Microfoundations of strategic management: Toward micro–macro research in the resource-based theory

Over the last few years, a new stream of research has emerged in the field of strategic management which focuses on the analysis of its microfoundations. This line of research analyzes strategic topics examining their foundations rooted in individual actions and interactions. The main purpose of this paper is to examine this emerging literature of microfoundations, indicating its usefulness and main characteristics. Through a systematic literature review, this paper contributes to the field by identifying the main areas studied, the benefits and potential of this approach, and some limitations and criticisms. Moreover, the paper studies how the integration of micro and macro aspects in strategy research may be carried out, examining several works that use a multilevel approach. Some methodological approaches that may help to effect this integration are indicated. These aspects will be analyzed in relation to the resource-based theory.

Operationalizing the resource based view for nascent and young firms : developing scales for resource advantages and disadvantages

Principal Topic: It is well known that most new ventures suffer from a significant lack of resources, which increases the risk of failure (Shepherd, Douglas and Shanley, 2000) and makes it difficult to attract stakeholders and financing for the venture (Bhide & Stevenson, 1999). The Resource-Based View (RBV) (Barney, 1991; Wernerfelt, 1984) is a dominant theoretical base increasingly drawn on within Strategic Management. While theoretical contributions applying RBV in the domain of entrepreneurship can arguably be traced back to Penrose (1959), there has been renewed attention recently (e.g. Alvarez & Busenitz, 2001; Alvarez & Barney, 2004). This said, empirical work is in its infancy. In part, this may be due to a lack of well developed measuring instruments for testing ideas derived from RBV. The purpose of this study is to develop a measurement scales that can serve to assist such empirical investigations. In so doing we will try to overcome three deficiencies in current empirical measures used for the application of RBV to the entrepreneurship arena. First, measures for resource characteristics and configurations associated with typical competitive advantages found in entrepreneurial firms need to be developed. These include such things as alertness and industry knowledge (Kirzner, 1973), flexibility (Ebben & Johnson, 2005), strong networks (Lee et al., 2001) and within knowledge intensive contexts, unique technical expertise (Wiklund and Shepard, 2003). Second, the RBV has the important limitations of being relatively static and modelled on large, established firms. In that context, traditional RBV focuses on competitive advantages. However, newly established firms often face disadvantages, especially those associated with the liabilities of newness (Aldrich & Auster, 1986). It is therefore important in entrepreneurial contexts to expand to an investigation of responses to competitive disadvantage through an RBV lens. Conversely, recent research has suggested that resource constraints actually have a positive effect on firm growth and performance under some circumstances (e.g., George, 2005; Katila & Shane, 2005; Mishina et al., 2004; Mosakowski, 2002; cf. also Baker & Nelson, 2005). Third, current empirical applications of RBV measured levels or amounts of particular resources available to a firm. They infer that these resources deliver firms competitive advantage by establishing a relationship between these resource levels and performance (e.g. via regression on profitability). However, there is the opportunity to directly measure the characteristics of resource configurations that deliver competitive advantage, such as Barney´s well known VRIO (Valuable, Rare, Inimitable and Organized) framework (Barney, 1997). Key Propositions and Methods: The aim of our study is to develop and test scales for measuring resource advantages (and disadvantages) and inimitability for entrepreneurial firms. The study proceeds in three stages. The first stage developed our initial scales based on earlier literature. Where possible, we adapt scales based on previous work. The first block of the scales related to the level of resource advantages and disadvantages. Respondents were asked the degree to which each resource category represented an advantage or disadvantage relative to other businesses in their industry on a 5 point response scale: Major Disadvantage, Slight Disadvantage, No Advantage or Disadvantage, Slight Advantage and Major Advantage. Items were developed as follows. Network capabilities (3 items) were adapted from (Madsen, Alsos, Borch, Ljunggren & Brastad, 2006). Knowledge resources marketing expertise / customer service (3 items) and technical expertise (3 items) were adapted from Wiklund and Shepard (2003). flexibility (2 items), costs (4 items) were adapted from JIBS B97. New scales were developed for industry knowledge / alertness (3 items) and product / service advantages. The second block asked the respondent to nominate the most important resource advantage (and disadvantage) of the firm. For the advantage, they were then asked four questions to determine how easy it would be for other firms to imitate and/or substitute this resource on a 5 point likert scale. For the disadvantage, they were asked corresponding questions related to overcoming this disadvantage. The second stage involved two pre-tests of the instrument to refine the scales. The first was an on-line convenience sample of 38 respondents. The second pre-test was a telephone interview with a random sample of 31 Nascent firms and 47 Young firms (< 3 years in operation) generated using a PSED method of randomly calling households (Gartner et al. 2004). Several items were dropped or reworded based on the pre-tests. The third stage (currently in progress) is part of Wave 1 of CAUSEE (Nascent Firms) and FEDP (Young Firms), a PSED type study being conducted in Australia. The scales will be tested and analysed with a random sample of approximately 700 Nascent and Young firms respectively. In addition, a judgement sample of approximately 100 high potential businesses in each category will be included. Findings and Implications: The paper will report the results of the main study (stage 3 – currently data collection is in progress) will allow comparison of the level of resource advantage / disadvantage across various sub-groups of the population. Of particular interest will be a comparison of the high potential firms with the random sample. Based on the smaller pre-tests (N=38 and N=78) the factor structure of the items confirmed the distinctiveness of the constructs. The reliabilities are within an acceptable range: Cronbach alpha ranged from 0.701 to 0.927. The study will provide an opportunity for researchers to better operationalize RBV theory in studies within the domain of entrepreneurship. This is a fundamental requirement for the ability to test hypotheses derived from RBV in systematic, large scale research studies.

Making sense of the resource-based view?

The Resource Based View (RBV) of strategic management has been criticized for relying on inconsistent assumptions of rationality, and mutually inconsistent underlying hypotheses. In this paper, I outline how these critiques can be addressed by re-building RBV on a sense-making foundation. The core notions from sense-making of bounded cognition, retrospective sense-making, incrementalism, loose coupling, causal maps and organizational paradigm are introduced. These are then used to propose a re-construction of key RBV constructs, extending some conceptual discussions, and providing for a conceptually consistent formulation. Implications for the use of RBV as a theory and future research are discussed.

Individual decision-making by top executives as a valuable resource for strategic management – A resource-based view and dynamic capability approach

Strategy is highly important for organisational success and the achievement of competitive advantage. Strategy is dynamic and it depends on accurate individual decision-making from medium and high-level managers and executives. Since managers always formulate strategy, its formulation depends mostly on their assertive decisions. Making good decisions is a complex task, even more in today’s business world where a large quantity of information and a dynamic environment forces people to decide without having complete information. As Shafir, Simonson, & Tversky (1993) point out, "the making of decisions, both big and small, is often difficult because of uncertainty and conflict". In this paper the author will explain a basic theoretical framework about top manager's individual decision-making, showing how complex the process of making high-impact decisions is; then, he will compare this theory with one of the most important streams in strategic management, the Resource-Based View (RBV) of the firm. Finally, within the context of individual decision-making and the RBV stream, the author will show how individual decision makers in top management positions constitute a valuable, rare, non-imitable and non-substitutable resource that provides sustained competitive advantage.

Linking resource acquisition and development processes to resource-based advantage : bricolage and the resource-based view

We investigate the relationship between bricolage – an approach to a firm’s resource development – and the firm’s strategic resource position as depicted by the resource-based view (RBV). The RBV is concerned with the resource characteristics of firms that lead to sustainable competitive advantage. Alternatively, bricolage is a process of resource use and development characterised by using resources at hand, recombining resources and making do. Based on a sample of approximately 700 nascent and 700 young firms we find that higher levels of bricolage behaviour tend to lead to more advantageous strategic resource positions.

Linking resource acquisition and development processes to resource-based advantage : bricolage and the resource-based view

We investigate the relationship between bricolage – an approach to a firm’s resource development – and the firm’s strategic resource position as depicted by the resource-based view (RBV). The RBV is concerned with the resource characteristics of firms that lead to sustainable competitive advantage. Alternatively, bricolage is a process of resource use and development characterised by using resources at hand, recombining resources and making do. Based on a sample of 1,329 entrepreneurial start-ups we find that higher levels of bricolage behaviour tend to lead to more advantageous strategic resource positions.

The success of the diversified farm : resource-based view

Farms and rural areas have many specific valuable resources that can be used to create non-agricultural products and services. Most of the research regarding on-farm diversification has hitherto concentrated on business start-up or farm survival strategies. Resource allocation and also financial success have not been the primary focus of investigations as yet. In this study these specific topics were investigated i.e. resource allocation and also the financial success of diversified farms from a farm management perspective. The key question addressed in this dissertation, is how tangible and intangible resources of the diversified farm affect the financial success. This study’s theoretical background deals with resource-based theory, and also certain themes of the theory of learning organisation and other decision-making theories. Two datasets were utilised in this study. First, data were collected by postal survey in 2001 (n = 663). Second, data were collected in a follow-up survey in 2006 (n = 439). Data were analysed using multivariate data analyses and path analyses. The study results reveal that, diversified farms performed differently. Success and resources were linked. Professional and management skills affected other resources, and hence directly or indirectly influenced success per se. In the light of empirical analyses of this study, tangible and intangible resources owned by the diversified farm impacted on its financial success. The findings of this study underline the importance of skills and networks for entrepreneur(s). Practically speaking all respondents of this study used either agricultural resources for non-farm businesses or non-farm resources for agricultural enterprises. To share resources in this way was seen as a pragmatic opportunity recognised by farmers. One of the downsides of diversification might be the phenomenon of over-diversification, which can be defined as the situation in which a farm diversifies beyond its optimal limit. The empirical findings of this study reveal that capital and labour resource constrains did have adverse effects on financial success. The evidence indicates that farms that were capital and labour resource constrained in 2001 were still less profitable than their ‘no problems’ counterparts five years later.

The drivers of multinational enterprise subsidiary entrepreneurship in China: a new resource-based view perspective

This paper extends the resource-based view (RBV) of the firm, as applied to multinational enterprises (MNEs), by distinguishing between two critical resource dimensions, namely relative resource superiority (capabilities) and slack. Both dimensions, in concert with specific environmental conditions, are required to increase entrepreneurial activities. We propose distinct configurations (three-way moderation effects) of capabilities, slack, and environmental factors (i.e. dynamism and hostility) to explain entrepreneurship. Using survey data from 66 Canadian subsidiaries operating in China, we find that higher subsidiary entrepreneurship requires both HR slack and strong downstream capabilities in subsidiaries, subject to the industry environment being dynamic and benign. However, high HR slack alone, in a dynamic and benign environment, but without the presence of strong capabilities, actually triggers the fewest initiatives, with HR slack redirected from entrepreneurial experimentation towards complacency and inefficiency. This paper has major implications for MNEs seeking to increase subsidiary entrepreneurship in fast growing emerging markets.