The significance of Marx's value for strategy theory: competitive advantage and the issue of tautology within the resource-based view of the firm

Marxian thinking following the TSSI (Temporal Single System Interpretation) of Marx is applied to refute the allegation of a tautology in the resource-based view of the firm--paired with providing an explanation of how and why resources create value--, where resources are synonymous with Marx's categories of constant and variable capital. Refuting the allegation naturally leads to the holy grail of resource-based thinking, i.e. the question of what, conceptually, constitutes a firm's competitive advantage within the industry context. The article achieves its objectives by tying the resource-based view into Marx's theory value.

Revisiting the relationship between marketing capabilities and firm performance: The moderating role of market orientation, marketing strategy and organisational power

This paper extends original insights of resource-advantage theory (Hunt & Morgan, 1995) to a specific analysis of the moderators of the capabilities-performance relationship such as market orientation, marketing strategy and organizational power. Using established measures and a representative sample of UK firms drawn from Verhoef and Leeflang’s data (2009), our study tests new hypotheses to explain how different types of marketing capabilities contribute to firm performance. The application of resource-advantage theory advances theorising on both marketing and organisational antecedents of firm performance and the causal mechanisms by which competitive advantage is generated.

Board attributes that increase firm risk - evidence from the UK

Purpose – The aim of the paper is to identify the board attributes that significantly increase firm risk. The study aims to find if board size, percentage of non-executive directors, women on the board, a powerful CEO, equity ownership amongst executive board directors and institutional investor ownership, are associated with firm risk. This is the first study that examines which board attributes increase firm risk using a UK based sample. Design/methodology/approach – This empirical study collected secondary data from Bloomberg and Morningstar databases. The data sample is an unbalanced panel of 260 companies’ secondary data on FTSE 350 index in the UK, from 2005 to 2010. The data was statistically analysed using STATA. Findings – The study establishes the board attributes that were significantly related to firm risk. The results show that a board which can increase firm risk is one that is small in size,has high equity ownership amongst executive board directors and has high institutional investor ownership. Research limitations/implications – The governance culture and regulatory system in the UK is different from other countries. Since the data is a UK based sample, the results can lack generalisability. Practical implications – The results are useful for investors who invest in large firms, to have the knowledge about the board attributes that can increase firm risk. Regulators can also use the results to strengthen regulatory guidelines. Originality/value – This study fills the gap in knowledge in UK governance literature on the board attributes that can increase firm risk.

Do financial distress and liquidity crises affect value and size premiums?

This study investigates the impact of liquidity crises on the relationship between stock (value and size) premiums and default risk in the US market. It first examines whether financial distress can explain value and size premiums, and then, subsequently, aims to determine whether liquidity crises increase the risk of value and size premium investment strategies. The study employs a time-varying approach and a sample of US stock returns for the period between January 1982 and March 2011, a period which includes the current liquidity crisis, so as to examine the relationship between default risk, liquidity crises and value and size premiums. The findings indicate that the default premium has explanatory power for value and size and premiums, which affect firms with different characteristics. We also find that liquidity crises may actually increase the risks related to size and value premium strategies.