The Experts below are selected from a list of 61443 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Stuart L. Hart - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Invited Editorial: A Natural-Resource-Based View of the Firm Fifteen Years After
Journal of Management, 2010Co-Authors: Stuart L. Hart, Glen DowellAbstract:The authors revisit Hart’s natural-Resource-Based View (NRBV) of the firm and summarize progress that has been made in testing elements of that theory and reevaluate the NRBV in light of a number of important developments that have emerged in recent years in both the Resource-Based View literature and in research on sustainable enterprise. First, the authors consider how the NRBV can both benefit from recent work in dynamic capabilities and can itself inform such work. Second, they reView recent research in the areas of clean technology and business at the base of the pyramid and suggest how the NRBV can help inform research on the Resources and capabilities needed to enter and succeed in these domains.
-
A Natural-Resource-Based View of the Firm
Academy of Management Review, 1995Co-Authors: Stuart L. HartAbstract:Historically, management theory has ignored the constraints imposed by the biophysical (natural) environment. Building upon Resource-Based theory, this article attempts to fill this void by proposing a natural-Resource-Based View of the firm—a theory of competitive advantage Based upon the firm's relationship to the natural environment. It is composed of three interconnected strategies: pollution prevention, product stewardship, and sustainable development. Propositions are advanced for each of these strategies regarding key Resource requirements and their contributions to sustained competitive advantage.
Manmohan S. Sodhi - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Conceptualizing Social Responsibility in Operations via Stakeholder Resource-Based View
Production and Operations Management, 2015Co-Authors: Manmohan S. SodhiAbstract:To conceptualize social responsibility for operations management (OM) research, we consider the corporate social responsibility, sustainability, and the bottom-of-the-pyramid approaches and argue that we need to study operations through a social responsibility lens rather than to classify operations as being socially responsible or not. There are three challenges to developing such a lens: the level of analysis, the multitude of objectives, and the theoretical underpinnings. We propose a ‘stakeholder Resource-Based View’ (SRBV) building on Resource-Based View, stakeholder theory, and utility theory to address these challenges, treating all stakeholders on a par. The different stakeholders seek to maximize their own (expected) utility, with different drivers shaping their preferences, using their respective Resources, routines and dynamic capabilities. SRBV affords a descriptive framework for qualitative research, an instrumental framework for empirical research, and a normative framework for analytical research. It enables tackling many of the opportunities for OM research, some of which we outline.
-
conceptualizing social responsibility in operations via stakeholder Resource Based View
Production and Operations Management, 2015Co-Authors: Manmohan S. SodhiAbstract:We seek to conceptualize social responsibility for operations management (OM) research to develop a social responsibility lens through which to View operations. To do so, we first consider the corporate social responsibility, sustainability, as well as the bottom-ofthe-pyramid and shared value approaches and identify three challenges to developing such a lens: selecting the level of analysis, tackling the huge multitude of objectives, and developing theoretical underpinnings. We then propose a ‘stakeholder Resource-Based View’ (SRBV) building on Resource-Based View, stakeholder theory, and utility theory to address these challenges. Under SRBV, all stakeholders are treated on a par with each other. These different stakeholders are all presumed to seek maximizing their respective (expected) utility, with different drivers shaping their preferences and do so they use their respective Resources, routines and dynamic capabilities. SRBV provides (a) a descriptive framework for qualitative research, (b) an instrumental framework for empirical research, and (c) a normative framework for analytical research. It enables tackling many opportunities for OM research to do with social responsibility and we outline some of these in each of the three types of research methodologies.
Jay B. Barney - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Text and metatext in the Resource‐Based View
Human Resource Management Journal, 2016Co-Authors: Jay B. Barney, Alison MackeyAbstract:This paper distinguishes between text and metatext in the Resource-Based View (RBV) – that is, the actual words and logic fundamental to the RBV (the text) and the traditions, interpretations and applications of the theory (the metatext). It argues that Kaufman's (2015) criticism of the RBV as applied to strategic human Resource management actually focuses on RBV metatext and not text. Indeed, unlike some RBV metatext, RBV text actually has a great deal to say about research and practice in strategic human Resource management.
-
The Resource-Based View of the firm: Ten years after 1991
Journal of Management, 2001Co-Authors: Jay B. Barney, Mike Wright, David J. KetchenAbstract:At present, the Resource-Based View of the firm is perhaps the most influential framework for understanding strategic management. In this editor’s introduction, we briefly describe the contributions to knowledge provided by the commentaries and articles contained in this issue. In addition, we outline some additional areas of research wherein the Resource-Based View can be gainfully deployed.
-
Resource-Based theories of competitive advantage: A ten-year retrospective on the Resource-Based View
Journal of Management, 2001Co-Authors: Jay B. BarneyAbstract:The Resource-Based View can be positioned relative to at least three theoretical traditions: SCP-Based theories of industry determinants of firm performance, neo-classical microeconomics, and evolutionary economics. In the 1991 article, only the first of these ways of positioning the ResourceBased View is explored. This article briefly discusses some of the implications of positioning the Resource-Based View relative to these other two literatures; it also discusses some of the empirical implications of each of these different Resource-Based theories.
-
EditorialThe Resource-Based View of the firm: Ten years after 1991
Journal of Management, 2001Co-Authors: Jay B. Barney, Mike Wright, David J. KetchenAbstract:At present, the Resource-Based View of the firm is perhaps the most influential framework for understanding strategic management. In this editor’s introduction, we briefly describe the contributions to knowledge provided by the commentaries and articles contained in this issue. In addition, we outline some additional areas of research wherein the Resource-Based View can be gainfully deployed.
Joseph T. Mahoney - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
entrepreneurship subjectivism and the Resource Based View towards a new synthesis
Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 2008Co-Authors: Nicolai J. Foss, Peter G. Klein, Yasemin Y. Kor, Joseph T. MahoneyAbstract:This paper maintains that the consistent application of subjectivism helps to reconcile contemporary entrepreneurship theory with strategic management research in general, and the Resource-Based View in particular. The paper synthesizes theoretical insights from Austrian economics and Penrose's (1959) Resources approach, arguing that entrepreneurship is inherently subjective and firm specific. This new synthesis describes how entrepreneurship is manifested in teams, and is driven by both heterogeneity of managerial mental models and shared team experiences.
-
Edith Penrose's (1959) Contributions to the Resource‐Based View of Strategic Management
Journal of Management Studies, 2004Co-Authors: Joseph T. MahoneyAbstract:We argue that Rugman and Verbeke (2002) underestimate the importance of Penrose's (1959) contributions to the modern Resource-Based View of the firm. In particular, we take issue with Rugman and Verbeke's (2002) arguments concerning Penrose's (1959) contributions to our knowledge of: (1) the "creation" of competitive advantage, (2) "sustaining" competitive advantage, (3) isolating mechanisms, and (4) competitive advantage and economic rents. In our response, we show that Penrose (1959) has both "directly" and indirectly influenced the modern Resource-Based View of strategic management. Copyright Blackwell Publishing Ltd 2004.
-
edith penrose s 1959 contributions to the Resource Based View of strategic management
Journal of Management Studies, 2004Co-Authors: Yasemin Y. Kor, Joseph T. MahoneyAbstract:ABSTRACT We argue that Rugman and Verbeke (2002) underestimate the importance of Penrose's (1959) contributions to the modern Resource-Based View of the firm. In particular, we take issue with Rugman and Verbeke's (2002) arguments concerning Penrose's (1959) contributions to our knowledge of: (1) the creation of competitive advantage, (2) sustaining competitive advantage, (3) isolating mechanisms, and (4) competitive advantage and economic rents. In our response, we show that Penrose (1959) has both directly and indirectly influenced the modern Resource-Based View of strategic management.
-
The Resource-Based View within the conversation of strategic management
Southern Medical Journal, 1992Co-Authors: Joseph T. Mahoney, J. Rajendran PandianAbstract:The Resource-Based approach is an emerging framework that has stimulated discussion between scholars from three research perspectives. First, the Resource-Based theory incorporates traditional strategy insights concerning a firm's distinctive competencies and heterogeneous capabilities. The Resource-Based approach also provides value-added theoretical propositions that are testable within the diversification strategy literature. Second, the Resource-Based View fits comfortably within the organizational economics paradigm. Third, the Resource-Based View is complementary to industrial organization research. The Resource-Based View provides a framework for increasing dialogue between scholars from these important research areas within the conversation of strategic management. Resource-Based studies that give simultaneous attention to each of these research programs are suggested.
Glen Dowell - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Invited Editorial: A Natural-Resource-Based View of the Firm Fifteen Years After
Journal of Management, 2010Co-Authors: Stuart L. Hart, Glen DowellAbstract:The authors revisit Hart’s natural-Resource-Based View (NRBV) of the firm and summarize progress that has been made in testing elements of that theory and reevaluate the NRBV in light of a number of important developments that have emerged in recent years in both the Resource-Based View literature and in research on sustainable enterprise. First, the authors consider how the NRBV can both benefit from recent work in dynamic capabilities and can itself inform such work. Second, they reView recent research in the areas of clean technology and business at the base of the pyramid and suggest how the NRBV can help inform research on the Resources and capabilities needed to enter and succeed in these domains.
