These principles about testing resource-based research have been applied in a wide variety of disciplines, not just strategic management. The remain- der of this chapter describes some of these tests.
1. RESOURCE-BASED RESEARCH IN STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT
Not surprisingly, to date, strategic management scholars have conducted the most empirical tests of resource-based logic. These tests examine sev- eral important assertions derived from the theory, including: (a) that ﬁrm eﬀects should be more important than industry eﬀects in deter- mining ﬁrm performance, (b) that valuable, rare, and costly to imitate resources should have a more positive impact on ﬁrm performance than other kinds of resources, (c ) that corporate strategies (including mergers, acquisitions, and diversiﬁcation) that exploit valuable, rare, and costly to imitate resources should generate greater returns than corporate strategies that exploit other kinds of resources, (d) that international strategies that exploit valuable, rare, and costly to imitate resources will outperform inter- national strategies that exploit other kinds of resources, (e) that strategic alliances that exploit valuable, rare, and costly to imitate resources will outperform other kinds of alliances, and ( f ) that there cannot be a ‘rule for riches’ derived from strategic management theory.
Industry versus ﬁrm eﬀects on ﬁrm performance
Resource-based theory suggests that ﬁrm eﬀects should have a larger impact on ﬁrm performance than industry eﬀects. The following research examines the relative impact of industry attributes and ﬁrm attributes on performance.
Initial work done by Schmalensee (1985) and Wernerfelt and Mont- gomery (1988) on industry versus ﬁrm eﬀects in explaining variance in ﬁrm performance was inconsistent with resource-based expectations. In particular, this work suggested that industry eﬀects were more important than ﬁrm eﬀects. However, in 1991, Rumelt published an article that con- tradicted these earlier ﬁndings. Rumelt (1991) argued that previous work had applied the wrong methods or had used inadequate data to evaluate the relative impact of industry and ﬁrm eﬀects on ﬁrm performance. After solving these problems, Rumelt’s results were consistent with resource- based expectations. Several authors have replicated Rumelt’s results (e.g. Brush and Bromiley 1997; McGahan and Porter 1997; Mauri and Michaels 1998). Some of these are critical of Rumelt’s ﬁndings, but primarily in terms of the small corporate eﬀect that Rumelt (1991) identiﬁed (Brush and Bromiley 1997). However, all these replications continue to document that ﬁrm eﬀects are a more important determinant of ﬁrm performance than industry eﬀects, although the relative size of these eﬀects can vary by industry.
Hansen and Wernerfelt (1989) found that ﬁrm factors explained about twice as much variance in proﬁt rates as economic factors. While Collis and Montgomery (1995) reported that where a company chooses to play will determine its proﬁtability as much as its resources. According to Karago- zoglu and Lindell (1998), motives behind internationalization of small and medium-sized technology based ﬁrms can be explained more with ﬁrm- speciﬁc characteristics rather than uniform patterns.
Other speciﬁc research on ﬁrm versus industry eﬀects includes the inﬂu- ence of environmental conditions at founding on mortality rates (Swami- nathan 1996), the impact of operating and competitive industry experi- ence (Ingram and Baum 1997), and societal impacts on the acquisition and creation of competencies (Marcus and Geﬀen 1998). Nickerson and Silverman (1998) studied the buﬀering eﬀect of high proﬁtability in the for hire trucking industry. Makadok (1998) examined sustainability of ﬁrst-mover and early-mover advantages in an industry with low barriers to entry and imitation. In addition, proactive environmental strategy and the development of competitively valuable organizational capabilities were considered by Sharma and Vredenburg (1998), and the strategic impor- tance of focusing on being diﬀerent was studied by Deephouse (1999).
Resources and ﬁrm performance
Resource-based theory suggests that valuable, rare, and costly to imitate resources can be sources of competitive advantage. This research examines a variety of diﬀerent resources that have these attributes to varying degrees and examines their impact on performance.
The bulk of empirical resource-based work in the ﬁeld of strategic man- agement has focused on identifying resources that have the attributes that resource-based theory predicts will be important for ﬁrm performance and then examining whether the predicted performance eﬀects exist. The per- formance eﬀects of a wide variety of diﬀerent types of ﬁrm resources have been examined, including a ﬁrm’s history (e.g. Collis 1991; Barnett, Greve, and Park 1994; Rao 1994), employee know-how (e.g. Hall 1992, 1993; Glunk and Wilderom 1998), its integrative capability (e.g. Henderson and Cockburn 1994), its innovativeness (e.g. Bates and Flynn 1995; McGrath et al. 1996), its culture (e.g. Moingeon et al. 1998), and its network position (e.g. Baum and Berta 1999; McEvily and Zaheer 1999), to name just a few. A wide variety of diﬀerent methods have been used to examine the performance eﬀects of ﬁrm resources including large sample surveys, small sample surveys, case studies, and simulations. Overall, results are consis- tent with resource-based expectations.
There are, however, a few studies that generate results that are inconsis- tent with resource-based expectations. For example, Poppo and Zenger’s analysis (1995) of vertical integration is more consistent with TCE than resource-based theory. Also, Sherer, Rogovsky, and Wright (1998) do sug- gest that compensation policy can have an eﬀect on cooperation among a ﬁrm’s employees, but that environmental conditions are a more important determinant of this cooperation. These and similar results suggest that the conditions under which diﬀerent resources are and are not valuable requires further development in resource-based theory (Priem and Butler 2001).
Further speciﬁc research on the impact of resources and capabilities on ﬁrm performance includes the importance of the ﬁrm-speciﬁc knowledge environment on process development (Pisano 1994), comprehension and deftness within competence developing processes (McGrath, MacMillan, and Venkataraman 1995), codifying and communicating manufacturing capabilities (Zander and Kogut 1995), and contingent combinations of ﬁrm-speciﬁc resources (Brush and Artz 1999). Miller and Shamsie (1996), in their award-winning Strategic Management Journal paper, examined the impacts of property-based and knowledge-based resources on perfor- mance in the US ﬁlm industry. Other knowledge-based research includes studies of stocks and ﬂows of organizational knowledge (De Carolis and Deeds 1999), the negative impacts of nonlocal learning (Greve 1999), integration of knowledge in product development (Hoopes and Postrel 1999), the transfer of intellectual property from universities to business (Stevens and Bagby 1999), and team-based tacit knowledge in the National Basketball Association (Berman, Down, and Hill 2002).
The role of ﬁrm resources and organizational attributes in determin- ing entry timing was examined by Schoenecker and Cooper (1998). Ruiz-Navarro (1998) focused on identiﬁcation and acquisition of com- plementary capabilities for a turnaround, and Maskell (1998) consid- ered agglomeration of resources in low-tech manufacturing ﬁrms. Other researchers evaluated the performance impacts of TQM programs (Reed, Lemark, and Montgomery 1996), appropriating and sustaining rents from human capital (Maijoor and Wittrloostuijin 1996), top management and organizational capital (Glunk and Wilderom 1998), organizational imped- iments to innovation (Dougherty and Hardy 1996), and modes of interor- ganizational imitation (Haunschild and Miner 1997). The integration of environmental management concerns in strategic planning processes was studied by Judge and Douglas (1998). Further resources and capabilities that have been investigated include relational capabilities (Lorenzoni and Lipparini 1999), corporate governance (McGuire 2000), localized learn- ing (Maskell and Malmberg 1999), age dependence (Henderson 1999), isolating mechanisms (Oktemgil, Greenley, and Broderick 2000), loca- tion of airlines in their rival’s hub markets (Gimeno 1999), technological competence and imitability (De Carolis 2003), and managerial foresight associated with patenting breakthrough innovations (Ahuja, Coﬀ, and Lee 2005). While Yeoh and Roth (1999) investigated potential sources of sustained competitive advantage in the pharmaceutical industry, Pettus (2001) identiﬁed resource development paths in the deregulated trucking industry. Douglas and Ryman (2003) found that service-related strategic competencies were positively related to ﬁnancial performance in the hos- pital industry. Hansen, Perry, and Reese (2004) used a Bayesian hierarchical methodology to examine the relationship between administrative decisions and economic performance over time.
Resources and corporate strategies
Resource-based logic suggests that both tangible and intangible resources can be important in corporate strategies, but only valuable, rare, costly to imitate, and nonsubstitutable resources can be a source of sustained competitive advantage for ﬁrms implementing merger, acquisition, and diversiﬁcation corporate strategies (as discussed in Chapters 9 and 10).
The impact of resources on corporate strategies and competitive advan- tage has also been examined empirically. One of the most important ﬁndings in this area is that SIC-code based measures of strategic relatedness must be augmented by resource-based measures to capture the full perfor- mance eﬀects of diversiﬁcation strategies (e.g. Robins and Wiersema 1995; Farjoun 1998). Moreover, only when the basis of a diversiﬁcation strategy is valuable, rare, and costly to imitate can ﬁrms expect such a strategy to generate superior ﬁrm performance (Markides and Williamson 1996). Moreover, while ﬁnance scholars have identiﬁed an important discount in the value of ﬁrms when they begin to diversify (Lang and Stulz 1994), resource-based theorists have shown that this discount either does not exist or is consistent with shareholder’s interests when the characteristics of the resources on which a ﬁrm’s diversiﬁcation strategies are based are accounted for (Miller 2000, 2004). Similar results have been found in studies on the return to mergers and acquisitions (e.g. Coﬀ 1999).
Further speciﬁc research on the impact of resources on corporate diver- siﬁcation strategies includes diﬀerences in resource allocations between target and acquiring ﬁrms (Harrison et al. 1991), consistency in resource allocations (Harrison, Hall, and Nargundkar 1993), ﬁrm-speciﬁc factors in multinational performance (Tallman 1991), ﬁrm-speciﬁc and product- speciﬁc characteristics of service ﬁrms (Ingham and Thompson 1995), and creating ﬁrm-speciﬁc advantage in a multinational subsidiary (Birkinshaw, Hood, and Jonsson 1998). Resource deployment was examined in acqui- sitions in declining industries (Anand and Singh 1997), following hori- zontal acquisitions (Capron, Dussauge, and Mitchell 1998), in relation to asset divestiture (Capron 1999), and market entry mode (Chatterjee and Singh 1999). In addition, Silverman studied technological resources and diversiﬁcation decisions (Silverman 1999), and Gupta and Govindarajan (2000) examined subsidiary knowledge stocks and transmission channels. Miller (2004) found that the diversiﬁcation discount observed ex post can be explained in part by ﬁrms having lower levels of technological resources ex ante. Carow, Heron, and Saxton (2004) examined early-mover advan- tages in acquisitions and found that strategic pioneers experience posi- tive acquisition announcement returns and outperform other acquirers in acquisition waves in terms of long-term stock price as well. Shamsie, Phelps, and Kuperman (2004) looked at performance diﬀerences among late entrants in ﬁfteen diﬀerent new product categories of household elec- trical equipment. They found that the ability of a late mover to penetrate the market is strongly linked to its own resources (size and relevance) and its own strategy.
Resource-based work on international strategies is a logical extension of the work on diversiﬁcation strategies cited earlier. However, some attributes of resource-based arguments are highlighted in an international context. For example, this work shows that a ﬁrm’s resources reﬂect its country of origin and that these country diﬀerences are long lasting (e.g. Karnoe 1995; Jarvenpaa and Leidner 1999). This work also examines the role of diﬀerent forms of governance in realizing cross-border economies of scope and suggests that the tacitness of the resources used to realize these economies is an important determinant of governance choices (e.g. Zou and Ozsomer 1999).
Further speciﬁc research on the role of resources in an interna- tional context includes transferring idiosyncratic technologies (Kogut and Zander 1992), international diversiﬁcation (Hitt, Hoskisson, and Kim 1997; Geringer, Tallman, and Olsen 2000), top management team interna- tional business advice network density (Athanassiou and Nigh 1999), the intensity and diversity of host country experience (Luo and Peng 1999), and expatriate staﬃng of subsidiaries (Gong 2003). Research on Japanese ﬁrms examined product-speciﬁc competencies and market size (Arora and Gambardella 1997), knowledge diﬀusion (Appleyard 1996), proprietary assets (Delios and Beamish 1999), and ﬁrm strategies and the environment (Kotha and Nair 1995). In addition, Mutinelli and Piscitello (1998) studied skills and entry mode of Italian multinationals, Baldauf, Cravens, and Wagner (2000) examined export performance in Austria, and Nachum and Rolle (1999) considered ﬁrm-speciﬁc characteristics of advertising agencies in the UK, France, and the United States. The impact of the international experience of CEOs on the degree of internationalization and on ﬁnancial performance was also investigated by Daily, Certo, and Dalton (2000). Financial implications of speciﬁcity and opacity of strategic resources were studied using Spanish manufacturing ﬁrms (Vicente-Lorente 2001), and RBV-driven variables were found to explain share values for Czech ﬁrms in the privatization period when the capitalistic economy was emerging (Makhija 2003).
Resources and strategic alliances
Closely related to resource-based international research is work that focuses on the impact of resources of strategic alliances. In particular, this work focuses on how ﬁrms can use alliances to either exploit their preexisting resources or develop new resources. This latter work integrates insights from research on learning and absorptive capacity with resource- based logic (e.g. Lane and Lubatkin 1998; Shenkar and Li 1999; Dussauge, Garrette, and Mitchell 2000).
Further speciﬁc research on the role of resources in determining the performance of strategic alliances includes functional expertise of man- agement teams in high-tech ventures (McGee, Dowling, and Megginson 1995), R&D skill sharing (Sakakibara 1997), ﬁrm-speciﬁc technological capabilities (Mowery, Oxley, and Silverman 1998), technical education and experience of executives (Tyler and Steensma 1998), and intellectual prop- erty rights (McGaughey, Liesch, and Poulson 2000). Combs and Ketchen (1999) contrasted resource-based and organizational economics factors on interﬁrm cooperation, while Gulati (1999) examined the impact of prior alliances on decisions to enter new alliances. In addition, research on international strategic alliances focused on multinational alliances in China (Luo 1999), and international strategic partner selection (Hitt et al. 2000). Park, Mezias, and Song (2004) found that alliances of e-commerce ﬁrms have a positive eﬀect on ﬁrm value in an emerging business sector.
Rules for riches
Finally, resource-based logic suggests that it is not possible to deduce rules for riches from strategic management theories, as persistent superior per- formance depends on valuable, rare, and costly to imitate resources. Rules for riches are rules that any ﬁrm can apply to gain sustained competitive advantages and economic rents. In this empirical work, the impossibility of deriving rules from riches from strategic management theory is exam- ined in the context of the diﬃculty of sustaining competitive advantages through the application of well-known, widely understood, managerial practices. These include the use of reengineering (Walston, Burns, and Kimberly 2000), learning curve logic (Lieberman 1982, 1987), the structure of training programs (Segev, Raveh, and Farjoun 1999), formal long-range planning (Brews and Hunt 1999), and patenting procedures (Mansﬁeld, Schwartz, and Wagner 1981; Mansﬁeld 1985; Schankerman 1998). Diﬃcul- ties of focusing on a few competencies were investigated by Tripsas (1997) and Miller and Toulouse (1998). In addition, Makadok (1999) found that money-market mutual fund families with larger marginal returns to increasing their scale subsequently do gain market share at the expense of their competitors, but this eﬀect diminishes over time, possibly due to imitation.
2. RESOURCE-BASED RESEARCH IN OTHER MANAGEMENT DISCIPLINES
While the bulk of empirical research on resource-based theory focuses on strategic management implications of the theory, this theory has had implications in related ﬁelds as well. Among the most important of these is HRM (as discussed in Chapter 6). Several other disciplines have begun to explore the empirical implications of resource-based logic. These include marketing, entrepreneurship, management information systems (MIS), operations management, and technology and innovation manage- ment. While research approaches vary by discipline, in all these diﬀer- ent settings, research examines how various kinds of functional resources aﬀect ﬁrm performance in ways that are consistent with resource-based logic.
Human resource management
Resource-based logic suggests that socially complex resources and capabili- ties should be among the most important sources of sustained competitive advantages for ﬁrms. Human resources are examples of socially complex resources and thus it is not surprising that HR theorists have drawn heavily on resource-based logic to examine the impact of human resources and HR policies on ﬁrm performance (Wright and MacMahan 1992; Wright, MacMahan, and McWilliams 1994; Barney and Wright 1998).
Some of the earliest work in this area focused on the impact of human resources on cost and quality in manufacturing (Womack, Jones, and Roos 1990; MacDuﬃe 1995). More recently, this work has focused on various bundles of HR practices that can have the eﬀect of creating signiﬁcant ﬁrm- speciﬁc human capital investments (e.g. Huselid and Becker 1997; Harel and Tzafrir 1999) and improving ﬁrm performance (Delaney and Huselid 1996). While some of this work has been criticized (Becker and Gerhart 1996), there is little doubt that resource-based logic has had an important impact on human resources research.
Further speciﬁc research on human resources includes aligning HRM practices to formulated strategy (Schuler and MacMillan 1984), aligning human capital enhancing HR systems and manufacturing strategies (Youndt et al. 1996), and integrating the HR function with strategic decision-making (Bennet, Ketchen, and Schultz 1998). Interestingly, Gupta and Govindarajan (1984) found no consistent managerial characteristics that would guarantee eﬀective strategy implementation in multinationals. Yet Richard (2000) found that cultural diversity adds value and contributes to competitive advantage in the right context.
Huselid (1995) observed that investment in high performance work practices reﬂected in lower employee turnover and greater productivity and ﬁnancial performance. Other studies examined HR management eﬀective- ness (Huselid, Jackson, and Schuler 1997), HR involvement in strategy and perception of HR eﬀectiveness (Wright et al. 1998), and the links between strong employee commitment and generic strategies (Lee and Miller 1999). Koch and McGrath (1996) examined labor productivity in capital intensive ﬁrms, while Delery and Doty (1996) considered universal, contingency, and conﬁgurational HR performance expectations. Both hard and soft versions of HRM based on theories X and Y were investigated by Truss et al. (1997).
Welbourne and Andrews (1996) examined the impact of HR value and organization-based rewards on IPO performance; Klaas, McClendon, and Gainey (1999) considered idiosyncratic HR practices moderating the degree of outsourcing and perceived beneﬁts; and Gainey and Klaas (2003) looked at the impact of outsourcing of training and development on client satisfaction. In addition, the eﬀects of human capital and social capital on ﬁrm dissolution were studied by Pennings, Lee, and van Witteloostuijn (1998). The eﬀects of human capital on the performance of large US law ﬁrms were demonstrated by Hitt et al. (2001). Hatch and Dyer (2004) examined human capital as a source of sustainable competitive advantage in semiconductor manufacturing ﬁrms. Kor and Leblebici (2005) tested the impacts of interdependencies between human capital deployment, development, and diversiﬁcation strategies on performance in professional service ﬁrms. Employers’ participation in school-to-work programs was shown to enable the development of ﬁrm-speciﬁc human capital capabili- ties by Linnehan and De Carolis (2005).
Internationally focused research includes HR practices, HR outcomes, and ﬁrm performance in Russia (Fey, Bjorkman, and Pavlovskaya 2000), HR practices inﬂuencing high mobility of managers in Hong Kong (Field, Chan, and Akhtar 2000), and strategy–HRM interaction impacts on per- formance in Singapore ﬁrms (Khatri 2000).
The role of marketing resources as sources of competitive advan- tage and their impacts on ﬁrm performance has been investigated by many researchers. Speciﬁc marketing resources studied include market- ing resources and capabilities from foreign direct investments (Hooley et al. 1996), market based and marketing support resources (Hooley et al. 2003), technical knowledge assets enabling bundled products (Ghingold and Johnson 1997), marketing mix reactions to a new entrant (Gatignon, Robertson, and Fein 1997), market knowledge competence (Li and Calantone 1998), industrial distribution channels (Johnson 1999), mar- keting strategy-making process (Menon et al. 1999), corporate citizenship in internal and external marketing (Maignan, Ferrell, and Hult 1999), redeployment of marketing assets after acquisitions (Capron and Hulland 1999), media reputation (Deephouse 2000), and market orientation (Hult and Ketchen 2001). In addition, Hult, Ketchen, and Slater (2004) exam- ined market orientation using both cultural and information processing elements and found that both approaches contribute to explaining per- formance, but their eﬀects are mediated by organizational responsiveness. In a study of market dominance, Shamsie (2003) found that advantages from reputation are tied to speciﬁc industry characteristics, for example industries with consumer products that are purchased frequently and have lower prices.
Resource-based logic has also been applied empirically in the ﬁeld of entrepreneurship. Chrisman (1999) examined the resources and capabil- ities inﬂuencing start-ups and regional diﬀerences in start-up propensities, while Dean, Turner, and Bamford (1997) considered the factors assisting the postentry phase for new ﬁrms. Other studies of small and entrepre- neurial ﬁrms have focused on basic capabilities (Rangone 1999), as well as ﬁrm-speciﬁc resources (Borch, Huse, and Senneseth 1999). The impact of resources on performance of small service and retail ﬁrms was examined by Brush and Chaganti (1999), and Michael and Robbins (1998) focused on retrenchment among small manufacturing ﬁrms during recession. In addition, dynamic capabilities and new product development in high tech- nology ventures were studied by Deeds, De Carolis, and Coombs (2000) in their empirical analysis of biotechnology ﬁrms. Consistent with resource- based theory, Choi and Shepherd (2004) found that entrepreneurs were more likely to exploit opportunities when they perceived more knowl- edge of customer demand for the product, more fully developed enabling technologies, greater managerial capability, and greater stakeholder support.
Management information systems
Strategic roles for resource and capabilities that are based on IT and MIS have been considered by many IT–MIS scholars (as discussed in Chapter 7). Among this research, there have been some empirical studies which have applied resource-based logic. Dent-Micallef and Powell (1998) found that IT investment per se had no eﬀect on performance in the retail service industry. However, when combined with intangible, diﬃcult-to-imitate complementary resources, such as a ﬂexible culture, strategic planning, IT- integration, and supplier relationships, retail ﬁrms gained a competitive advantage. Similarly, Ray (2000), in his study of customer service processes in North American insurance ﬁrms, found that ﬁrm-speciﬁc managerial IT knowledge can be a source of sustainable competitive advantage (fur- ther explained in Ray, Barney, and Muhanna 2004; Ray, Muhanna, and Barney 2005). Bharadwaj (2000) found that ﬁrms with high IT capabil- ity outperformed others in a matched sample group in his project that focused on ﬁrm-speciﬁc IT resources including IT infrastructure, human IT resources, and IT-enabled intangibles (such as customer orientation, knowledge assets, and synergy). Li and Ye (1999) found that IT investments linked to managerial, strategic, and environmental factors had a stronger positive eﬀect on ﬁnancial performance. In addition, Broadbent, Weill, and Neo (1999) examined IT infrastructure capabilities of ﬁrms linked to their strategic context. Tippens and Sohi (2003) found that organizational learning plays a signiﬁcant role in mediating the eﬀects of IT competency (comprising IT knowledge, IT operations, and IT objects) on ﬁrm perfor- mance.
Resource-based logic has also been applied empirically within the ﬁeld of operations management, with the same pattern of results as discussed above with IT/MIS research. Powell (1995) found that TQM tools and tech- niques do not generally produce competitive advantage, but certain tacit, behavioral, imperfectly imitable features such as an open culture, employee empowerment, and executive commitment can be a source of competitive advantage. Knights and McNabe (1997) also examined quality focusing on measurement issues. The alignment between best practices, processes, and manufacturing strategy was investigated by Morita and Flynn (1997). In addition, Klassen and Whybark (1999) studied the pattern of investments in environmental technologies, manufacturing strategy, and performance in the furniture industry. They found that signiﬁcantly better performance was achieved where management invested in the environmental technology portfolio and allocated resources toward pollution prevention technolo- gies. Hult, Ketchen, and Nichols (2002) examined the eﬀects of supply chain cultural competitiveness as a strategic resource which can improve supply chain outcomes such as on order fulﬁllment cycle time. Finally, in their study of manufacturing performance, Schroeder, Bates, and Junt- tila (2002) focused on three manufacturing capabilities (internal learning, external learning, and proprietary processes and equipment) and their ﬁndings were consistent with resource-based theory.
Technology and innovation management
Resource-based logic has also been applied empirically within technol- ogy and innovation management. Key ﬁndings here are consistent with resource-based theory and research. In their study of the acquisition of medical technological innovation and hospital performance, Irwin, Hoﬀman, and Lamont (1998) found that the relationship is strongest when these technological innovations are valuable, rare, and imperfectly imitable. Similarly, Stuart and Podolny (1996) found that the evolution of technological positions is derived from ﬁrm-speciﬁc ability to innovate in particular technological subﬁelds that partly shapes their competitive success. Intangible resources and capabilities were the main determinants of proﬁtability for Spanish ﬁrms engaged in internal R&D (Del Canto and Gonzales, 1999). Further, Helfat (1997) found that dynamic capabilities enabled ﬁrms to stay competitive through changing market conditions in her study of knowledge and asset complementarity in R&D processes.
Other speciﬁc research within technology and innovation management included projects on optimal patent policy and innovation (Chang 1995), environmental pollution and competitive advantage in industrial goods manufacturing ﬁrms (Morris 1997), and knowledge transfer between cus- tomers and suppliers in industrial districts (Albino, Garavelli, and Schiuma 1999). Dutta, Narasimhan, and Rajiv (2005) used stochastic frontier esti- mation to demonstrate heterogeneity in R&D capabilities in the semicon- ductor industry.
Source: Barney Jay B., Clark Delwyn N. (2007), Resource-Based Theory: Creating and Sustaining Competitive Advantage, Oxford University Press; Illustrated edition.