Search results

The purpose of this paper is to argue for the need to reconcile managerial and economic approaches of the firm. Strategic management seems to be the perfect playground for this.

The paper shows many divergences between the economic and managerial approach of the firm but also highlights many topics where both approaches come in handy.

The authors underline the topics and theories in strategic management with the greatest benefits of mixing economics and management can be expected and they echo the papers in this special issue.

The paper comes as a warning for those using only managerial perspective without listening to the caveats and ideas put forward by the economic approach of the firm.

The paper offers an agenda of how economics and management could be reunited, and shows the relevance of doing so to both theory and practice.

Examines the implications for the economics of the firm of the development of total quality control and just‐in‐time management which are becoming increasingly important for intrafirm resource allocation. Shows the Alchian and Demsetz and transaction cost perspectives on the firm and work organization to be theories of a particular management style rather than a general economics of the firm. Develops an alternative and more general framework on the basis of the firm as a strategic framework, defined in terms of the knowledge base of an organization, rather than a single strategic orientation. This framework constrains and directs organizationally lower level proactive activity. Emphasis is placed on the importance of participative management, in core firms, and an economic rather than legal definition of the firm.

We argue that the stakeholder and CSR literature can benefit from more systematic thinking about ownership. We discuss general notions of ownership in the economics and legal literature and the entrepreneurial notion of ownership we have developed in prior work. On this basis, we argue that stakeholder theory needs to deal more systematically with ownership as an economic function that can be exercised with greater or lesser ability, may be complementary to other economic functions, and works better when assigned to homogeneous groups. Some stakeholder groups are likely to lack what we call “ownership competence,” even if they have made relationship-specific investments, in part because of a diversity of interests. We also discuss CSR from the perspective of ownership and support Friedman’s original position, but with a twist. The point of Friedman’s paper is not that firms “should” maximize profits, but that managerial pursuit of “socially responsible” activities in a discretionary way imposes costs on owners. We suggest this problem is exacerbated with entrepreneurial managers who can devise new ways to prop up their self-interested actions with new creative CSR initiatives.

This paper aims to investigate the curvilinear effects of firms’ market learning on radical innovation and the moderation effects of the focal firms’ horizontal ties and vertical ties.

This study uses regression analysis with the survey data from 303 Chinese firms.

Explorative/exploitative market learning has an inverted U-shaped/U-shaped effect on radical innovation. The effects of explorative market learning on radical innovation increase when firms have strong horizontal ties, but decrease when firms have strong vertical ties. The opposite is true for the effects of exploitative market learning.

This study uses unilateral data to examine the moderation effects of the focal firms’ vertical and horizontal ties on the market learning-radical innovation links. Future research that conducted in the dyadic-paradigm would be preferable to test the generalizability of this research and address the potential changes.

The value of the current study centers on its integrated framework that incorporates organizational learning theory and the social network perspective to account for radical innovation. The integrative view helps us to interpret the curvilinear effects of market learning on radical innovation and outlines the moderation mechanisms of horizontal ties and vertical ties.

This chapter estimates a dynamic reduced-form model of intra-firm promotions using an employer–employee panel of over 300 of the largest corporations in the United States in the period from 1981 to 1988. The estimation conditions on unobserved individual heterogeneity and allows for both an endogenous initial condition and sample attrition linked to individual heterogeneity in demonstrating the relative importance of variables that influence promotion. The role of the executive’s functional area in promotion is considered along with the existence and source of promotion fast tracks. We find that while the principal determinant of promotions is unobserved individual heterogeneity, functional area has a high explanatory power, resulting in promotion probabilities that differ by functional area for executives at the same reporting level and firm. No evidence is found that an executive’s recent speed of advancement in pay grade has a positive causal impact on in-sample promotions after conditioning on the executive’s career speed of advancement, except for the lowest level executives the data. Fast tracks appear to largely result from heterogeneity in persistent individual characteristics, not from an inherent benefit in recent advancement itself.

Personnel economics tends be based on single-firm case studies. Here, we examine several internal labor market dimensions of nearly 5,000 firms, over a period of 20 years, using detailed matched employer–employee data from Portugal. In the spirit of Baker, Gibbs, and Holmstrom (1994a, 1994b), we consider worker turnover, the role of job levels and human capital as wage determinants, wage dispersion within job levels, the importance of tenure in promotions and exits, and the scope for careers. We find a large degree of diversity in most of these personnel dimensions across firms. Moreover, some dimensions are shown to be robust predictors of firm performance, even after controlling for time-invariant firm heterogeneity and other variables. These dimensions include low worker churning, the importance of careers, low wage dispersion at low and intermediate job levels, and a tight relationship between human capital variables and wages.

The attention-based view (ABV) of the firm highlights the role of decision makers’ attention in firm behavior. The ABV vastly improves our understanding of decision makers’ focus of attention; how that focus is situated in an organization’s procedural and communication channels; and how the distribution of the focus of attention among decision makers participating in those procedural and communication channels affects their understanding of a situation, their motivation to act, and, ultimately, their behavior. Significant progress has been made in recent years in refining and extending the ABV. However, the role of individual differences in the capacity to read other people’s desires, intentions, knowledge, and beliefs – that is, the theory of mind (ToM) – has remained on the sidelines. The ToM is a natural complement to the ABV. In this study, we explore how the ToM allows for an understanding of the advantage that organizations have over markets within the ABV.

Entrepreneurs in a competitive economy face three fundamental problems. They need to search for and discover a business opportunity (Kirzner, 1973), evaluate it (Knight, 1921), and then seize the opportunity to reap entrepreneurial profits (Schumpeter, 1911) (Langlois, 2007). The problem that we address is how the ability to exploit business opportunities is influenced by entrepreneurial search and the economic organization of entrepreneurship (Arrow, 1962; Lippman & Rumelt, 2003b; Aghion et al., 2005; Foss, Foss, & Klein, 2007). In many cases, the discovery for a new business opportunity needs to be motivated by expected gains, since the search and evaluation of business opportunities is a costly, resource-consuming process (Denrell, Fang, & Winter, 2003; Nickerson & Zenger, 2004; Foss & Klein, 2005; Teece, 2007; Foss & Foss, 2008).¹ We show the critical role of expectations for understanding of the economic organization of entrepreneurship, and argue that transaction cost economics, with its insistence on bounded rationality, but farsighted contracting offers useful insights and presents rich opportunities for further theoretical and empirical research (cf. also Furubotn, 2002).

The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate how to incorporate knowledge concepts into analytical models of strategy formulation and the strategic theory of the firm.

The paper examines four different perspectives of the elusive concept of “knowledge”, namely, “knowledge as assets”, “knowledge through innovation”, “knowledge embedded in routines” and “knowledge through learning”. The study attempts to specify and interrelate the concepts of a knowledge‐based strategic theory of the firm.

The “knowledge web” is seen as a partial framework, capturing from a strategic perspective how both specific and organisational knowledge build the competences necessary for the value‐creating activities of the firm.

The paper provides frameworks for understanding how knowledge can reinforce the strategic core competences of the firm.

The paper addresses knowledge as a key element in the development of an enhanced strategic theory of the firm, incorporating the knowledge‐based viewpoint.