Towards a Theoretical Model for Strategic Assets, Competitive Capabilities and Firm Performance: A Research Agenda

Justus Kyengo; James Kilika

doi:doi:10.11648/j.sjbm.20170502.11

| Peer-Reviewed

Towards a Theoretical Model for Strategic Assets, Competitive Capabilities and Firm Performance: A Research Agenda

Justus Kyengo, James Kilika

Published in Science Journal of Business and Management (Volume 5, Issue 2)

Received: 9 January 2017 Accepted: 24 January 2017 Published: 9 March 2017

Views: Downloads:

Download PDF

Share This Article

Twitter
Linked In
Facebook

Abstract

Each firm faces a unique set of competitors when similarities among products and resources are considered to identify competitors. Despite much debate in the strategy literature on strategic assets, competitive capabilities and firm performance, little consensus has been generated. Thus, the gap the current paper seeks to fill. The study’s objectives are as follows; to review the extant theoretical literature on strategic assets, competitive capabilities and firm performance, to review the extant empirical literature on strategic assets, competitive capabilities and firm performance, to identify the gaps in literature that will help in understanding the relationship between strategic assets, competitive capabilities and firm performance and to propose a theoretical framework based on the identified theoretical and empirical gaps. This study will be important in terms of empirical enhancement since past studies have limitation of the empirical research on strategic assets and competitiveness in regards to being imperfect comparability of results across different studies using different variables (features) describing competitiveness. This paper contributes to the theoretical research on strategic assets, competitive capabilities and firm performance not only by the synthesis of old and new writings as well as the findings of the exploratory studies, but also by concept synthesis. Since the concept of strategic assets and competitive capability can be reported to individual product/service, enterprise/farm, industry, economic sector, region, nation or international economic blocks, the attempts towards creating one common definition of strategic assets, competitive capabilities seem to be doomed to fail. This study is significance because it will be used in the developing of government policies on strategic assets, competitive capabilities and its links to performance which requires an understanding of the major factors that facilitate or impede firms’ ability to compete. These factors can, however, differ depending on a country, region or industry. This study will facilitate polices on public spending and taxes, exchange rates, interest rates, and government regulatory activities as some of the examples of key macroeconomic determinants of competitiveness.

Published in	Science Journal of Business and Management (Volume 5, Issue 2)
DOI	10.11648/j.sjbm.20170502.11
Page(s)	45-53
Creative Commons	This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright	Copyright © The Author(s), 2017. Published by Science Publishing Group

Keywords

Strategic Assets, Competitive Capabilities, Competitive Advantage, Resource heterogeneity, Organization’s Capability and Firm Performance

References

[1]	Acedo, F. J., Barroso, C. and Galan, J. L. (2006): “The resource-based theory: Dissemination main trends”, Strategic Management Journal, 27 (7), 621-636.
[2]	Anderse´n, J. (2007): “How and what to imitate? A sequential model for the imitation of competitive advantages”, Strategic Change Journal, 16 (6), 271-279.
[3]	Ambrosini, V., Bowman, C. and Collier, N. (2009). Dynamic capabilities: an exploration of how firms renew their resource base. British Journal of Management.
[4]	Barney, J. B (2012): “Organizational culture: can it be a source of sustained competitive advantage?” Academy of Management Review. 11 (3), 656-665.
[5]	Barney, J. B. and Hesterly, W. S. (2008), Strategic Management and Competitive Advantage: Concepts and Cases, Pearson/Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.
[6]	Baumol, W. J., Litan, R. E., & Schramm, C. J. (2009). Good capitalism, bad capitalism, and the economics of growth and prosperity. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
[7]	Bruton, Garry D., Ahlstrom, D. & Li, H. (2010). Institutional Theory and Entrepreneurship: Where Are We Now and Where Do We Need to Move in the Future? 1042-2587© 2010 Baylor University.
[8]	Carmen, C. O., Fernando, M., Ramon, V. C. (2003). Intangible Resources and Strategic Orientation of Companies: An Analysis in the Spanish Context, Journal of Business Research, 56, 95-103.
[9]	Chang HR, Hou JJ (2007). Organizational change and dynamic capabilities; A case of high-tech company. Industrial Forum, 9 (1), 15-29.
[10]	Clemens, E. S. and Cook, J. (2005). Politics and institutionalism: Explaining durability and change. Annual Review of Sociology, 25: 441–466.
[11]	Daft, R. L. (2003). Organizational theory and design. Cincinnati, OH: South-Western.
[12]	Davis, G. F., & Cobb, J. A. (2010). Research in the Sociology of Organizations Chapter 2 Resource dependence theory: Past and future: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
[13]	Eisenhardt, K. M. and J. A. Martin, (2010):”Dynamic capabilities: What are they?” Strategic Management Journal, 21 (2), 1105-1121.
[14]	Foss, N. J. and Knudsen, T. (2009). The Resource-Based Tangle: Towards a Sustained Explanation of Competitive Advantage, Institute for Industry Economy, working paper 2008-9.
[15]	Galbreath J. (2004). Which Resources Matter The Most to Firm Success? An Exploratory Study of Resource-based Theory, Technovation.
[16]	Helfat, C. E., and Raubitschek, R. S. (2007). Product sequencing: Co-evolution of knowledge, capabilities and products. Strategic Management Journal, 21 (10-11): 961-980.
[17]	Hessels, J. & Terjesen, S. (2010). 'Resource dependency and institutional theory perspectives on direct and indirect export choices.' Small Business Economics, 34: 2, 203-20.
[18]	Johanson, J. Vahlne, J-E. (2009). The Uppsala Internationalization Process Model Revisited From liability of foreignness to liability of outsidership. Journal of International Business Studies. 40 (9) s. 1411-1431.
[19]	Jepperson, R. L. (2001). The Development and Application of Sociological Neoinstitutionalism, European University Institute, Florenz, EUI Working Papers RSC 2001/5.
[20]	Lebans, M., Euske, K. (2006), “A conceptual and operational delineation of performance”, Business Performance Measurement, Cambridge University Press.
[21]	Ordaz, C. C., Alcazar, F. M., and Cabrera, R. V. (2003). Intangible Resources and Strategic Orientation of Companies, an Analysis in the Spanish Context, Journal of Business Research, 56, 95-103.
[22]	Porter, M. E (2011): “Towards a dynamic theory of strategy”, Strategic Management Journal, 12 (1), 95 – 117.
[23]	Prescott, J. E. (2011): The evolution of competitive intelligence, in Hussey, D. E. (Ed.), International Review of Strategic Management, Wiley, Chichester. NY.
[24]	Rainbird, M. (2010):”A framework for operations management: the value chain”, International Journal of Physical Distribution and Logistics Management, 34 (2), 12-25.
[25]	Santangelo, G. and Meyer, K. E. (2011). ‘Extending the internationalization process model: increases and decreases of MNE commitment in emerging economies’. Journal of International Business Studies, 42, 894-909.
[26]	Swink, M., & Song, M. (2007). Effects of marketing-manufacturing integration on new product development time and competitive advantage. Journal of Operations Management, 25, 203-217.
[27]	Teece DJ (2007). Explicating dynamic capabilities: the nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance, Strategic Management Journal, 28 (13): 1319-50.
[28]	Woiceshyn J, Daellenbach U (2005). Integrative capability and technology adoption: evidence from oil firms. Industrial and Corporate Change, 14 (2), 307.
[29]	Zahra S, Sapienza H, Davidsson P (2006). Entrepreneurship and dynamic capabilities: a review, model and research agenda, Journal of Management Studies, 43, pp. 917–955.
[30]	Zahra, S. A. and George, G. (2002). Absorptive capacity: A review, reconcepualisation, and extension. Academy of Management Review, 27 (2): 185-203.

Cite This Article

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Justus Kyengo, James Kilika. (2017). Towards a Theoretical Model for Strategic Assets, Competitive Capabilities and Firm Performance: A Research Agenda. Science Journal of Business and Management, 5(2), 45-53. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.sjbm.20170502.11

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Justus Kyengo; James Kilika. Towards a Theoretical Model for Strategic Assets, Competitive Capabilities and Firm Performance: A Research Agenda. Sci. J. Bus. Manag. 2017, 5(2), 45-53. doi: 10.11648/j.sjbm.20170502.11

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Justus Kyengo, James Kilika. Towards a Theoretical Model for Strategic Assets, Competitive Capabilities and Firm Performance: A Research Agenda. Sci J Bus Manag. 2017;5(2):45-53. doi: 10.11648/j.sjbm.20170502.11

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.sjbm.20170502.11,
  author = {Justus Kyengo and James Kilika},
  title = {Towards a Theoretical Model for Strategic Assets, Competitive Capabilities and Firm Performance: A Research Agenda},
  journal = {Science Journal of Business and Management},
  volume = {5},
  number = {2},
  pages = {45-53},
  doi = {10.11648/j.sjbm.20170502.11},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.sjbm.20170502.11},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.sjbm.20170502.11},
  abstract = {Each firm faces a unique set of competitors when similarities among products and resources are considered to identify competitors. Despite much debate in the strategy literature on strategic assets, competitive capabilities and firm performance, little consensus has been generated. Thus, the gap the current paper seeks to fill. The study’s objectives are as follows; to review the extant theoretical literature on strategic assets, competitive capabilities and firm performance, to review the extant empirical literature on strategic assets, competitive capabilities and firm performance, to identify the gaps in literature that will help in understanding the relationship between strategic assets, competitive capabilities and firm performance and to propose a theoretical framework based on the identified theoretical and empirical gaps. This study will be important in terms of empirical enhancement since past studies have limitation of the empirical research on strategic assets and competitiveness in regards to being imperfect comparability of results across different studies using different variables (features) describing competitiveness. This paper contributes to the theoretical research on strategic assets, competitive capabilities and firm performance not only by the synthesis of old and new writings as well as the findings of the exploratory studies, but also by concept synthesis. Since the concept of strategic assets and competitive capability can be reported to individual product/service, enterprise/farm, industry, economic sector, region, nation or international economic blocks, the attempts towards creating one common definition of strategic assets, competitive capabilities seem to be doomed to fail. This study is significance because it will be used in the developing of government policies on strategic assets, competitive capabilities and its links to performance which requires an understanding of the major factors that facilitate or impede firms’ ability to compete. These factors can, however, differ depending on a country, region or industry. This study will facilitate polices on public spending and taxes, exchange rates, interest rates, and government regulatory activities as some of the examples of key macroeconomic determinants of competitiveness.},
 year = {2017}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - Towards a Theoretical Model for Strategic Assets, Competitive Capabilities and Firm Performance: A Research Agenda
AU  - Justus Kyengo
AU  - James Kilika
Y1  - 2017/03/09
PY  - 2017
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.sjbm.20170502.11
DO  - 10.11648/j.sjbm.20170502.11
T2  - Science Journal of Business and Management
JF  - Science Journal of Business and Management
JO  - Science Journal of Business and Management
SP  - 45
EP  - 53
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2331-0634
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.sjbm.20170502.11
AB  - Each firm faces a unique set of competitors when similarities among products and resources are considered to identify competitors. Despite much debate in the strategy literature on strategic assets, competitive capabilities and firm performance, little consensus has been generated. Thus, the gap the current paper seeks to fill. The study’s objectives are as follows; to review the extant theoretical literature on strategic assets, competitive capabilities and firm performance, to review the extant empirical literature on strategic assets, competitive capabilities and firm performance, to identify the gaps in literature that will help in understanding the relationship between strategic assets, competitive capabilities and firm performance and to propose a theoretical framework based on the identified theoretical and empirical gaps. This study will be important in terms of empirical enhancement since past studies have limitation of the empirical research on strategic assets and competitiveness in regards to being imperfect comparability of results across different studies using different variables (features) describing competitiveness. This paper contributes to the theoretical research on strategic assets, competitive capabilities and firm performance not only by the synthesis of old and new writings as well as the findings of the exploratory studies, but also by concept synthesis. Since the concept of strategic assets and competitive capability can be reported to individual product/service, enterprise/farm, industry, economic sector, region, nation or international economic blocks, the attempts towards creating one common definition of strategic assets, competitive capabilities seem to be doomed to fail. This study is significance because it will be used in the developing of government policies on strategic assets, competitive capabilities and its links to performance which requires an understanding of the major factors that facilitate or impede firms’ ability to compete. These factors can, however, differ depending on a country, region or industry. This study will facilitate polices on public spending and taxes, exchange rates, interest rates, and government regulatory activities as some of the examples of key macroeconomic determinants of competitiveness.
VL  - 5
IS  - 2
ER  -

Copy | Download

Author Information

Justus Kyengo

Department of Business Administration, Kenyatta University, Nairobi, Kenya
James Kilika

Department of Business Administration, Kenyatta University, Nairobi, Kenya

Download PDF

Sections

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Justus Kyengo, James Kilika. (2017). Towards a Theoretical Model for Strategic Assets, Competitive Capabilities and Firm Performance: A Research Agenda. Science Journal of Business and Management, 5(2), 45-53. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.sjbm.20170502.11

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Justus Kyengo; James Kilika. Towards a Theoretical Model for Strategic Assets, Competitive Capabilities and Firm Performance: A Research Agenda. Sci. J. Bus. Manag. 2017, 5(2), 45-53. doi: 10.11648/j.sjbm.20170502.11

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Justus Kyengo, James Kilika. Towards a Theoretical Model for Strategic Assets, Competitive Capabilities and Firm Performance: A Research Agenda. Sci J Bus Manag. 2017;5(2):45-53. doi: 10.11648/j.sjbm.20170502.11

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.sjbm.20170502.11,
  author = {Justus Kyengo and James Kilika},
  title = {Towards a Theoretical Model for Strategic Assets, Competitive Capabilities and Firm Performance: A Research Agenda},
  journal = {Science Journal of Business and Management},
  volume = {5},
  number = {2},
  pages = {45-53},
  doi = {10.11648/j.sjbm.20170502.11},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.sjbm.20170502.11},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.sjbm.20170502.11},
  abstract = {Each firm faces a unique set of competitors when similarities among products and resources are considered to identify competitors. Despite much debate in the strategy literature on strategic assets, competitive capabilities and firm performance, little consensus has been generated. Thus, the gap the current paper seeks to fill. The study’s objectives are as follows; to review the extant theoretical literature on strategic assets, competitive capabilities and firm performance, to review the extant empirical literature on strategic assets, competitive capabilities and firm performance, to identify the gaps in literature that will help in understanding the relationship between strategic assets, competitive capabilities and firm performance and to propose a theoretical framework based on the identified theoretical and empirical gaps. This study will be important in terms of empirical enhancement since past studies have limitation of the empirical research on strategic assets and competitiveness in regards to being imperfect comparability of results across different studies using different variables (features) describing competitiveness. This paper contributes to the theoretical research on strategic assets, competitive capabilities and firm performance not only by the synthesis of old and new writings as well as the findings of the exploratory studies, but also by concept synthesis. Since the concept of strategic assets and competitive capability can be reported to individual product/service, enterprise/farm, industry, economic sector, region, nation or international economic blocks, the attempts towards creating one common definition of strategic assets, competitive capabilities seem to be doomed to fail. This study is significance because it will be used in the developing of government policies on strategic assets, competitive capabilities and its links to performance which requires an understanding of the major factors that facilitate or impede firms’ ability to compete. These factors can, however, differ depending on a country, region or industry. This study will facilitate polices on public spending and taxes, exchange rates, interest rates, and government regulatory activities as some of the examples of key macroeconomic determinants of competitiveness.},
 year = {2017}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - Towards a Theoretical Model for Strategic Assets, Competitive Capabilities and Firm Performance: A Research Agenda
AU  - Justus Kyengo
AU  - James Kilika
Y1  - 2017/03/09
PY  - 2017
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.sjbm.20170502.11
DO  - 10.11648/j.sjbm.20170502.11
T2  - Science Journal of Business and Management
JF  - Science Journal of Business and Management
JO  - Science Journal of Business and Management
SP  - 45
EP  - 53
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2331-0634
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.sjbm.20170502.11
AB  - Each firm faces a unique set of competitors when similarities among products and resources are considered to identify competitors. Despite much debate in the strategy literature on strategic assets, competitive capabilities and firm performance, little consensus has been generated. Thus, the gap the current paper seeks to fill. The study’s objectives are as follows; to review the extant theoretical literature on strategic assets, competitive capabilities and firm performance, to review the extant empirical literature on strategic assets, competitive capabilities and firm performance, to identify the gaps in literature that will help in understanding the relationship between strategic assets, competitive capabilities and firm performance and to propose a theoretical framework based on the identified theoretical and empirical gaps. This study will be important in terms of empirical enhancement since past studies have limitation of the empirical research on strategic assets and competitiveness in regards to being imperfect comparability of results across different studies using different variables (features) describing competitiveness. This paper contributes to the theoretical research on strategic assets, competitive capabilities and firm performance not only by the synthesis of old and new writings as well as the findings of the exploratory studies, but also by concept synthesis. Since the concept of strategic assets and competitive capability can be reported to individual product/service, enterprise/farm, industry, economic sector, region, nation or international economic blocks, the attempts towards creating one common definition of strategic assets, competitive capabilities seem to be doomed to fail. This study is significance because it will be used in the developing of government policies on strategic assets, competitive capabilities and its links to performance which requires an understanding of the major factors that facilitate or impede firms’ ability to compete. These factors can, however, differ depending on a country, region or industry. This study will facilitate polices on public spending and taxes, exchange rates, interest rates, and government regulatory activities as some of the examples of key macroeconomic determinants of competitiveness.
VL  - 5
IS  - 2
ER  -

Copy | Download