Search results

The purpose of this paper is to provide a conceptual tool that would help managers to integrate the findings from strategy frameworks such as the value chain, the five forces or the VRIO framework by jointly analyzing the different levers of competitive advantage.

Building on the extant literature the paper develops a strategy framework that integrates the internal and external dimensions of strategy formulation. To illustrate a practical application of the value‐process framework, the paper presents a case study of a project at the German music corporation Sony BMG.

The value‐process framework serves managers as a conceptually unifying analysis tool that contributes to their understanding of the main levers that help to create a sustainable competitive advantage. The framework can be used to visually integrate isolated strategy frameworks by jointly analyzing the different levers of competitive advantage, and to develop consistent and integrated strategies that simultaneously take into account the internal and external perspectives of strategic decision making.

While the existing strategy literature is good at providing specific concepts and tools of strategy analysis, it rarely connects the different dimensions and points out their interdependencies. As a result, strategic analyses are often fragmented and isolated from their broader context. The value‐process framework aims to provide an overarching perspective that helps to integrate the different dimensions of strategy formulation.

The realisation of joint innovation outcomes in open innovation networks is closely related to an efficient utilisation of governance mechanisms, which coordinate joint processes (e.g. knowledge sharing) and eliminate undesired behaviours (e.g. opportunism). Hence, the purpose of this paper is to analyse the complex effects of multiple governance approaches on outcomes of open innovation networks with a national and an international scope.

The study draws on a large-scale survey-based study of 100 mechanical engineering firms involved in open innovation networks. Hypotheses are tested by means of PLS structural equation modelling.

The evidence shows that the three governance mechanisms: transactional governance, relational governance and institutionalised governance significantly foster innovation outcomes of open innovation networks. In national open innovation networks, only relational governance exerts positive effects, internationally transactional and institutionalised governance is necessary.

The study contributes to research in multiple ways. First, it shows that governance of open innovation networks is crucial for their innovation performance, thereby providing some explanations for the performance differences between certain networks. Second, the results indicate that the effects of governance mechanisms depend on the scope of the network. By showing that the effect of governance mechanisms varies under different contextual conditions the study also contributes to the ongoing debate on combined effects of governance mechanisms.

The paper fills important gaps in the existing research on the link between governance and performance in open innovation networks and delineates interesting areas for further research.

The purpose of this paper is to examine characteristics of project management assets and project management performance outcomes as a step towards exploring the link between assets being valuable, rare, inimitable, and having organizational support and the achievement of competitive advantage.

This paper analyzes data from responses to an online survey by 198 North American Project Management Institute^® members. Exploratory factor analysis is used to identify characteristics of project management assets and project management performance outcomes.

In total, six factors that comprised the characteristics of project management assets, three factors that comprised organizational support for project management assets, and two factors that comprised the project management performance outcomes were extracted.

Limitations of this study include sample size, response rate, and self‐report bias, calling for a larger sample in ongoing research. This study is a step towards making the link between project management assets and performance outcomes.

This study draws managerial attention to project management assets as sources of competitive advantage, applying the resource based view of the firm that assets are sources of competitive advantage if they add economic value, are rare, are difficult to imitate, and have organizational support.

Few papers have applied the resource based view of the firm to examine project management capabilities as a source of competitive advantage. This paper contributes to the literature on the resource based view of the firm and contributes to an improved understanding of project management as a source of competitive advantage.

The aim of this paper is to examine the links between project management process characteristics and project-level and firm-level performance outcomes to test the hypotheses that project management assets being valuable, rare, inimitable and having organizational support leads to competitive advantage.

This paper analyzes data from responses to an online survey by 198 North American Project Management Institute® members. Regression analysis is used to examine the relationship between six factors extracted from an exploratory factor analysis that comprise the three project management asset characteristics – valuable, rare and inimitable, three factors that comprise organizational support for the project management process, and two factors that comprise project management performance outcomes – project-level and firm-level performance.

Organizational support for the project management process, specifically project management integration, was found to significantly contribute to both project-level and firm-level performance. Of the asset factors examined, valuable project management knowledge was found to contribute to project-level and firm-level performance, though information technology (IT) tools did not. Inimitable proprietary tangible assets were found to contribute to both project-level and firm-level performance, and inimitable embedded intangible assets were also found to contribute to firm-level performance. Rare knowledge sharing tools and techniques were found to negatively contribute to project-level performance.

Limitations of this study include sample size, response rate and self-report bias, calling for a larger sample in ongoing research.

This study draws managerial attention to project management assets as sources of competitive advantage, highlighting the need to have organizational support for the project management process through organizational integration, and emphasizing the importance of valuable project management knowledge-based assets and inimitable project management assets that are proprietary and tangible as well as those that are embedded and intangible.

Few papers have applied the resource-based view of the firm to examine project management capabilities as a source of competitive advantage. This paper contributes to the literature on the resource-based view of the firm and to an improved understanding of project management as a source of competitive advantage.