Search results

Given that an industrial cluster contains a high concentration of numerous stakeholders, a firm in an industrial cluster often ends up forming relationships with many of the stakeholders. The research questions are as follows: Does stakeholder-based management always lead to greater value creation? What are the moderators in this association? This paper proposes that although relationships with stakeholders can act as a “catalyst” for value-creation, they can also act as a “retardant.” A combination of (1) the strategic nature of the relationships and (2) the policy environment determines whether the relationships with stakeholders act as catalysts or retardants.

Using relationship-focused theory, a conceptual framework that adopts a relational view of stakeholder theory is developed. Given the high concentration of stakeholders in industrial clusters, the conceptual framework uses stakeholders in industrial clusters as a setting. A firm can form relationships with a variety of stakeholders in an industrial cluster. The strategic nature of a relationship with a stakeholder is assessed in terms of variations in strategic intent and intellectual spillover.

The key argument is the following: whether a relationship with a stakeholder becomes a catalyst or a retardant for value creation is contingent on the fit between the strategic nature of the relationship and the policy environment. For instance, in a probusiness policy environment, relying on relationships with stakeholders that maximize intellectual spillover can act as a catalyst for value creation. In contrast, in an antibusiness environment, not having to rely on intellectual spillover is a safer option.

Whereas the literature implicitly assumes that stakeholder theory has relational essence, the conceptual framework developed in this paper adopts a relational view of stakeholder theory in a very explicit way. This paper applies relationship-focused theory by making explicit the different forms of stakeholder relationships. Such an explicitly relational approach in theorizing can help in more in-depth research on the link between stakeholder relationships and value creation. The conceptual framework will allow future research to analyze value creation in an industrial cluster, especially in terms of how stakeholder relationships can act as either catalysts or retardants.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the firm’s role in the value creation process. In particular, after categorizing the activities that firms carry out to facilitate the creation of value, the “value space,” an actionable framework within which different dimensions of value creation are integrated, is developed and discussed.

The framework is built up on process theory, an in-depth review of the literature and a multiple case study carried out on 65 European firms in the furniture industry.

The value space is both a practical and theoretically based framework which contributes to the development of a more holistic and “actionable” view on the role of firm in the value creation process; also it provides managers with a tool to support the analysis, management and innovation of the value creation process.

The systematic categorization of firms’ activities and their subsequent integration into a value creation framework are a missing piece in terms of understanding the value creation process carried out by firms. Also, by facilitating the analysis and innovation of the value creation process, the framework can be used to support both exploitative and explorative business process management.

The purpose of this paper is to determine if there is a link between corporate shareholder value creation and economic growth. The first objective of this paper is to determine which specific shareholder value measurement best explains shareholder value creation for a particular industry. The next objective of the study is to establish, for each of nine different categories of firms examined, a set of value drivers that are unique and significant in expressing shareholder value for that particular category of firms. Lastly, the relationship between shareholder value creation and economic growth is tested.

To quantify and measure value creation, the paper investigates the various value creation measurements that are being applied. The next step is to ascertain whether various industries have different value creation measures that best explain value creation for the respective industries. Then, the value drivers of these specific value creation measures can be determined and their relationship with economic growth tested.

The results of this study indicate that each industry does have a specific shareholder value creation measurement that best explains shareholder value creation for that industry; for example, for five of the nine categories (industries) that were analyzed, market value added was found to be the best shareholder value creation measurement, but for capital-intensive firms and manufacturing firms, the Qratio is the best measure, while for the food and beverage industry, the market to book ratio was found to be a better measure of shareholder value creation than other measures tested. It was further found that an increase in corporate shareholder value creation is to the detriment of economic growth.

The contribution of the present study is its determination of a unique shareholder value creation measurement for particular industries. In addition, a specific set of variables per industry that create shareholder value is identified. Lastly, the important link between shareholder value creation and economic growth is exposed.

Most, if not all, management control tools were formulated for firms employing an industrial value creation logic (i.e., Ford, McDonald’s, and Wal‐Mart). We argue that given the growth, both in number and importance, of firms employing a knowledge value creation logic (i.e., Accenture, Goldman Sachs, and Clifford Chance) and firms employing a network logic (i.e., Verizon, eBay, and Expedia) that these control tools should be revisited in light of this potentially critical contingency. This paper outlines the key characteristics of knowledge intensive firms and network service firms and then examines how these contingencies impact Simons’ (1995) Levers of Control and Kaplan and Norton’s (1996) Balanced Scorecard. We find that whilst each lever/perspective is still relevant for each value creation logic, the relative importance and thus intensity of use should vary between logics.

The purpose of this paper is to identify the shareholder value creation measure best suited to express shareholder value creation for a particular industry.

The analysis was performed on 192 companies listed on the Johannesburg Stock Exchange, classified into nine different samples or industries. Five shareholder value creation measures were examined, namely market value added (MVA), a market-adjusted stock return, the market-to-book ratio, Tobin’s Q ratio, and the return on capital employed divided by the cost of equity.

An analysis of the nine categories of firms led to the identification of different measures that are suited to express value creation. Stock returns did not provide an appropriate value measure. Instead, depending on the specific industry, Tobin’s Q ratio, MVA, and the market-to-book ratio should be used to measure and express value creation.

For management, the value drivers identified for each industry present a clear indication of industry-specific variables upon which they can focus in operating activities to most efficiently increase shareholder value.

Unlike previous studies that use only one or two different shareholder value creation measures as dependent variables, this study uses five different value creation measures. Another contribution of this study is the compilation of a unique set of value drivers that explain shareholder value creation separately for each of the nine different categories of firms.

The objective of this paper is to present an empirically founded outline of value creation and the orchestration of this process.

A qualitative study of the video game industry was undertaken for which data were collected through use of both primary and secondary sources. The gathered data enabled a categorization of the industry, from both a user and a firm perspective, into different archetypical modes of value creation.

The study adds to the understanding of value creation by illustrating that a firm can orchestrate the process through which value is created by being: an inspirator; a facilitator, and an attendant. In illustrating the continuity of this process, the paper introduces the orchestrating firm and the value emergence process.

In describing the modes through which interaction occurs within the video game industry, the paper provides an outline which can be used for further investigations of value creation. This industry holds, however, certain features making the arguments presented in need of further research.

Based on the empirical findings, an outline is provided for the allocation and deployment of internal resources in order to enable continuous value creation.

The paper empirically exemplifies how value creation is orchestrated by developing firms within the video game industry and illustrates value creation as a continuous process; a value emergence process.

To explore building blocks of corporate value creation that can be effectively assembled by practicing managers to deconstruct corporate value creation into distinctive models (customer value creation and shareholder value creation) and stages (resource assembly and capability leverage) in the Indian Information Technology enabled Service (ITeS) industry for exploring efficiency differentials between large Indian ITeS companies.

Data envelopment analysis (DEA) technique has been used to uncover efficiency differentials in large Indian ITeS companies that represent 90% of all the ITeS companies listed in the Indian stock market and 13.9% of all companies listed in the Indian stock market, across industries.

This paper documents a nuanced understanding of interrelationships among activities that influence corporate value creation and comprehensively highlight those dominant activities that contribute to corporate value creation in an ITeS industry setting. The study demonstrates as to how companies can become more efficient in such crucial value creating components that result in superior corporate value. The explicating methodology proposed in this study can be handy for managers and can be extrapolated to other industry and national settings as well.

Deconstructing corporate value creation into granular models, customer value creation and shareholder value creation and further into two stages, being assembling resources to create capabilities and leveraging such capabilities to deliver value, this study provides hands-on value for managers in ITeS companies to create value.

Fusing the value creation and appropriation (VCA) framework, the resource-based view (RBV) and its extensions, this paper builds a robust theoretical model specification that is empirically tested.

The purpose of this paper is to develop a conceptual framework for a value creation business (VCB) model. It seeks to unlock two essential research questions: “what constitutes value”, and “how do firms create value for customers?” in the context of the firm‐customer dyad.

The paper is conceptual and is premised on a review of the extant literature on value and value creation. It addresses the limitations pertaining to the dominance of the value‐in‐use perspective. It also addresses the call for a paradigm shift toward customer‐centric marketing and operant resource‐based dominant logic. Building on the review, the paper identifies essential components of value in value creation processes.

The VCB model is developed by integrating three perspectives of value including creating value for customers, value‐in‐offering, and value‐in‐use, capturing a contingency approach to theory building. The model enlightens how value creation architecture (the strategic space of value creation processes) and value creation engineering (the capability space of value creation processes) engage in creating value outcomes for both the firm and the customer.

The VCB model constitutes guidelines useful for practitioners in crafting value‐based business processes and provides a base for academic researchers to further research on value and value creation.

The paper advances the literature on value by conceptualising value as consisting of the value offering and customer equity (the firm viewpoint), and customer value and brand equity (the customer viewpoint). The paper also highlights that value creation processes are initiated with the crafting of value creation architecture, followed by developing value creation engineering, and completed with value outcomes.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the dimensions of supply management that may contribute to its ability to create value. Based on previous literature, this study proposes that key supplier management (KSM), the strategic level of supply management and supplier relationship management (SRM) capabilities can be supply management factors that significantly influence its ability to create value.

The issue is examined using survey data collected in Finland, and the concepts are tested using regression analysis.

The results show that KSM, the strategic level of supply management and SRM capabilities are significant dimensions of value creation in supply management. The findings support the contemporary understanding of value in which firms endeavour to create value for the company, its customers and its suppliers.

Previously, value creation has received minor attention in supply chain management research. Although previous research clearly shows that strategic supply management plays a significant role in firms’ competitiveness and performance, its role and potential in value creation have been less studied. Thus, this study contributes by empirically examining the factors affecting the ability of a firm’s supply management to create value.

To successfully create customer value, firms must use coherent market strategies and perform value-creating activities that enable them to develop solutions to customers’ needs. However, as firms exhibit differences in how they approach value creation, their market strategies will also differ. These differences among market strategies can be described through different combinations of proactivity and responsiveness, representing each firm’s value-creation logic. This study aims to increase understanding of how firms can improve the effectiveness of their market strategies by considering their associated value-creation logics.

The authors conceptualize market strategies as coherent sets of value-creating activities. While the types of activities within a market strategy are driven by a firm’s strategic orientations, how these activities are performed is influenced by its value-creation logic. With this as the foundation, the authors develop a conceptual typology of archetypal market strategies based on the different value-creation logics that influence them.

The authors propose four distinct market strategies – habitual, visionary, adaptive and ambidextrous – representing unique ways in which value-creation logics influence the formation of market strategies. Furthermore, the authors highlight the need for activities to reflect consistent value-creation logics to create coherent market strategies and the authors provide an exploration of the activities that enable firms to implement different types of market strategies.

The typology expands the concept of market strategy, introducing the idea of a value-creation logic of proactivity and responsiveness, and thus demonstrating the need for more in-depth consideration of the value-creating activities that constitute market strategies to better understand how firms can create superior customer value.