Search results

The purpose of this paper is to present and test a new model for competitive capabilities. Traditionally, a cumulative model has been viewed as having one sequence of building competitive capabilities in a firm in support of market needs, including quality, delivery, cost efficiency and flexibility. Although appealing as a conceptual model, empirical testing has not been able to fully support the cumulative model. This paper acknowledges the need for a hybrid approach to managing capability progression. It brings together the literature on trade‐offs, cumulative capabilities, and order winners and qualifiers.

A new hybrid approach for modelling competitive capabilities is tested empirically using data from the high performance manufacturing (HPM) study, round 3, including three industries and seven countries – a total of 211 plants.

The hybrid model shows significantly better fit with the data from the sample than the cumulative models suggested by previous literature. Empirical support is found for the traditional perception that a high level of quality is a prerequisite for a high level of delivery performance. However, cost efficiency and flexibility do not exhibit a cumulative pattern. Instead, the results show that they are developed in parallel. The findings suggest that a balance between cost efficiency and flexibility is built upon high levels of quality and delivery performance.

Since we limit the empirical investigation to three industries and seven countries, it would be interesting to extend the testing of this model to more industries and countries. This research shows that combining perspectives and insights from different research streams – in this case, trade‐off theory and the concepts of cumulative capabilities, and order winners and qualifiers – can be fruitful.

The results of this paper provides managers with guidelines concerning the configuration of competitive capabilities. First, a qualifying level of quality needs to be attained, followed by a qualifying level of delivery. Then, a balance between potential order winners, i.e. cost efficiency and flexibility, needs to be attained.

This paper presents a new approach to modelling competitive capabilities that synthesises previous research streams and perspectives from cumulative capabilities, contesting capabilities (trade‐offs), and order winners and qualifiers.

Examines the manufacturing strategy framework developed by Hill and its development, comparing it to work in manufacturing strategy and other related fields. Discusses Hill’s distinctive concepts of order‐winning criteria and order‐qualifying criteria. Also raises issues relating to manufacturing strategy more generally. Concludes that strategy is now about the very ability to change, not just about choosing the “right” change to make.

The purpose of this paper is to establish an integrated model of Analytic Network Process (ANP) and Decision-Making Trial and Evaluation Laboratory (DEMATEL), to assist enterprises to process supplier quality performance rating and comparison and find the core improvement direction to create the value of all supply chain members.

This study used the integrated model to process supplier quality performance rating and comparison, which not only improved the order-winners and qualifiers and continued to increase supplier quality performance, but resolved the complex and difficult cause-effect relation issue to find out core improvement items. The cases of Taiwanese industrial computer manufacturers were used to describe the application and benefits of this methodology.

The results recommended that the improvement item of supplier A shall focus on design and quality conformance. The recommended improvement item and order for supplier B is design, delivery reliability and delivery speed. This study established ANP and DEMATEL evaluation models, and expanded the application field in the supplier performance evaluation.

The ANP model is used to calculate the importance of the evaluation criteria, and the DEMATEL method is introduced to consider the impact of the casual relationship of evaluation items and to adjust the importance of the evaluation item, and to solve the complex and difficult practical causation issue.

A firm’s ability to win orders on the market depends on its competitiveness. A competitive firm wins orders on the market, which has a positive impact on its sales performance. Order‐winning criteria are those criteria that make a difference to the customer when he decides between qualified offered products. The selling and the buying actors may have the same or different ideas about what constitute these order winners, and they may also differ in their evaluation of the competitive strengths of a firm. Analyses the selling and buying actors’ perceptions of order winners and competitive strengths as the degree of fit between these perceptions. A good fit means that the two actors agree on order‐winning criteria and the firm’s competitive strength on these criteria. It is expected that a good fit relates to a positive sales growth of the selling firm’s product. Analyses different situations of fit and misfit for the ten product families of four small manufacturing Swedish firms, and shows how these situations relate to the sales patterns of the product families. The results reveal that a good fit is related to a stable economic development of sales, while two different situations of misfit may lead to a decline in or an expansion of sales.

An ever-increasing number of companies outsource logistics activities to third-party logistics (3PL) providers to beat the competition. From the buyer's (shippers') perspective, selecting the right 3PL provider is crucial, and from the 3PL provider's perspective, it is imperative to be attractive and to retain clients. To this aim, a potential lever can be physical assets, such as warehouses, which the literature has traditionally neglected. The objective is to benchmark the importance of warehouses for 3PL providers to attract/retain clients and for shippers to select the right 3PL provider.

The authors performed an empirical investigation through interviews on dyads (3PL providers/shippers) and utilized the Best-Worst Method (BWM) to rank the criteria used in the 3PL buying process and allow the warehouse's role to emerge.

Results show that the 3PL buying process consists of four phases and three evaluation steps. The selection criteria are classified into three groups: order qualifiers, order winners and retention factors. The warehouse has different levels of importance throughout the process. It appears that it can indirectly enhance the attractiveness and retention capability of 3PL providers through other selection criteria.

By combining the resource-based view and the customer value theory, this research extends the theory on logistics outsourcing by studying the phases of the 3PL buying process and scrutinizing the criteria used in different evaluation steps. The research adds a double perspective of analysis (3PL providers and shippers), which is missing in the literature, and focuses on the importance of warehouses.

Much of the earlier empirical work in service management has suggested that the dimensions of service quality may be stable in terms of their relative importance. In particular, the works of Zeithaml et al. postulate that service reliability matters most to customers and that empathy and the tangible aspects of services matter the least. Shows arguments, both conceptually and empirically, so that this observation is not based on strategic thinking nor on a particularly sound set of experiments. The relative priorities of service organizations must be established through the strategy formulation process and are likely to vary, quite logically, according to market choices and operations process characteristics.

The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate the usefulness of a dynamic analysis of the development and management of strategic capabilities and resources in manufacturing. It aims to present dynamic resource/capability systems as a means to understand an issue from manufacturing strategy.

A case study from a standard textbook on manufacturing strategy is used to illustrate the approach that is mainly based on Warren's strategy dynamics. Extensions to this approach are introduced.

Diagrams of dynamic resource/capability systems are valuable tools for understanding issues of interconnected and changing strategic resources and capabilities. Resources and capabilities can be interpreted as stocks in dynamic simulation models following ideas from system dynamics.

The exact nature of strategic capabilities and their relationships needs to be further investigated. Approaches need to be developed to measure and to quantify these concepts. The connection between Hill's order winners/qualifiers and the inflows/outflows of capability and resource stocks should be further examined.

Static analyses of strategic issues are often difficult to interpret. The dynamic nature of strategic issues needs to be reflected in the tools used for analysing them.

Applies a dynamic analysis to manufacturing strategy and uses a textbook example in a new way to illustrate the relevance of the approach.

As businesses progress through their organizational lifecycle, many experience growing pains associated with increased volume, product line breadth, personnel, and the complexity associated with managing larger businesses. It is essential that the company have the ability to recognize these and develop methods of dealing with them if they expect to survive. While many authors address the area of how to grow in terms of marketing, product development and financing and, while they note that there are risks to rapid growth, little information is available on how to recognize trouble spots, analyze them and accommodate them. The product profile is a management tool that helps decision‐makers to identify problems that have evolved through time and to identify impending opportunities on the horizon. Discusses the advantages of adapting product profiling to services to identify and accommodate growing pains and then provides an example of its successful use by a service company.

Competition in the beverage industry is increasing on all fronts (advertising, price, product proliferation, service, etc.). As a result, distributors need to understand what is important to retailers and assess how they and their competitors are meeting those needs in the supply chain. In this paper a performance system is proposed to assess the distributor‐retailer interface based on the integration of a number of concepts including customer service, relationship exchanges, competitive benchmarking, order winners (consumer preference perceptions), and portfolio analysis.Various performance matrices are constructed which indicate the importance level and service effectiveness for categories of service provided to retailers. These importance/ performance matrices provide a basis for distributors to develop marketing strategies for categories of retailers, as well as for individual retailers.

Presents a new taxonomy for the non make‐to‐stock sector to enable a like‐with‐like comparison, arguing that existing taxonomies within the literature are inadequate for strategic research purposes. Presents empirical evidence which has been collected from 22 companies in three European countries – the UK, Denmark and The Netherlands. The data support the structure of the proposed new taxonomy and provide insights into competitive advantage and customisation issues in the non make‐to‐stock sector. Finally, two new labels for this sector of industry are proposed. “Versatile manufacturing company” is used to describe those manufacturers which are involved in a competitive bidding situation for every order which they receive, customisation by individual order. In contrast, the “Repeat business customiser” may only be in this position for the first of a series of similar orders from a particular customer, customisation by contract.