management(动态能力与战略管理)

企业如何竞争？企业如何赚取高于正常的回报吗？什么是需要长期保持卓越的性能呢？一个日益强大的经营策略这些基本问题的答案在于动态能力的概念。这些的技能，程序，例程，组织结构和学科，使公司建立，聘请和协调相关的无形资产，以满足客户的需求，并不能轻易被竞争对手复制。具有较强的动态能力是企业强烈的进取精神。他们不仅适应商业生态系统，他们也塑造他们通过创新，协作，学习和参与。大卫·蒂斯是动态能力的角度来看的先驱。它植根于25年，他的研究，教学和咨询。他的思想已经在企业战略，管理和经济学的影响力，创新，技术管理和竞争政策有关。通过他的顾问和咨询工作，他也带来了这些想法，承担业务和政策，使周围的世界。本书的核心思想动态能力是最清晰和最简洁的语句。蒂斯解释其成因，应用，以及如何他们提供了一个替代的方法很多传统的战略思想，立足于简单和过时的产业组织和竞争优势的基础的理解。通俗易懂撰写并发表了，这将是一个非常宝贵的工具，为所有那些谁想要理解这一重要的战略思想的贡献，他们的MBA学生，学者，管理人员，或顾问和刺激。StrategicManagementJournal,Vol.18:7,509–533(1997)Thedynamiccapabilitiesframeworkanalyzesthesourcesandmethodsofwealthcreationandcapturebyprivateenterprisefirmsoperatinginenvironmentsofrapidtechnologicalchange.Thecompetitiveadvantageoffirmsisseenasrestingondistinctiveprocesses(waysofcoordinatingandcombining),shapedbythefirm’s(specific)assetpositions(suchasthefirm’sportfolioofdifficult-to-tradeknowledgeassetsandcomplementaryassets),andtheevolutionpath(s)ithasadoptedorinherited.Theimportanceofpathdependenciesisamplifiedwhereconditionsofincreasingreturnsexist.Whetherandhowafirm’scompetitiveadvantageiserodeddependsonthestabilityofmarketdemand,andtheeaseofreplicability(expandinginternally)andimitatability(replicationbycompetitors).Ifcorrect,theframeworksuggeststhatprivatewealthcreationinregimesofrapidtechnologicalchangedependsinlargemeasureonhoninginternaltechnological,organizational,andmanagerialprocessesinsidethefirm.Inshort,identifyingnewopportunitiesandorganizingeffectivelyandefficientlytoembracethemaregenerallymorefundamentaltoprivatewealthcreationthanisstrategizing,ifbystrategizingonemeansengaginginbusinessconductthatkeepscompetitorsoffbalance,raisesrival’scosts,andexcludesnewentrants.(C)1997byJohnWiley&Sons,Ltd.战略管理杂志。18:7，509-533（1997）动态能力框架分析方法的来源和财富创造和捕捉由私人企业公司在环境的技术快速变化。竞争优势的公司被视为搁在独特的过程(方法的协调和结合),受到公司的(特定的)资产头寸(如该公司的投资组合的难以贸易知识资产和互补资产),和演化路径(s)已采取或继承。路径依赖的重要性是放大收益递增的情况存在。是否和怎样一个公司的竞争优势是侵蚀取决于市场需求的稳定性,易于复现性(扩大内部)和imitatability(复制竞争对手)。如果正确,框架表明,私人财富创造在政权的技术快速变化很大程度上取决于内部技术、组织、珩磨和管理流程在公司。总之,识别新的机会和组织有效和高效地拥抱他们通常更基本的私人财富创造比谋略,如果通过策划一个意味着从事商业行为,使对手失去平衡,提高竞争对手的成本,不包括新进入者。(C)1997年由约翰•威利父子公司。INTRODUCTIONThefundamentalquestioninthefieldofstrategicmanagementishowfirmsachieveandsustaincompetitiveadvantage.Weconfrontthisquestionherebydevelopingthedynamiccapabilitiesapproach,whichendeavorstoanalyzethesourcesofwealthcreationandcapturebyfirms.Thedevelopmentofthisframeworkflowsfromarecognitionbytheauthorsthatstrategictheoryisrepletewithanalysesoffirm-levelstrategiesforsustainingandsafeguardingextantcompetitiveadvantage,buthasperformedlesswellwithrespecttoassistingintheunderstandingofhowandwhycertainfirmsbuildcompetitiveadvantageinregimesofrapidchange.OurapproachisespeciallyrelevantinaSchumpeterianworldofinnovation-basedcompetition,price/performancerivalry,increasingreturns,andthe‘creativedestruction’ofexistingcompetences.Theapproachendeavorstoexplainfirm-levelsuccessandfailure.Weareinterestedinbothbuildingabettertheoryoffirmperformance,aswellasinformingmanagerialpractice.Inordertopositionouranalysisinamannerthatdisplayssimilaritiesanddifferenceswithexistingapproaches,webeginbybrieflyreviewingacceptedframeworksforstrategicmanagement.Weendeavortoexposeimplicitassumptions,andidentifycompetitivecircumstanceswhereeachparadigmmightdisplaysomerelativeadvantageasbothausefuldescriptiveandnormativetheoryofcompetitivestrategy.Whilenumeroustheorieshavebeenadvancedoverthepasttwodecadesaboutthesourcesofcompetitiveadvantage,manyclusteraroundjustafewlooselystructuredframeworksorparadigms.Inthispaperweattempttoidentifythreeexistingparadigmanddescribeaspectsofanemergingnewparadigmsthatwelabeldynamiccapabilities.Thedominantparadigminthefieldduringthe1980swasthecompetitiveforcesapproachdevelopedbyPorter(1980).Thisapproachrootedinthestructure–conduct–performanceparadigmofindustrialorganization(Mason,1949Bain,1959),emphasizestheactionsafirmcantaketocreatedefensiblepositionsagainstcompetitiveforces.Asecondapproach,referredtoasastrategicconflictapproach(e.g.,Shapiro,1989)iscloselyrelatedtothefirstinitsfocusonproductmarketimperfections,entrydeterrenceandstrategicinteraction.Thestrategicconflictapproachusesthetoolsofgametheoryandthusimplicitlyviewscompetitiveoutcomesasafunctionoftheeffectivenesswithwhichfirmskeeptheirrivalsoffbalancethroughstrategicinvestments,pricingstrategies,signaling,andthecontrolofinformation.Boththecompetitiveforceandthestrategicconflictapproachesappeartosharetheviewthatrentsflowfromprivilegedproductmarketpositions.Anotherdistinctclassofapproachesemphasizesbuildingcompetitiveadvantagethroughcapturingentrepreneurialrentsstemmingfromfundamentalfirm-levelefficiencyadvantages.Theseapproacheshavetheirrootsinamucholderdiscussionofcorporatestrengthsandweaknessestheyhavetakenonnewlifeasevidencesuggestthatfirmsbuildenduringadvantagesonlythroughefficiencyandeffectiveness,andasdevelopmentinorganizationaleconomicsandthestudyontechnologicalandorganizationalchangebecomeappliedtostrategyquestions.Onestrandofthisliterature,oftenreferredtoasthe‘resource-basedperspective,’emphasizesfirm-specific