The case for a process theory of resource accumulation and deployment

The resource-based view (RBV) is a useful framework for studying strategic organization. However, it focuses on rent-generating properties of resources, with less attention paid to the processes by which firms accumulate and deploy resources. I contend that organizational design that supports these processes should be integral to RBV theorizing. Despite recent debates concerning the RBV (Barney, 2001; Lado et al., 2006; Priem and Butler, 2001), its conceptualization of the firm as a bundle of resources has remained immune to criticism. This conceptualization has led scholars to consider everything that is embedded in the firm as a resource: ‘all assets, capabilities, organizational processes, firm attributes, information, knowledge, etc.’ (Barney, 1991: 101). Thus, it has obscured the distinction between resources and other organizational properties that govern resource accumulation and deployment. Related research streams shed little light on these processes. The knowledge-based view underscores some properties of knowledge (Kogut and Zander, 1992). Although several scholars distinguish flows from stocks of knowledge (e.g., Decarolis and Deeds, 1999), this literature disregards organizational constraints that limit knowledge accumulation and deployment. In turn, the absorptive capacity literature studies internalization of external knowledge, referring to the cycle of acquisition, assimilation, transformation, and exploitation (Zahra and George, 2002). It concentrates on abilities rather than on supportive mechanisms. The capabilities literature examines a firm’s abilities to achieve objectives by integrating, combining, and leveraging resources (Hoopes and Madsen, 2008). It sheds more light on the means by which firms acquire and release resources, yet falls short of revealing how firms manage their resource bases. Finally, the dynamic capabilities literature concerns the ability to reconfigure capabilities in view of path dependencies and changing market conditions (Teece et al., 1997). Capabilities can follow predetermined lifecycles (Helfat and Peteraf, 2003) or be transformed and substituted (Lavie, 2006), yet the mechanisms that support their reconfiguration have not been specified. These streams of research contribute little to the understanding of dynamic resource accumulation and deployment. Most approaches do not distinguish resource flows from stocks; some consider only one type of resource, while others underscore either internal or external resources. They neither distinguish resources from capabilities and other organizational properties nor do they explain their interplay. They associate competitive advantage with the properties of resources and 452822 SOQ10310.1177/1476127012452822LavieStrategic Organization 2012