The Resource-Based View (Rbv) of the Firm: a Framework for Determining Competitive Heterogeneity

If a firm’s resources are both valuable and rare, a firm may achieve a competitive advantage (Newbert, 2008). A resource is considered valuable when it improves the efficiency and effectiveness of a strategy, and when it exploits external opportunities or neutralises external threats (Barney, 1991). This wording is somewhat confusing as it draws a direct connection with the environmental model, i.e. Porter’s (1985) five forces. The ‘value’ variable could therefore be rendered exogenous to the RBV (Priem and Butler, 2001). On the other hand, Peteraf (1993) praises the model for its internal focus and ability to uncover potential sources of competitive advantage which cannot be attributed to the external environment, notably because areas of value are often so difficult to identify (Newbert, 2008). The term ‘potential’ is used because not all resources have the ability to create a SCA

This article has started revolutionary thinking about what are the different forces in addition to direct competitors that affect competitive strategy of an organization and how better understanding of industry structure and these forces, also known as " Porter 's Five Forces", derive organization 's strategy to achieve sustainability and higher profitability. Author has explained the other factors that contribute for industry structure like industry growth rate, technology and innovation, external factors, government & regulations and complementary products and services. Industry structure changes while responding to changes in competitive forces. Author also discussed the framework to perform industry analysis and avoid common pitfall while conducting analysis. In this review I will summarize five competitive forces explained by Micheal E. Porter and their implication on organization 's strategy. Further, I will discuss the relevancy of Porter 's five forces framework in current scenario.

2. Capabilities - can be defined as 1) organizational capabilities – the network of organizational routines and processes that determine how efficiently and effectively the organization transforms its inputs (resources) into outputs (products including physical goods and services) and 2) dynamic capabilities – an organizations ability to build, integrate and reconfigure capabilities to address rapidly changing environments.

Barney, J. (2004). Firm resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage. Strategy: Process Content Context: an international perspective, de Wit & Meyer , 285-292.

He suggested that sustained competitive advantage derives from the resources and capabilities a firm controls that are valuable, rare, imperfectly imitable, and not substitutable. He further added that the resources and capabilities can be viewed in form of tangible and intangible assets. There are four different categories of resources financial, physical, human, and organization.

For a business to be successful and have a competitive advantage, it is important to evaluate the company’s resources and capabilities (Pitt & Koufopoulos, 2012). Resources in a company are the productive assets owned (tangible or intangible) whereas capabilities are what the company can do with this (Grant, 2010). “Establishing competitive

Competitive strategy, after Porter, came to be defined as the strategy of a business unit which seeks to achieve sustainable Competitive Advantage (SCA). The literature on strategy deems the market-based view (MBV) and the resource –based view (RBV) as two approaches to giving businesses the competitive edge they need to compete in their industries. Aside from having competitive advantage as their ultimate goal, the two approaches are also similar in the sense that they both make use of particular tools and models in their undertakings. They also differ in numerous ways,

“Porter’s five forces”: Introduction. “Porter’s five forces” is widely applied in today’s business world. Harvard Professor Michael E. Porter’s first HBR article “How competitive forces shape strategy” was published in 1979. It became revolutionary in the field of strategy. Porter’s subsequent work has brought big changes to the study of competitive strategy for corporations, regions, and nations. With assistance from his colleagues from Harvard Business School, Porter continues to update and extend his classic work, providing practical guidance for

This strategy emphasizes the use of an organization’s resources and capabilities to achieve a core competence that cannot be imitated by competitors. Furthermore, the resource based school argues that if an organization distinctively improves its internal capability; that is being able to have effective inside machinery to deliver products and services to customers, the organization will enjoy a massive advantage in the market. This school also argues that in order to have a competitive advantage, an organization must have resource and capabilities that are sophisticated to those of competitors (QuickMBA,

The second theme of recent years is the RBV of the firm, which posits that strategy (and

To begin with, heterogeneity of capabilities and resources of firms, which is explained as “enduring and systematic performance differences among relatively close rivals”, provides a foundation of the resource-based view (Song, et al.,2006). The implication of this assumption is that core competence conveys the valuable and unique feature of products to customers. The RBV disagrees with the opinion that the resources are homogeneous; if homogeneity is assumed to be essential to develop a proper strategy, the strategy can be easily copied by competitors, which will ultimately result in the dissipation of above-normal rents. Conversely, the unique and fixed resources on hand will lead to outstanding performance and ultimately turn to be a competitive advantage, under the circumstances that sustainable competitive advantage is achieved in an environment where competition does not exist.

Resources are the source of the firm’s capabilities. Resources are bundled to create organisational capabilities. Some of a firm’s resources are tangible and intangible. Tangible resources are assets that can be seen and quantified. Intangible resources include assets that typically are rooted deeply in the firm’s history and have accumulated over time. Intangible resources are relatively difficult for competitors to analyse and imitate. The four types of tangible resources are financial, organisational, physical and technological. And the three types of intangible resources are human, innovation and reputational (Hanson, D., Hitt, M., Ireland, R. D., & Hoskisson, R. E., 2011, pp. 75-78).

1) Barney, J., (1991). Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage, Journal of Management, vol. 17 (1991), no. 1, pp. 99–120.

convenience of location’ (Queensland government, 2016). As Resource-based view (RBV) theory holds that the competitive advantage and superior performance

For transforming a short-run competitive advantage into a sustained competitive advantage we require resources that are heterogeneous in nature and not perfectly mobile. This translates into valuable resources that are neither perfectly imitable nor substitutable without great effort. If these conditions are fulfilled then the bundle of resources can sustain the firm's above average returns.