survey method with a population of furniture SMEs in Jepara, Central Java, Indonesia using a sample area by collecting 158 questionnaires. The data analysis method used the partial least square.

The result shows that EO has an impact on differentiation, market development and performance. Differentiation strategies and market development mediate the influence of EO and performance. The differentiation strategy further mediates the influence of EO on market development and market development mediates the effect of differentiation on performance.

Managers instill entrepreneurial practice in the organization by proactively creating the market and taking high-risk jobs to provide quality products and services. SMEs require capabilities that are difficult to imitate in creating designs and product quality that are different, providing pre and post-sales services and maintaining good relationships with customers and partners. SMEs emphasize flexibility and speed of operation by adjusting the production process to short waiting times and reliable delivery. The government must support general training and market information, network development, access to capital and knowledge transfer.

This paper explains the importance of differentiation and market development strategies in determining the relationship between EO and performance that has not been explored in the context of SMEs in developing countries.

Aims to investigates the relationship of strategic choices of pure cost‐, pure differentiation‐, or a combination‐strategy on a composite measure of financial performance for third‐party logistics (3PL) providers in Hong Kong. In addition, it seeks to identify the importance of operations priorities underlying the respective adopted strategy, as well as the importance given to future competitive challenges for each strategy.

Uses cluster analysis, ANOVA.

Logistics service providers classified to follow different strategies report different financial performance, with companies adhering to the combined strategy of cost and differentiation performing best, followed by pure differentiation companies, which in turn outperform pure cost‐, commodity driven‐companies.

Future research may be widened to include customer, and not solely competitor, perceptions. Further studies could elaborate on technology adoption, information sharing, strategy formulation, operations practices, and benchmarking. Other studies could focus on the differences between high and low performers in terms of business performance, and the processes that enable low performers to become high performers; as well as comparing logistics strategies and practices between different countries.

Third‐party logistics providers, solely competing on cost and offering basic services only, need to differentiate to gain improved financial performance. Logistics companies can improve along multiple operational dimensions to achieve competitive advantage in the marketplace. Research identifies operational areas to be emphasized to drive strategy according to strategic orientation, as well as generic factors that will drive future logistics management in Hong Kong.

Linking perceived financial performance to strategic choices of pure cost‐, pure differentiation‐, or a combination‐strategy for 3PL providers in Hong Kong.

This study aims to examine the effects of international competitive strategies, i.e. cost leadership and differentiation, on export (market share and strategic) performance. This study further explores the roles of exploitative and exploratory organizational learning in the relationships between international competitive strategies and export performances. To fill research gaps, this study intends to provide guidance on how varied exploitative/exploratory organizational learning and cost leadership/differentiation strategy combinations would affect export performance. The outcomes of this study provide a new match and mis-match conceptualization to extant international competitive strategy and organizational learning literature.

This study selected New Zealand (NZ) exporting as the research setting because exporting plays such a vital role in NZ’s economy and NZ exporting firms have long been highly competitive in international markets (e.g. meat and dairy exporters), with the primary data collected through surveys conducted in 2010 and 2013. This study adopted a three-year lagged performance approach.

Cost leadership strategy has a positive effect on market share performance. This effect is enhanced by exploitative learning but dampened by exploratory learning. Cost leadership also has a positive effect on strategic performance, which is not affected by exploitative and exploratory learning. Differentiation strategy bears no relation to market share and strategic performance, even allowing for exploitative and exploratory learning. Collectively, the contingent role of organizational learning in the international competitive strategies and export performance framework is far more comprehensive than was expected.

This study reveals that a match between cost leadership strategy and exploitative learning may result in a superior market share. The configuration of differentiation strategy and exploitative learning and the integration of cost leadership strategy and exploratory learning are suggested as mis-matches, as these combinations would not lead to any significant and positive market share and strategic performance. Unexpectedly, the co-alliance of differentiation strategy and explorative learning is not suggested as a match, as it does not result in a superior market share and strategic performance. This latter outcome suggests that the differentiation strategy-export performance link may be stimulated by other moderating factors (e.g. business managerial ties).

While choosing an appropriate international competitive strategy, managers may use cost leadership over differentiation strategy to achieve successful export performance in both the market share and strategic perspectives. Export managers focusing on cost leadership strategy may further implement exploitative learning instead of explorative learning, when market share is vital. Meanwhile, they may note that explorative learning may not have a moderating effect on enhancing strategic performance through cost leadership. These points signify that exploitation of existing knowledge may be more effective than exploration of new knowledge for market share expansion when cost leadership strategy is devoted to exporting activities. Differentiation strategy, however, does not influence market share and strategic performance in exporting, even with an alignment of exploitative/exploratory learning. Managers are urged to pay attention to the mis-match of differentiation strategy and organizational learning when market share and strategic performance are the priorities in export performance evaluation.

This study contributes to the organizational learning literature by providing a new match and mis-match conceptualization relating to international competitive strategy and export performance. The new framework provides directions on when firms should use organizational learning to enhance their competitive strategies (a match scenario) and when they should not use it (a mis-match scenario). This study broadens the existing research that has mainly focused on alignment combinations such as organizational learning-internationalization strategy and organizational learning-social network.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the relationship between the strategic positioning of firms and the sustainability of firm performance. The paper argues that pursuing a differentiation strategy leads to more sustainable financial performance compared to following a cost leadership strategy. However, a differentiation strategy may also be associated with greater risk.

To investigate the research questions, the authors utilize publicly available archival data consisting of 12,849 firm-year observations for the period 1989-2003. In the first stage of the analysis, factor analysis is used to determine firms’ strategic positioning. The resulting factor scores are subsequently used in regression analysis to investigate the sustainability of performance based on the strategic positioning of firms.

The results indicate that both cost leadership and differentiation strategies have a positive impact on contemporaneous performance. However, the differentiation strategy allows a firm to sustain its current performance in the future to a greater extent than a cost leadership strategy. The differentiation strategy, though, is also associated with greater systematic risk and more unstable performance.

Sustainability of performance refers to how much a firm's current profitability can be sustained in future periods. The main contribution of this study is the comparison of generic strategies based on the sustainability of firm performance. This aspect of the strategy-performance link has not been considered in prior work. Another contribution of the study is that it considers multiple dimensions of firm performance in order to evaluate the trade-offs involved with pursuing different strategies. In particular, the authors contribute to the literature by documenting that while differentiation leads to more sustainable earnings, it also leads to riskier and more unstable earnings.

Research has shown that firms successfully pursuing either a cost leadership or a differentiation strategy are better able to gain competitive advantages over other firms and accordingly achieve superior performance. Thus, if firms actually do realize superior performance based on their strategic orientation, capital markets should recognize this and place a positive value on such strategy‐focused firms. The aim of this paper is to empirically investigate how capital markets perceive and reward the strategies pursued by firms.

The paper uses Tobin's Q as a measure of market perception. By regressing Tobin's Q against relevant control variables and proxies for differentiation and cost leadership strategies, the paper evaluates the relationship between market perception and firm strategy. Furthermore, the paper also conducts abnormal returns analyses (both portfolio and regression analysis) to determine whether the market accurately prices the different strategies, given the complexity in both the nature and the implementation of such strategies.

The analysis shows that markets place a positive value on firms successfully pursuing either a cost leadership or a differentiation strategy; moreover markets place a higher value on firms pursuing a differentiation strategy compared to a cost leadership strategy. The abnormal returns analyses show that the market is not able to fully price the superior performance generated by pursuing differentiation strategy resulting in abnormal returns from portfolios formed based on higher levels of differentiation.

By providing detailed information to the market about the strategies they follow, firms will enable markets to value their strategies accurately, thus reducing their cost of capital. Fundamental investors looking to earn abnormal returns can use firm strategy in their portfolio selection. A variety of characteristics are conceived to influence a firm's strategic positioning and market perception of such characteristics. This evaluation is limited to a macro level assessment of the implications of the overall strategy pursued by a firm. Future research, in the form of detailed field studies, could be directed at evaluating the market perceptions and other implications of multi‐dimensional, lower level, operational strategies on a firm‐by‐firm basis.

To the best of the authors' knowledge, this is the first paper to show how financial markets value firm strategy. The paper also provides evidence to the complexity of a differentiation strategy, and how such complexity can lead to market mis‐pricing.

This paper aims to clarify the fit of competitive strategies and firm-specific advantages (FSAs) with country-specific advantages (CSAs) in explaining manufacturing location choices at product category level in the European automotive industry.

Seven hypotheses are formulated and tested using binomial logistic regression with data from 148 passenger car models (i.e. product category level) that are sold in Europe and manufactured in countries that offer CSAs of either cost advantages or differentiation advantages. The first four hypotheses test manufacturing location choices of product categories pursuing cost leadership strategy, differentiation strategy, focus strategy and hybrid strategy. The other three hypotheses test whether FSAs of R&D capability, marketing capability and operations capability will impact on the manufacturing location choice. The tests control for the type of passenger cars as well as the manufacturer’s region of origin.

While pursuing cost leadership strategy leads to manufacturing in countries that offer cost advantages, pursuing differentiation strategy as well as strong R&D capability and marketing capability result in manufacturing in countries that offer differentiation advantages. Focus strategy, hybrid strategy and operations capability do not have an impact on the manufacturing location choice at product category level.

Conducting empirical research at product category level is subject to limitations in the choices of FSAs due to lack of availability of data.

Managers should assess the competitive strategies and FSAs of their product categories and then decide about manufacturing locations based on their fit with host country CSAs. Policymakers should understand the CSAs of their countries and target to attract manufacturing FDI from product categories with matching competitive strategies and FSAs.

The research contributes to discussions in explaining manufacturing location choices. Its originality lies in being the first study to test the fit of competitive strategies and FSAs of product categories with CSAs.

Notes that substantive relationships between dimensions of competition and supportive manufacturing strengths have not been clearly established. Existing priorities‐based models of strategy ignore the dynamics of manufacturing capabilities. Furthermore, these models employ highly aggregated concepts which mix together operational priorities, outcomes, and capabilities, making hierarchical relationships in strategy difficult to define. Develops and proposes a new framework which modifies existing models of business strategy and manufacturing strategy in order to clarify and define core dimensions of competitive differentiation and manufacturing capabilities. Discusses relationships among these dimensions that are apparent in previous research and case studies. These relationships are summarized by a comprehensive model with propositions regarding supportive links between manufacturing capabilities, manufacturing outcomes, and product differentiation. Concludes by suggesting directions for tests of the model and for related future research.