The dynamic interplay of capability strengths and weaknesses: investigating, страница 11

Because our theory pertained to competitive advantage, a relative construct (Hitt et al., 2009), we utilized a relative performance measure as suggested by the literature (Arend, 2003). To calculate the relative performance measure, we industry centered value-added on three-digit industry classifications. Moreover, we lagged this variable to correspond to firm performance two years after the year the survey was completed.[5]

Importantly, these performance data were not collected via the Sesame questionnaire, but are part of the Banque de France’s ongoing and regular financial data collection efforts for France’s industrial firms. Therefore, common method bias is not a concern with these data. Furthermore, the Banque audits the figures where necessary to ensure their accuracy, increasing their validity. Finally, performance measures are not available for the second survey because they are still in the process of being centralized and validated by the Banque de France.

To test the hypotheses related to changes in strength and weakness sets, we compared firms’ scores for their strength and weakness sets (described later) from the second survey to the corresponding scores from the first survey to produce the variables: Strength Set Change and Weakness Set Change.[6] These variables represent the difference between the strength (weakness) set at the time of the second survey and the strength (weakness) set at the time of the first survey. Again, these figures were computed for the 1,578 firms that were surveyed twice.

Independent variables

The variables of primary interest to the performance hypotheses are sets of strengths and weaknesses. Importantly, these variables represent a much larger number of capabilities than most prior research has examined. Specifically, we obtained data from the Sesame questionnaire which measures the relative value of six capabilities. The CEO (i.e., respondent) was asked to evaluate each focal capability against his/her firm’s major competitors’ functionally similar capabilities.[7] Respondents evaluated the focal capability as in a weaker position (−2), slightly weaker position (−1), average position (0), slightly stronger position (1), or among the strongest positions (2). The individual capabilities examined included: cost management, product reliability, product innovation, process innovation, brand management, and manufacturing flexibility. While this is not an exhaustive list, these capabilities are highly important for creating value in industrial firms, are output driven, and represent the major capabilities of the firms surveyed.

The strength set variable summarizes firm capabilities with values greater than major rivals, while the weakness set variable summarizes firm capabilities with values less than major rivals. To separate strengths from weaknesses, we utilized spline functions, which model differences in relationships above and below a critical threshold level (Greene, 2003; Greve, 2003). Importantly, the critical threshold was set at zero per item response.[8]Thus, each capability score above parity was coded as a capability strength, while each capability score below parity was coded as a capability weakness. A value of 0 indicates a lack of strength or weakness and, while important to the firm, does not contribute to either set.

Second, following our theoretical approach emphasizing firms’ sets of strengths and weaknesses in a competitive market, we used Deephouse’s (1999) approach to compute strength and weakness set scores. The following equation illustrates the calculation of firm f’s strength set, where Saf is the strength score for capability a for firm f, Ave(Sai) is the average strength score for capability a in industry i, and SD(Sai) is its standard deviation. Industry is based on the three-digit level. The corresponding weakness equation was utilized to compute each firm’s weakness set score; before computing this variable the absolute value of the raw weakness scores was obtained.