Search results

Ideas from microeconomics, market‐positioning theory and resource‐based theory have been brought together to develop a framework for discussing firm competitiveness and survival.

Propositions about the nature of scale economies, time, resource imitability and customer‐perceived benefits are used to provide a basis for the analysis of firms and their markets. The structures of markets and the impact of innovation and environment on these structures are discussed.

A number of hypotheses are advanced. When movements in consumer perceptions and technology are slow and predictable, leading firms may have developed enough resource capital to remain dominant. When they are not, opportunities for market leadership changes occur.

A conclusion is that strategic management should involve the study of firms in the context of their market situation. Market‐based case studies should seek to understand how markets evolve over time by tracking changes in key variables.

The paper outlines factors that firms’ managers need to take into account in order to evaluate their relationships with their competitors. How these relationships impact on industry structure and the long‐term equilibrium that would result if these relationships remain unchanged is discussed.

A contribution to thinking about research and practical strategic management longitudinally is proposed. The approach emphasises the importance of relationships between firms and the factors that may dynamically change those relationships.

The purpose of this paper is to develop a model using resource‐based‐view theories of competitive advantage for application to the private sector as a basis for understanding managers' perceptions of high performance in a local authority. The model is evaluated as a substantive case against an English local authority.

The study investigated senior managers' perceptions of the capabilities and assets that their organisation required to achieve high performance relative to government performance criteria. Data were collected using a questionnaire that asked managers to indicate their notions of drivers for change. The key resources required for successful responses to these drivers were related to one of the four types of generic capabilities a priori outlined in the model, i.e. regeneration, leverage, transformational and privileged access. Subsequent interviews with the respondents explored further issues in greater depth.

Managers indicated their beliefs that “capabilities” based on “intangible organisational‐assets” are necessary for “sustained high‐performance”. This is consistent with the model proposed. Nevertheless, the findings also indicated that some assets, historically based, such as “reputation” and “partnerships”, are also important.

The paper critically demonstrates the usefulness of resource‐based‐view and dynamic‐capability theories when applied in a new context, i.e. English local government.

The paper reveals significant organisational development and senior management leadership issues for English county councils, in this case, in developing and sustaining high performance.

The paper is innovative in reviewing, developing and applying a resource‐based‐dynamic‐capability model to research local government organisational management.

The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate the relationship between three concepts: organisations, transformability and the dynamics of strategy. These three concepts together with their interrelationships are central in explaining the life cycle of organisations, their survival and renewal.

The development of this explanation has been based on bringing together a diversity of perspectives. Each perspective provides a horizon of understanding by directing attention in a particular way. The benefits of this approach are that it avoids the pitfalls of one‐dimensionalism. This approach more accurately reflects the multi‐faceted reality within which organisations operate.

Discusses, compares and contextualises the findings and approaches of the papers in this special issue.

The perspectives considered represent a small sample of the diversity that exists. However, this sample as serves a starting‐point in developing a wider, more holistic debate that aims to bring theory and practice together.