A review of empirical research on dynamic competitive strategy, страница 14

In addition, actions in the domain of competitive strategy can set the stage for corporate strategic actions, which subsequently shape organizational structure. Hagedoorn and Sadowski (1999) found this to be the case, showing that strategic alliances often evolve into mergers or acquisitions. Yet, despite the fact that Amburgey and Dacin (1994) have shown that strategy is a more powerful determinant of structure than structure is of strategy, broader studies of the structural implications of competitive strategy are missing.

Competitive strategy→Organizational resources and capabilities. Finally, researchers studying the strategy→organizational contingency link have acknowledged that strategic actions shape the evolution of a firm's stock of resources and capabilities. For example, the mobile phone manufacturer Nokia has recently announced the discontinuation of its in-house chip production. As it is no longer a core requirement of its current competitive strategy, the change will probably lead to a decline in Nokia's resources and capabilities in this domain. On the flipside, the example of Microsoft's entry into the search engine business provides an example of how a competitive strategy can require firms to extend their existing bases of resources and capabilities. Both examples are supported by the studies covered in this review. The findings present persuasive evidence that competitive strategy influences the accumulation of firm resources and capabilities, with the most prevalent focus being on R&D, sales and alliance strategies. Yeoh and Roth (1999) analyze the pharmaceutical industry and show that R&D and salesforce expenditure increase subsequent firm capabilities, which directly and indirectly influence the degree of differentiation in the marketplace. Ahuja and Katila (2004) focus on the chemical industry and show similar findings, arguing that firms engage in R&D activities in order to add new resources to prevent technological depletion. In the context of small and medium enterprises, Branzei and Vertinsky (2006) confirm this relationship, suggesting that the type of innovation strategy influences subsequent innovation capabilities.

Mowery et al. (1996) extend these findings by showing that alliances can facilitate the transfer of technological capabilities or grant access to complementary capabilities (Lorenzoni and Lipparini 1999), thereby enabling firms to augment their resource base. However, a firm's ability to access additional technological capabilities depends on the type of alliance (Dussauge et al. 2000) as well as on the firm's initial level of absorptive capacity (Mowery et al. 1996), and leads to a subsequent co-evolution of firm resources and resources within the network of partnerships. One consequence of this process is that the technology profiles of alliance partners often diverge, and firms become more technologically specialized over time (Lorenzoni and Lipparini 1999; Mowery et al. 1996). Hence, the studies included in this link pay significant attention to path dependencies in the evolution of the firm's resource base. However, both short-term timing of strategic actions and long-term pacing of strategic adaptations both still offer significant potential for an analysis of the shape of resource accumulation and depletion processes.

Suggestions for Future Research and Implications for Practice

1.Top of page

2.Abstract

3.Introduction

4.Methodology

5.Literature Review

6.Suggestions for Future Research and Implications for Practice

7.Conclusion

8.References

An Overall Evaluation of Research across Links