Search results

The purpose of this paper is to provide a personal retrospective on six of the key events/experiences that influenced the development of the structure, foundational premises, and models of the resource‐advantage theory of competition.

The paper uses a personal retrospective approach.

The paper finds that six key events influenced the development of resource‐advantage theory: B.J. “Bud” LaLonde emphasizes the works of Alderson; Rob Morgan suggests an article on the resource‐based theory of the firm; Roy Howell suggests a presentation on R‐A theory; Randy Sparks shows a “socialist calculation” article; Kim Boal suggests the Journal of Management Inquiry as a publication outlet; and Bob Phillips discusses his work on “firm effects vs industry effects”. The paper then relates each of the six events to the paths, routes, or procedures that are often proposed as (or reported to be) likely to lead to the development of theories.

By providing the evolutionary history of resource‐advantage theory, the paper provides implications for developing marketing theories.

The purpose of this paper is to illustrate that conceptual frameworks developed from a general theory of competition, i.e. resource‐advantage (R‐A) theory, can facilitate managerial action.

After a brief overview of resource‐advantage (R‐A) theory, five conceptual frameworks are developed and offered for the purposes of managerial action.

This paper identifies several conceptual frameworks and after noting that conceptual frameworks that do not have positive theoretical foundations may not be as useful as those that do, develops five conceptual frameworks that are based on R‐A theory.

The conceptual frameworks developed in this paper have great potential for facilitating managerial action.

Conceptual frameworks that have positive theoretical foundations can be very useful for practitioners. In fact, the frameworks proposed in this paper can replace frameworks that are currently in use for managerial action.

This research aims to provide a theoretical framework for exploring how firms can respond to the growing threat of natural resource scarcity. Specifically, the role of closed‐loop supply chain management is examined as a means for creating resource advantages that can lead to marketplace competitive advantages.

The research extends previous theoretical research, integrating natural resource scarcity and closed‐loop supply chain management for the first time. Resource‐advantage theory is employed as the theoretical lens for the research model and propositions.

The findings deepen understanding of the forces that create natural resource scarcity conditions in the supply chain, and highlight the need for higher order closed‐loop capabilities that have the ability to mitigate natural resource scarcity.

The theoretical model and six research propositions suggest relationships between natural resource scarcity, closed‐loop capabilities, and firm level performance that need to be tested empirically. Future research opportunities and methodologies are suggested.

Growing natural resource scarcity is already having a major impact on many firms and industries; therefore, this research has significant managerial implications due to supply risks and potential disruptions caused by insufficient natural resources in current and future supply chains.

This paper seeks to increase discussion about natural resource scarcity and bring it into focus as a relevant supply chain topic related to closed‐loop supply chain capabilities and the internal firm level resources needed to ensure performance in a changing world.

This study aims to examine the role of market orientation as a relationship property. This property, labeled “alliance market orientation”, is at the inter‐firm level and is related to the new product development (NPD) activities of alliances. The main objectives of this article are: to define the alliance market orientation; to argue that it is a major factor in NPD alliance success; and to argue that the resource‐advantage (R‐A) theory of competition can provide a theoretical foundation for this concept and explain its contribution to alliances' NPD success.

The paper is conceptual in approach.

In their efforts to strengthen relationships, alliances may tend to focus so much time on the relationship factors that they miss market opportunities. As a spanning process, NPD should be informed by both external and internal activities. alliance market orientation assists alliances in guiding NPD activities from outside to inside and vice versa. As a dynamic and disequilibrium provoking process, the R‐A theory of competition can theoretically ground the concept of alliance market orientation and explain its role in NPD alliance success.

This study contributes to business marketing theory in three ways: it extends the concept of intra‐organizational market orientation to an inter‐organizational context; the alliance market orientation concept contributes to understanding the role of idiosyncratic resources in alliances; and the R‐A theory of competition can theoretically ground the concept of alliance market orientation and provide insights to develop it further.

This study is the first to extend the concept of market orientation into inter‐organizational NPD framework and to examine the role of alliance market orientation in NPD alliance success.

This study aims to assess the impact of an established market orientation on the implementation of green supply chain practices and environmental performance.

Data collected from 225 manufacturing managers are analyzed using a partial least squares structural equation modeling methodology.

Findings indicate that market orientation both directly and indirectly (through green supply chain management practices) impacts environmental performance.

The study focuses on the impact of a market orientation on environmental sustainability within the manufacturing sector, thereby limiting generalization to other sectors.

Manufacturing practitioners are provided with information emphasizing the importance of implementing and maintaining a strong market orientation as a precursor to establishing an environmental sustainability strategy.

The results have important societal implications, in that a marketing approach that leads to the more rapid adoption of environmental sustainability programs within the manufacturing sector is identified.

This is believed to be the first empirical investigation of the relationship between market orientation and environmental sustainability.

Despite the vast proliferation of conceptual, theoretical, and empirical studies in adaptation‐selection research, debate continues to surround a key question: how do firms strategically coevolve with their environments? This paper attempts to address part of this question by drawing on advances in strategic choice theory and resource‐advantage theory. A scenario‐based group methodology based around the “think tank” described in the first paper of this special issue is presented whereby marketing analyses of environmental contexts are described which lead to a series of recommended marketing strategies for response (selection), which fit the changing environments (adaptation). Various conclusions are derived from this marketing strategy determination process and finally, consideration is given to issues of complexity and chaos in environmental assessment terms.

Informed by the resource-based and resource-advantage theories, this study, a comparative study, aims to examine the core dimensions of nation brands – culture, tourism, exports, foreign direct investment, migration and governance – from the company-based brand equity perspective in a sample of 48 countries clustered into three groups (strong, moderate and weak nation brands) from 2011 to 2019 to identify the most critical predictors of nation brand strength in each cluster.

A clustering technique was applied to the modified Country Brand Index to cluster the included countries into strong, moderate and weak nation brands. The authors were then able to analyze each cluster in an effort to explore the relative importance of the predictor variables and determine if that importance varied across the clusters.

This approach revealed novel findings of great importance to policymakers and academics. The results indicate the resources that contribute the most to nation brand equity in each cluster. Such information can guide policymakers in effectively leveraging these strategic resources. First, the cultural dimension was a more critical predictor concerning countries with moderate and weak nation brands than countries with strong brands. Second, tourism exhibited the highest predictive importance concerning all the clusters. For academics, these findings help foster a better understanding of the determinants of nation brand strength, as aligned with the resource-based and resource-advantage theories.

The findings of this study contribute to the literature concerning nation brand management, particularly the stream related to nation brand equity monetization.

The purpose of this paper is to provide a retrospection on the importance, origins and development of the research programs in the author’s career.

The study uses an autobiographical approach.

Most of the articles, research monographs and books that constitute this research and publishing efforts can be categorized into seven distinct, but related, research programs: channels of distribution; marketing theory; marketing’s philosophy debates; macromarketing and ethics; relationship marketing; resource-advantage theory; and marketing management and strategy. The value system that has guided these research programs has been shaped by specific events that took place in the author’s formative years. This essay chronicles these events and the origins and development of the seven research programs.

Chronicling the importance, origins and development of the seven research programs will hopefully motivate and assist other scholars in developing their own research programs.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the benefits of integrating the theory of constraints (TOC), resources-based theory (RBT), resource advantage theory (RAT), with a structured project-based methodology e.g., Project Management Body of Knowledge. This paper describes each theory and explores what benefits a unified model would bring to project management. This paper represents the conceptual development of an integrated framework that will be tested in a range of project management scenarios in various industrial sectors.

Extant literature is used to develop a conceptual framework of an integrated model that will be tested in the field for robustness. The model has been applied to published projects to identify its strengths and weaknesses.

The work shows important implications for improved success of projects from the use of TOC, RAT and resource dependence theory (RDT). Specifically, it emphasizes the need for application of strategic theories to project management.

While TOC, RAT and RDT are well established in the context of organization theory, there is limited application in project management. Moreover, the model has yet to be applied in the field. The hypotheses identified in this research are currently being tested using field-based surveys.

The research falls short in addressing some resources, e.g. innovation, tacit knowledge and decision making methods in traditional project management context. Therefore, identifying these critical resources in future work and exploiting them as the means of improving project performance would enhance the success of project-based management.

Project management is an emergent discipline and a project is temporary in nature. Therefore, new ideas and development of theories for project management practices are required. This innovative research, for example, may change the way projects are executed in future.

This paper examines the components of a successful project according to the iron triangle, i.e. scope, quality, time and cost. However, through the application of TOC, RAT and RDT into an integrated project-based management framework gives new insights to resources management.

Societies highly value economic growth because economic growth results in increase in societal standards of living. This paper addresses the issue of why economies grow and what public policy makers should favor in order to increase economic growth.

This paper reviews and contrasts the two major, rival ways to account for economic growth: the neoclassical model, which maintains that growth results from increases in investment, and the dynamic competition model, which maintains that growth results from the innovations that stem from the process of competition.

The paper finds that the dynamic‐competition model, as represented by resource‐advantage (R‐A) theory, best explains economic growth.

Public policy should focus on promoting R‐A competition in order to foster economic growth.

This issue of which approach best accounts for economic growth is important because the two approaches imply very different decisions in the public policy arena.