Search

This paper considers the role of strategic assets in the generation of company competitiveness. It takes the position that the resource-based view/dynamic capabilities explanation of competitiveness is tautological and ex post facto in its approach and proposes that competitiveness is derived from permanent infrastructural characteristics of organizational design providing a source of a continuous stream of temporary strategic assets or successful products, services and processes. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

The suggestion that use of the net present value (NPV) rule in major investment decisions induces illusions of certainty and encourages over-confidence on the part of users is contested. In the event that poor decisions are made when the NPV rule has been used, it is argued here that the causes will be behavioural and competence-centred rather than technique-based. The argument is advanced that the NPV rule is an important rational evaluation technique that provides astute and numerate managers and directors with important economic information and satisfies the demands of the investing community for a wealth creation-based criterion for strategic decisions. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

The word competitiveness is used extensively in management discourse concerning national economic performance, international economic performance comparisons and at the level of the firm. It is a word of elusive meaning. Indeed, it is used in so many different ways that there must be serious doubt that the word has any concrete meaning at all. This is regrettable because it could make a valuable contribution to our thinking about economic policy and the management of business. This paper considers the concept of competitiveness at the level of the business unit and proposes an interpretation, which will be of value to practising managers in their efforts to improve the economic performance of their businesses. Copyright © 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

•A dominant theoretical paradigm in academic strategic management circles is the Resource-Based View (RBV). This paper reviews the literature of this position and the extent to which the RBV may be seen as a source of practical guidance for managers seeking competitive advantage and strategic success. •The theories of management academics should be of practical value to managers, otherwise such theories are of limited value. The test of the validity of theorizing about management is whether the theories produced help to improve the art of management. That is the criterion adopted in this paper. •The RBV is an ‘inside-out’ perspective, according to which, competitive success lies within the hands of managers themselves and it is from the point of view of practising managers that this paper examines competitiveness. Consequently, the assessment of the RBV will be a purely instrumental one. Does it help managers to manage better? Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

It is argued that practising managers benefit from conceptual frameworks to provide techniques for implementing business strategies. This paper: Considers the link between the concept of strategy levels and the marketing concept of product levels, Stresses that the success of business strategy is necessarily dependent upon effective implementation by the functional activities of the business, Proposes a technique based on the product level concept for approaching the practical issues of strategy implementation at the functional level, Suggests a greater emphasis by researchers on the practical problems of strategy implementation. Copyright © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

This article: Considers competitive business strategy from a managerial rather than purely theoretical perspective; Focuses on the practical task of generating ‘good ideas’ for business development; Concentrates on products and markets as the building blocks of strategy; and Proposes a framework which managers can employ to stimulate idea generation and the identification of the key resource implications. Copyright © 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

This article is prompted by Slater and Narver’s (1998) SMJ article entitled ‘Customer-led and market-oriented: Let’s not confuse the two’. It is suggested here that Slater and Narver’s contention that strategic success is a function of market-led orientation rather than customer-led orientation is too reductionist a proposition which gives inadequate weight to the resource endowment and scale differences between companies. The argument is offered that success through time for the bulk of businesses will be directly related to close relationships with existing customers, particularly for smaller companies, which are the vast majority. Copyright © 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

This response is prompted by Hult, Ketchen and Slater's (2005) article entitled ‘Market orientation and performance: an integration of disparate approaches.’ As a contributor to the foregoing debate in the pages of this journal to which they refer I am writing to offer some observations on the nature and implications of the research reported in their paper and to clarify my essential difficulty as a strategist with the ‘market-oriented: customer-led’ construct. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.