• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Management research review >The role of firm-specific factors in the strategy-performance relationship Revisiting the resource-based view of the firm and the VRIO framework
【24h】

The role of firm-specific factors in the strategy-performance relationship Revisiting the resource-based view of the firm and the VRIO framework

机译：企业特定因素在战略绩效关系中的作用重新审视企业和VRIO框架的基于资源的观点

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Purpose - This paper aims to attempt to bring together various organisational aspects that have never been collectively investigated before in the strategic management literature. Its main objective is to examine the relationship between "strategic orientation" and "firm performance", in the light of two firm-specific factors ("distinct manufacturing capabilities" and "organisational structure"). The proposed research model of the present study is built upon the resource-based view (RBV) of the firm and the organisational aspect of the VRIO framework (the "0" from the VRIO model). Design/methodology/approach - The study proposes a newly developed research model that adopts a four-factor approach, while examining a number of direct and indirect effects. The examination of the proposed research model was made with the use of a newly developed structured questionnaire that was distributed on a sample of Greek manufacturing companies. Research hypotheses were tested using the structural equation modelling technique. The present study is explanatory (examines cause and effect relationships), deductive (tests research hypotheses), empirical (collects primary data) and quantitative (analyses quantitative data that were collected using a structured questionnaire). Findings - The empirical results suggest the coexistence of three distinct categories of effects on "firm performance": strategy or "utility" effects, depending on the content of the implemented strategy; firm-specific effects, depending on the content of the organisational resources and capabilities; and organisational effects, depending on the implemented organisational structure. More specifically, the statistical analysis underlines the significant mediating role of "strategic orientation" and the complementary role of "organisational structure". Finally, empirical results support the argument that "strategy follows structure". Research limitations/implications - The use of self-reported scales constitutes an inherent methodological limitation. Moreover, the present study lacks a longitudinal approach because it provides a static picture of the subject under consideration. Finally, the sample size of 130 manufacturing companies could raise some concerns. Despite that, previous empirical studies of the same field, published in respectable journals, were also based on similar samples. Practical implications - When examining the total (direct and indirect) effects on "firm performance", it seems that the effect of "organisational structure" is, almost, identical to the effect of "distinct manufacturing capabilities". This implies that "organisational structure" (an imitable capability) has, almost, the same contribution on "firm performance" as the manufacturing capabilities of the organisation (an inimitable capability). Thus, the practical significance of "organisational structure" is being highlighted. Originality/value - There has been little empirical research concerning the bundle of firm-specific factors that enhance the impact of strategy on business performance. Under the context of the resource-based view (RBV) of the firm, the present study examines the impact of "organisational structure" on the "strategy-capabilities-performance" relationship, something that has not been thoroughly investigated in the strategic management literature. Also, the present study proposes an alternate measure for capturing the concept of business strategy, the so-called factor of "strategic orientation". Finally, the study adopts a "reversed view" in the relationship between structure and strategy. More specifically, it postulates that "strategy follows structure" and not the opposite ("structure follows strategy"). Actually, the empirical data supported that (reversed) view, challenging the traditional approach of Chandler (1962) and calling for additional research on that ongoing dispute.
机译：目的-本文旨在尝试将战略管理文献中从未进行过集体研究的各个组织方面放在一起。它的主要目的是根据两个公司特有的因素（“不同的制造能力”和“组织结构”）来研究“战略导向”和“公司绩效”之间的关系。本研究提出的研究模型基于企业的基于资源的观点（RBV）和VRIO框架的组织方面（VRIO模型中的“ 0”）。设计/方法/方法-该研究提出了一种新开发的研究模型，该模型采用四因素方法，同​​时研究了许多直接和间接影响。使用新开发的结构化问卷调查了所提议的研究模型，该问卷已分发给希腊制造公司的样本。使用结构方程建模技术对研究假设进行了检验。本研究是解释性的（检查因果关系），演绎性（检验研究假设），经验性的（收集主要数据）和定量的（分析使用结构化问卷收集的定量数据）。调查结果-实证结果表明，对“公司绩效”的影响分为三种不同的类别：策略或“效用”效应，具体取决于实施策略的内容；公司特有的效果，取决于组织资源和能力的内容；和组织效果，具体取决于实施的组织结构。更具体地说，统计分析强调了“战略方向”的重要中介作用和“组织结构”的补充作用。最后，经验结果支持“战略遵循结构”这一论点。研究局限性/含义-使用自我报告的量表构成了方法上的固有局限性。此外，本研究缺乏纵向方法，因为它提供了所考虑对象的静态图片。最后，130家制造公司的样本量可能会引起一些担忧。尽管如此，以前在相同领域发表的经验研究也基于相似的样本。实际意义-检查“公司绩效”的总体（直接和间接）影响时，“组织结构”的影响似乎与“明显的制造能力”的影响几乎相同。这意味着“组织结构”（同等的能力）对“公司绩效”的贡献几乎与组织的制造能力（同等的能力）相同。因此，突出了“组织结构”的实际意义。原创性/价值-很少有关于增强企业战略对业务绩效影响的企业特定因素捆绑的实证研究。在企业基于资源的观点（RBV）的背景下，本研究考察了“组织结构”对“战略-能力-绩效”关系的影响，而这一点在战略管理文献中还没有被彻底研究。 。另外，本研究还提出了一种替代措施，用于捕获业务战略的概念，即所谓的“战略导向”因素。最后，该研究对结构与策略之间的关系采取了“相反的观点”。更具体地说，它假定“战略遵循结构”而不是相反（“结构遵循战略”）。实际上，经验数据支持了这种观点（相反的观点），对钱德勒（Chandler，1962）的传统方法提出了挑战，并呼吁对这一正在进行的争议进行更多的研究。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号