Relationship Between Firm Resources And Performance Commerce Essay

Relationship Between bulletproof Resources And Performance Commerce EssayMany researchers assimilate point out that the relationship between planetary houses imagings and military operation atomic number 18 always the crucial bea of interest in strategic management (Barney, 1991 Peteraf, 1993 Wernerfelt, 1984). Resource-based view (RBV) highlights the informal environment of the firm in crafting strategy to accomplish a sustainable warlike service in it. Consequently, RBV finish be consider as the best strategy route in the learning of a firms strategy. However, the relationship among strategic resource and firm procedure may be quite complex and take aim to be examine, there is besides many distinct factors that can influence the relationship. In fact, there is no one best strategy that will suits all situation for a firm. Moreoer, RBV also been comp atomic number 18d to early(a)s strategy amazement methods handle Porters industry depth psychology. base on this assignment, we will be focus on the contention that RBV analysis has a strong relationship with firms performance especially in achieving a sustainable war-ridden reward for certain industry only.Resource in RBV can be defined in an extremely get along with way. For instance, Wernerfelt (1984) comprises all strengths and weaknesses of a firm. Concepts like dynamic capabilities (Barney et al, 2001), entrepreneurship (Alvarez and Busenitz, 2001) and management (Barney, 1994 Mahoney, 1995) are usually regarded as strategic resources. Similarly, RBV also has been defined as stocks of available factors that are owned and controlled by the firm, these factors can be classified into physical, reputational, organizational, financial, homo intellectual and technological, which are transformed into final products or service efficiently and effectively (Amit and Schoemaker, 1993 Capron and Hulland, 1999). As we know, resources are exploited by people, not by themselves. Human beings have differ considerably concerning to the sorts of skills they have, also their form of skilfulness and their intelligence to view opportunities (Eisenhardt and Martin, 2000). According to Brown et al. (2001), in order to develop entrepreneurial performance at heart the firm, managers must inspire the coordination of get wind resources, allow flexibility, encourage members to search for opportunity and rewarding them for pursuing youthful opportunities in order for it to prosperous. Besides, RBV assists management to create a culture where there is valid and comfort for pertly knowledge by encouraging the perplex process of recombining existing knowledge with new knowledge (Prahalad, 1998 Shih-Wei, 2005 Montalvo, 2006).RBV can be treat as the best strategy route in the development of a firm strategy, because RBV analyze and explain resources of the firms to grasp how organizations accomplish sustainable competitive prefer. In addition, RBV centralize on the opinion of hardly to imitate attri moreoveres as sources of higher performance and competitive advantage for the organization (Barney, 1986 Hamel and Prahalad, 1996). In the alike manner, resources are hardly to be transferred and acquired, that need a lengthen learning curve or a major modify in the organization climate and culture, hence to a greater extent difficult to duplicate by rivals because of a range of isolating mechanisms and very likely to be unique to the organization (Rumelt, 1984 Mahoney and Pandian, 1992 Peteraf, 1993 Hoopes et al., 2003). Based on Conner (1991), performance variation between organizations depends on its possession of unique inputs and capabilities. For example, Honda following RBV strategy, built its play along strategy around the firms strength, capability and expertise in building petrol based locomotives, at last the order utilize it unique resource and capabilities to build a world class petrol based engines and became the largest engine manufacturer in the wor ld.Firm must possess semiprecious resources in order to build resource-based advantages. For the break up to outperform with competitors, many RBV researchers assert that organizations must exploit the resources that they possess. An organizations succeed or fail in the food market is depend on the particular perspective on an inside-out view of firm from RBV (Dicksen, 1996). According to Barney (1986) valuable resource must enable a firm to function and behave in ways that tercet to high sales, low costs, high margins, or in opposites ways add financial value to the firm. A firms ability to innovate successful is also a factor of unique capability which is sustainable and appropriable. For example, an innovative products such as Apples iTunes and iPod. The companys first class innovation in product design and practicality is proving not an tardily act for rivals to copy. Apple avoid to sit back complacently, although the company maintain at the front seat of the digital med ia with its iPod and iTunes online stores. In 2007, Apple introduce of its iPhone and entered into the mobile phone market, this continuous innovation and product mental hospital keeps rivals such as Sony, Samsung guessing about what products Apple will bring out in the futurity and provides a factor of outperform as rivals struggle to substitute their achievement. In other words, strategic resources are also concerns on non-monetary factors such as knowledge based, human resource management activities on their customer service department to result in a competitive advantage..To obtain a competitive advantages over the others is easy, however to achieve a sustainable competitive advantage is rather hard. Way to maintain sustainable competitive advantages for sustained superior performance, firms must be unique and core competencies and resources that are valuable, rare, imperfectly imitable and non-substitutable (Barney, 1991) as well as visualize of value-creating ways to exploi t them. Intangible resources such as intellectual, technological resources are much appropriate than tangible resources which are human, financial resources to generate competitive advantage (Hitt, Bierman, Shimizu and Kochhar, 2001). Particularly, intangible resources like knowledge allow firms to add up value to incoming sources of production (Hitt et al., 2001). It indicates firms achieve competitive advantage (Prahalad and Hamel, 1990 Collis and Montgomery,1995 Post,1997 Markides,1997 Bogner,Thomas and McGee,1999). Such resource is built over time and difficult to be imitated and is valuable. For instance, Tesco, Sainsburys and Asda all compete in the same environment, yet Tesco is a superior performer. It is not the environment that distinguishes between them but their internal strategic capabilities. It is difficult for one organization to obtain or copy the capabilities of another. Like Sainsburys cannot readily obtain the substantial Tescos retail sites its management or i ts experience. As a result, Tesco is achieving a sustainable competitive advantage. On the other hand, firm must develop one or two value creating activities to some extent that creates more general value than rivals do to attain competitive advantage. Porter (1985) point out two generic wine strategy, the first is lower cost strategy, to reduce activity cost by lowering the cost of the inputs than rivals, firearm retaining average quality and prices. Secondly is differentiation, to induce customers willingness to pay an above-average price, including value of the ancillary service or the flick of the product. Managers who carrying a general knowledge of their rivals activity sets can apply this information to analyze their position relational to its rivals (Ghemawat, 2006 Porter, 1985, 1991). Besides, Porter (1985) also identified the value chain framework to help managers in understanding, enhancing and executing a lower costs or differentiation strategy. The value chain can b e defined as a general activity model that is used to decompose the firm into the single activities it manages to form value for the consumer. In conclusion, both activity-based and RBVs complement each other and share an objective of discovering and exploiting factors that lead to higher competitive performanceEven though the RBVs principle for a firm is to achieve and sustain a competitive advantage by exploiting valuable, rare, inimitable and non-substitutable resources is instinctive and theoretically satisfying, it is essential to recognize that value, rare, inimitability and non-substitutable are not on the whole invariables. In fact, facing of radical, volatile changes in the environment, value, rare, inimitability and non-substitutability are very considerably over time. In other words, RBV state have their fall like in the valuable attribute, the need for planning and investment to develop such resources are remote factors, which means the RBV may overstate the profitabil ity of firms by exploiting these resources, because the cost of learnedness and accumulation had been avoided. As a result, it is difficult for the RBV to tell why firms invest in such a valuable resource instead of in other type of resources. Moreover, if the organizations want to increase their profit from the resources they possess, they have to think over the demand side attributes that effect on the final price of the product. Furthermore, in the imagination of rareness resource, it does not essentially attain the competitive advantage of the firm, in spite of the resource cook a great rent due to its relative shortage. Rents can be defined as the prices of services yielded by resources (Lewin and Phelan, 2002). Regardless of the rents are rare or not, in this stage rent is nothing more than the rental price of the service of the resource. There are no any profit has been earn to the firm, by and by paying remuneration to all the factors of production (Demsetz, 1973 Barney, 1986a Rumelt, 1987). However, the firm may grasps some part of the rent from the owner of resources, if the firm is gaining any profit left from the resource. Member or staff who have capabilities such as knowledge based will have benefits of bargaining power, hence being able to appropriate supernumerary rent. Barney (1991) point out that the strategic resource possess rareness, inimitable and non-substitutable criteria may be in certified of the firm, but when the belief of the heterogeneous distribution of resources is taken into account it is not easily to visualize that the resource effrontery by the value is similar for all firms. For instance, intangible resources such as innovative capability or diverse production capabilities have been recognized as essential strategic resources and are extremely dependent of other resources in order to act properly. On the other hand, some resources might prevent firms from direct higher performance. For example, a Formula One engine er might be a key resource for a sports car manufacturer due to his ability to built high-performance engines, while car companies with key resources in the aspects of an image for safety or high environmental standards might not be desirable to gain advantage from possessing such capabilities. These examples result the complication of resource interactions (Smith et al., 1996) and also the value of resource is different among companies.ConclusionAccording to Barney (1991), Mahoney and Pandian (1992), Porter (1991), they agree that both internal and external factors must be taken into account when analyzing firm performance. For example, if a firm is able to acquire a key resource, it often regard a diversification in the product market (Andersen, 2007a). The result of such a diversification is to a great extent dependent on the organizations prior market experience or market that pertinent to existing product lines (Pehrsson, 2004). In consequence, if a firm is not able to use i ts product effectively in the appropriate product market, the product will not benefit from these resources even though the company possess with superior production skills and great valuation. Therefore, firms can actually fail to attain higher performance while posses several strategic resources, if the marketing capability are poor. In conclusion, both internal and external environment are complement to each other in achieving a sustainable competitive advantage for a firm.(1863 words)Bibliography ListAndersen, J. (2011) strategical resources and firm performance Management Decision journal. 49, 87-98.Johnson, G., Scholes, K. and Whittington, R. (ed.) (2008) Exploring Corporate Strategy textual matter and Cases. 8th ed. London Prentice Hall.Newbert, S. L.,Gopalakrishnan, S., Kirchhoff, B. A. (2008) Looking beyond resources Exploring the importance of entrepreneurship to firm-level competitive advantage in technologically intensive industries Technovation Journal. 28, 6-19.Oup.co m (2011) The Internal Environment A resource-Based View of Strategy http//www.oup.com/uk/orc/bin/9780199288304/henry_ch05.pdf accessed 24 April 2011.tamanpowell.com (2007) Resource Based View Encyclopaedic Dictionary of Strategic Management. http//tamanpowell.com/Writing/assets/Resource%20Based%20View.pdf accessed 24 April 2011.skynet.ie (2001) The Resource-Based Theory of emulous avail Implications for Strategy Formulation http//www.skynet.ie/karen/Articles/Grant1_NB.pdf accessed 24 April 2011.Halawi, L. A., Aronson, J. E. and McCarthy, R. V. (2005) Resource-Based View of Knowledge Management for Competitive improvement The Electronic Journal of Knowledge Management. 3 (2)75-86. www.ejkm.com/issue/download.html?idArticle=55 accessed 24 April 2011.Madhani. P (2009) Resource based view (RBV) of Competitive Advantages Importance, Issues and Implications Indian Management Research Journal. 1 (2)2-12. http//ssrn.com/abstract=1504379 accessed 26 April 2011.Tokuda Akio (2005) The Criti cal Assessment of the Resource-Based View of Strategic Management The Source of Heterogeneity of the Firm Ritsumeikan International Affairs. 3, 125-150 http//www.ritsumei.ac.jp/acd/re/k-rsc/ras/04_publications/ria_en/03_8.pdf accessed 27 April 2011.Pertusa-Ortega, E. M., Molina-Azorin, J. F. and Claver-Cortes, E. (2010) Competitive Strategy, social organisation and firm performance A comparison of the resource-based view and the contingency approach Management Decision Journal. 48, 1282-1303.Sheehan, N. T. and Foss, N. J. (2007) naval division 4. Hierarchical Strategies and The Resource-Based View Enhancing the prescriptiveness of the resource-based view through Porterian activity analysis Management Decision Journal. 45, 450-461.quickmba.com (2010) Competitive Advantage Strategic Management. http//www.quickmba.com/strategy/competitive-advantage/ accessed 30 April 2011.