Skip to main content

Abstract

Recently, numerous strategy scholars have revitalized the concern with the resources and capabilities side of firms. This trend often referred to as the “resource-based perspective” (RBP), has led to a much improved understanding of firms’ diversification strategies (Montgomery and Wernerfelt 19881 Montgomery and Hariharan 1991) and of the underlying conditions for sustained competitive advantage (Barney 1991 Peteraf 1993). Furthermore, the perhaps more dynamic issue of resource- accumulation processes has been treated in some detail (Dierickx and Cool 1989). In terms of the SWOT framework—the overall idea that strategy is a matter of obtaining fit between the Strengths of the firm and the Opportunities of the environment, while simultaneously safeguarding the Weaknesses of the firm from the Threats of that environment—the RBP may be said to have investigated and added further analytical content to the “Strength-Weaknesses” part.

The authors wish to thank Cynthia Montgomery, Raffi Amit, Jim Brander, Richard Langlois, and participants at the Conference on Integrating Resource-based and Evolutionary Perspectives on Strategy in Snekkersten, Denmark, August 1993, for helpful comments, The usul disclaimers apply.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Alchian, A.A. 1950. “Uncertainty, evolution, and economic theory.” In idem. 1977. Economic Forces at Work. Indianapolis: Liberty Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Allen, R.C. 1983. “Collective invention.” Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 4: 1–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barney, J.B. 1986. “Strategic factor markets: expectations, luck and business strategy.” Management Science 32: 1231–1241.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barney, J.B. 1991. “Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage.” Journal of Management 17: 99–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, W.M., and Levinthal, D.A. 1989. “Innovation and learning: the two faces of R&D.” Economic Journal 99: 569–596.

    Google Scholar 

  • David, P.A. 1987. “Some new standards for the economics of standardization in the information age.” In Dasgupta, P. and P. Stoneman (eds.) 1987. Economic Policy and Technological Performance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dosi, G. 1982. “Technological paradigms and technological trajectories.” Research Policy 11: 147–162.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Demsetz, H. 1982. “Barriers to entry.” American Economic Review 72: 47–57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dierickx, I., and Cool, K. 1989. “Asset stock accumulation and sustainability of competitive advantage.” Management Science 35: 1504–1511.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Farrell, J., and Saloner. G. 1985. “Standardization, compatibility, and innovation.” Rand Journal of Economics 16: 70–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Geroski, P., and Vlassopoulos. 1991. “The rise and fall of a market leader: frozen foods in the UK.” Strategic Management Journal 12: 467–478.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ghemawat, P. 1991. Commitment: the dynamics of strategy. New York: The Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Langlois, R.N. 1990. “External economies and economic progress: The case of the microcomputer industry.” Mimeo, Department of Economics, University of Connecticut.

    Google Scholar 

  • Langlois, R.N. 1992. “Transaction cost economics in real time.” Industrial and Corporate Change 1: 99–127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Loasby, B. 1993. “Understanding markets.” Mimeo, Department of Economics, University of Stirling.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mansfield, E. 1985. “How rapidly does new industrial technology leak out?” Journal of Industrial Economics 34: 217–223.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • March, J. 1991. “Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning.” Organization Science 2: 1–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marshall, A. 1925. Principles of economics. 8th ed. London: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Montgomery, C. A., and Hariharan, S. 1991. “Diversified expansion by large established firms.” Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 15: 71–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Montgomery, C.A., and Wernerfelt, B. 1988. “Diversification, Ricardian rents, and Tobin’s q.” RAND Journal of Economics 19: 623–632.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, R.R., and Winter, S.G 1982. An evolutionary theory of economic change. Cambridge: Belknap Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M.E. 1980. Competitive strategy. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M.E. 1990. The competitive advantage of nations. New York: Free Press. Pyke, F., and Sengenberger, W. (eds.). 1992. Industrial districts and local economic regeneration. Geneva: International Institute for Labor Studies.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richardson, G.B. 1960. Information and investment. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richardson, G.B. 1972. “The organisation of industry.” Economic Journal 82: 883–896.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Routledge, B., and von Amsberg, J. 1994. “Endogenous social capital.” Mimeo, University of British Columbia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Russo, M. 1985. “Technical change and the industrial district: the role of interfirm relations in the growth and transformation of ceramic tile production in Italy.” Research Policy 14: 329–343.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saxonian, A. 1991. “The origins and dynamics of production networks in Silicon Valley.” Research Policy 20: 423–437.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stigler, G. 1951. “The division of labor is limited by the extent of the market.” Journal of Political Economy 59: 185–193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sugden, R. 1986. The economics of rights, cooperation, and welfare. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Teece, D.J. 1992. “Foreign investment and technological development in silicon valley.” California Management Review 34 (2): 88–106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teece, D.J., Pisano, G., and Shuen, A. 1991. “Firm capabilities, resources, and the concept of strategy.” Mimeo, University of California, Berkeley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wernerfelt, B. 1984. “A Resource-Based View of the Firm.” Strategic Management Journal 5: 171–180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Winter, S.G. 1984. “Schumpeterian competition in alternative technological regimes.” Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 5: 287–320.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1995 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Foss, N.J., Eriksen, B. (1995). Competitive Advantage and Industry Capabilities. In: Montgomery, C.A. (eds) Resource-Based and Evolutionary Theories of the Firm: Towards a Synthesis. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-2201-0_3

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-2201-0_3

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4613-5923-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4615-2201-0

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics