Search results

The paper introduces a resource-based linear programming model for resource optimization in small innovative enterprises (SIE).

The model is grounded on resource-based view on the firm and dynamic capabilities approach. Linear programming technique is used to provide the actual framework to the resource-based model.

The paper introduces a new resource-based linear programming model for resource optimization in small innovative enterprises. The conceptual model is grounded on resource-based view (RBV) and dynamic capabilities strategy. The RVB of firm and firm strategy is based on the concept of economic rent. Linear programming technique is used to provide the actual framework to the resource-based model. In developing the versatility concept, study suggests a distinct sight regarding resource fungibility. Study classifies resources into multipliable, rentable and expendable resources to increases adequacy of the model. The developed model includes both tangible and intangible assets such as human capital. The survival rate of SIE in the early stages of life cycle is very low due to the competition among SIEs. In this regard, the greatest advancement of the developed resource-based linear programming model is its simplicity and versatility which is much desirable for the SIE especially in their initial stages of the life cycle. Kelliher and Reinl (2009) argued that micro firms have unique advantage over bigger firms in following term: rate of learning or redeployment of strategy in micro firms is faster than the rate of change in their environment. One very significant feature of the developed resource-based linear programming model is that mathematically the proposed model could easily be transformed into mixed integer or stochastic linear programming models to meet the time variant requirement of small firms especially when it expands its operation.

The survival rate of SIE in the early stages of life cycle is very low due to the competition among SIEs. In this regard, the greatest advancement of the developed resource-based linear programming model is its simplicity and versatility which is much desirable for the SIE especially in their initial stages of the life cycle. Kelliher and Reinl (2009) argued that micro firms have unique advantage over bigger firms in following term: rate of learning or redeployment of strategy in micro firms is faster than the rate of change in their environment. One very significant feature of the developed resource-based linear programming model is that mathematically the proposed model could easily be transformed into mixed integer or stochastic linear programming models to meet the time variant requirement of small firms especially when it expands its operation.

One very significant contribution of the present study is that the study develops a new resource-based model for SIE especially for the SIE in the initial stages of the life cycle, to gain competitive advantages. Furthermore, the present study contributes to the existing literature in strategy at least in three senses as mentioned below: 1. further addition of SIE research based on the RBV and dynamic capabilities in the strategy literature 2. in developing the versatility concept, the study suggests a distinct sight regarding resource fungibility and it classifies resources into three categories as follows: multipliable, rentable and expendable resources to increases adequacy of the model. 3. Finally, the study introduces a new resource-based linear programming model for SIE resources allocation. To the best of author’s knowledge, no such similar model is introduced by any previous studies for small firm. The greatest advancement of the developed resource-based linear programming model is its simplicity and versatility.

This study sought to develop an aggregated assessment of the literature on the resource-based view (RBV). The main aim was to map the RBV field based on a systematic literature review (SLR) of 226 academic articles published in refereed journals from 1994 to 2022.

Two bibliometric analysis methods were used: bibliographic coupling and co-citation. These measures are complementary because bibliographic coupling is retrospective in nature and co-citation is forward-looking.

The analysis identified the most influential studies, top-cited articles and journals and six major thematic clusters: RBV, customer orientation and alliance portfolio, resource-based theory, firm performance, entrepreneurial orientation (EO) and dynamic capabilities.

This research was based on a combination of bibliographic coupling and co-citation analysis. The results provide a better understanding of the RBV field’s intellectual structure, which reveals potential new lines of future research.

The paper tries to investigate the impact of applications of the resource-based view (RBV) theory in the management field to improve the firm’s profitability. Global firms are innovating and adopting new technology, paving the way to improve their performance.

We have adopted RBV in management practices such as marketing, strategy, finance, and human resources.

RBV has gained researchers' attention with the growing competitive world and new challenges to retaining customers and achieving their pre-defined targets. We attempt to identify the issues related to the usage of RBV in management.

Using RBV in management may help researchers create a competitive mindset and be prepared for uncertain challenges in the business world.

Multi-level issues (Klein, Dansereau, & Hall (1994). Academy of Management Review, 195–229) are critical to both strategic management research and practice, and yet, we have few approaches for dealing with them both systemically and systematically. In this chapter, I take a resource-based approach to exploring multi-level linkages, suggesting that such an approach has wide applicability. A resource-based view (RBV) of competitive advantage and value creation illustrates the multi-level nature of these concepts and shows how the RBV is itself linked to the external market environment. The RBV also provides a way to link a variety of types of levels of analysis. These include different organizational levels of analysis, content and process linkages, and linkages across time.

The field of research on resource-based competition is full of nuanced terminology and misunderstandings. This has led to confusion, and thus the authors offer a critical review, which provides a structure and clarity to this subject. The paper aims to discuss these issues.

This analysis structures the literature on resources, capabilities, and competences into three distinct schools of thought: the resource-based view (RBV) of the firm, the rational-equilibrium school; the dynamic capability-based view of the firm, the behavioural-evolutionary school; and the competence-based view of the firm, the social constructionist school.

The authors uncover 13 criticisms of the most widely adopted theoretical framework of the RBV of the firm – Valuable-Rare-Imperfectly imitable-Organisation (VRIO).

The misinterpretation and neglect of the classic scholarly work may help to explain why the VRIO framework has been elevated from a view to a theory and why it has received so much attention.

The authors show how the relative ease of measuring resources as compared to (dynamic) capabilities and (core) competencies has helped raise the profile of RBV.

This analysis contributes to management research by illustrating the deviation among the three schools of thought; the authors show how this has contributed to wide terminological confusion and offer a structure to help researchers situate their work within the relevant school of thought.

The resource‐based view of the firm (RBV) is an important, emerging theory of firm heterogeneity. It is well grounded in industrial economics and has benefited in its development from a multiplicity of contributions by management writers. But like any developing body of knowledge, it is not short of confusion, ambiguity and conceptual and empirical difficulties. This paper provides an integrated review of the resource‐based view of the firm in an effort to eliminate much of the ambiguity caused by weak taxonomies and the inconsistent and conflicting use of terminology. It provides a detailed insight into the logic of the RBV and illuminates its contributions to the debate on the nature of competitive advantage. The paper then evaluates the status of some ongoing debates that are germane to our understanding of competitive advantage and outlines prospective directions for the development of the resource‐based view.

Almost since the inception of the resource‐based view (RBV), critics have complained that the view is weak in the prescriptive dimension. A recent statement of this critique is by Priem and Butler, who argue that the RBV does not address value creation. One aspect of this is that the link between resources and value creation is black‐boxed. The paper aims to argue that a Porterian activity analysis with a focus on activity drivers can remedy this weakness, and how it brings into focus important implementation issues that are neglected in the RBV.

The study extends Priem and Butler's critique of the RBV by examining the RBV literature in light of Porter's activity‐based framework.

The resource‐based logic has been gainfully applied in many fields other than strategy. However, because it lacks the concept of activities, the paper argues that it has not reached its full potential in the field of strategy. Formally including the concept of activities and activity drivers addresses the prescriptive shortcomings of the RBV.

Porter's activity drivers are “levers” that managers can manipulate to improve firm value creation in two ways: The first method involves using activity drivers to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of individual activities. The second method involves improving the fit at the level of the firm's activity set. Managers may identify potentially rewarding competitive positions and then use competitive data regarding rivals' activities and drivers to gauge how successful their firm may be in capturing these positions.

This is one of the first attempts to address the prescriptive shortcomings of the RBV using a Porterian activity lens.

The resource-based view of the firm and strategic groups research are two of the most investigated frameworks in strategic management. Historically, assumptions behind these two views have seemingly put them at odds. The resource-based view of the firm argues that sustained competitive advantage is best attained when firms have unique resources, while strategic groups research argues that a number of firms within the same industry can achieve sustained profitability with strategies that are similar to one another, but distinct from other industry members. The two views focus on different levels of analysis and each largely ignores the other’s focal level. Yet neither offers any propositions that are incompatible with the tenets of the other. Thus, conceptual integration that crosses levels of analysis is possible and potentially fruitful. Indeed, some strategic groups research has begun to bridge the gap between these two theories by suggesting that firm differences exist both within and between strategic groups. This article adopts a multi-level view by developing propositions concerning contingencies when firm differences, group processes, or both may lead to sustained competitive advantage. Implications for practitioners as well as suggestions for future theory building and empirical tests are also discussed.

This paper reviews the past 20 years of empirical research, based on the resource-based view (RBV) of the firm, in hospitality and tourism literature. There has been a significant increase in empirical RBV-grounded management research throughout the 2000s. However, to date, there has been no systematic assessment of the RBV in both qualitative and quantitative empirical hospitality and tourism literature. The purpose of the present paper, therefore, is to review and analyse the approaches employed in empirical hospitality and tourism research founded on the RBV, provide an overview and suggest how to further advance the RBV as a framework for future research.

The present study systematically reviews empirical RBV-based hospitality and tourism studies, published between 2000 and 2019. Through a well-defined and replicable inclusion/exclusion criterion, a sample of 122 studies was identified and reviewed.

It was found that while the RBV has received support in both quantitative and qualitative studies, the way in which researchers have utilised it in quantitative and qualitative research varies considerably in terms of the types of resource examined, the measurement variables used and the terminology/theoretical sub-stream employed. To increase the effectiveness of the RBV as a theoretical foundation in future research, its application needs to become more consistent across different studies, allowing for the development of a unified theory. Several shortcomings of the extant literature are identified, including the practical utility of the RBV; the tautology inherent in RBV-based research; the limited amount of qualitative research and the limited focus on industry contexts other than hotels, not to mention the current abundance of research with a Western perspective. These shortcomings lead to the suggestions for future research.

The implications raised in the present study are, firstly, the current body of hospitality and tourism literature founded on the RBV is lacking in certain areas, which highlights the need for further research. Secondly, the confusion arising from its tautologies have negatively impacted the usefulness of the RBV for researchers and practitioners alike. Finally, focusing on lower than firm-level competitive advantage will allow researchers to provide more meaningful recommendation to practitioners.

This is the first systematic review of both qualitative and quantitative hospitality and tourism research founded on the RBV. It provides an overview of this theory, with the aim of highlighting what has already been explored while aiding the further development of the theory in hospitality and tourism research.

The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate why greater attention to performance measurement is so essential to assessing the meaningfulness and usefulness of the knowledge gained from empirical tests of the resource-based view (RBV).

This paper reviews the RBV empirical literature and relies on illustrative examples from various industries in order to assess the degree to which the empirical operationalization of the dependent variable in RBV research adheres to its theoretical specification.

This analysis shows that although RBV theorists routinely conceptualize the dependent variable in terms of a firm's performance in direct comparison to the performance of its competitors, or relative performance, the overwhelming majority of empirical studies conducted in the field operationalize the dependent variable in terms of a firm's performance in isolation, or absolute performance.

Because significant findings are only meaningful if they are grounded in valid data, the findings suggest that support for the RBV and subsequent practical advice about resource-based strategy appears tenuous. Therefore, this paper highlights several possible reasons for the tendency to equate absolute and relative performance, discusses the implications of this disconnect on the RBV's usefulness and scientific rigor, and suggests how both theorists and empiricists might advance theory and method to produce more meaningful knowledge about the RBV.

By providing a critical view of the RBV, this paper offers new insights into what the authors know, what the authors do not know, and how the authors can improve what is known about this important and well-accepted theory.