Strategic Management Journal. Antecedents of temporary advantage, страница 2

6.The field of strategic management without sustainable advantage

7.SUMMARY OF EXTANT WORK ON TEMPORARY ADVANTAGE

8.THIS SPECIAL ISSUE'S UNIQUE CONTRIBUTIONS TO TEMPORARY ADVANTAGE

9.THE FUTURE OF TEMPORARY VERSUS SUSTAINABLE ADVANTAGE: MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE OR SIMULTANEOUSLY COEXISTENT?

10.REFERENCES

The increasing temporary nature of advantages has been attributed to numerous causes, including technological change, globalization, industry convergence, aggressive competitive behavior, deregulation, the privatization movement stimulated by governments or hedge funds, government subsidies, the rise of China, India, and other emerging countries, the increase in availability of patient venture capital money, terrorism, global political instability, the pressure of short-term incentives for senior executives to produce results, etc. There is no evidence, however, about the real drivers of temporary competitive advantages and the increased volatility of returns. What are the endogenous antecedents of various kinds of temporary advantages? It would seem especially important to identify the extent to which a firm's own decisions, competitive actions, and behaviors undermine its advantages and what motivates such behavior? What are the exogenous antecedents of various kinds of temporary advantage? In this regard, it would seem important to study the role of industry structure and industry boundaries. For example, how does the convergence of industries and competing business models from converging industries contribute to the erosion of advantages? Furthermore, how and why do different industry structures contribute to the speed of erosion? Finally, are controllable or uncontrollable causes more important? Answers to these questions are necessary to understand whether there are ways to slow the accelerating depreciation of advantages over time and which strategic solutions are possible.

The management of temporary advantage

1.Top of page

2.Abstract

3.Antecedents of temporary advantage

4.The management of temporary advantage

5.Consequences of temporary advantage

6.The field of strategic management without sustainable advantage

7.SUMMARY OF EXTANT WORK ON TEMPORARY ADVANTAGE

8.THIS SPECIAL ISSUE'S UNIQUE CONTRIBUTIONS TO TEMPORARY ADVANTAGE

9.THE FUTURE OF TEMPORARY VERSUS SUSTAINABLE ADVANTAGE: MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE OR SIMULTANEOUSLY COEXISTENT?

10.REFERENCES

As the environment becomes more dynamic and disruptive through both exogenous and endogenous changes, it perhaps becomes appropriate to define strategy as dynamic maneuvering—moves and counter moves—rather than static positioning, such as resources, routines, capabilities, generic strategy, industry structure, strategic groups, etc. (Grimm, Lee, and Smith, 2005). When such a view is taken, the value and duration of a move perhaps lasts only as long as rivals do not outmaneuver it. The literature on the delay or rapidity of competitive response finds that industry leaders are dethroned more frequently than is commonly believed (Ferrier, Smith, and Grimm, 1999; Smith, Ferrier, and Grimm, 2001), that more aggressive firms are more successful (Ferrier, 2001; Ferrier et al., 2002) and that Red Queen competition exists whereby rival actions cut into the performance of the acting firm requiring new action to keep pace (D'Aveni, 1994; Derfus et al., 2008). This perspective suggests that firms are incentivized to take a variety of different kinds of actions to actively destroy their own and the advantages of rivals. In fact, the vigorous pursuit of a series of temporary rents becomes the enticing strategy from this viewpoint. This recalls models of strategy eventually purporting that firms do not stick with just one advantage over their lifetime (Jacobson, 1992; Mocciaro, Li Destri, and Dagnino, 2005). Such strategic behavior focuses on continuously matching the rapid evolution of the firm with a rapidly evolving environment, suggesting the relevance of the learning school (Mintzberg, Ahlstrand, and Lampel, 1998), which emphasizes how firms incorporate input from the environment and adapt over time. But is the capability of learning a frequently observed phenomenon that yields sustainable advantage or does learning stop when firms learn a successful formula and turn it into an immutable paradigm? And, how should firms learn in conditions where prior advantages are quickly eroded? The learning literature suggests there is tension between top-down or theory-driven learning based on accumulated experience over time versus bottom-up learning that is based more on the result of immediate action (Huber, 1991).