HETEROGENEIDADE. No tópico "Strategic Heterogeneity, Knowledge Dynamics and Performance" da EURAM 2005, Arturo Capasso (Business Economics & Management, University of Sannio), Giovanni Battista Dagnino (University of Catania, Dept. of Business Economics & Management), e Andrea Lanza (University of Calabria, Department of Business Economics & Management) salientam:
"There is currently a budding consensus among scholars in the strategic management field on the fact that firm resources can be a source of competitive advantage and of sustainable performance. Accordingly, resources have to be unique, scarce or rare, not easy to acquire on factor markets, and thus neither easily imitable nor tradable: These features make resources an embedded bundle of components, heterogeneous from one firm to another. Broadly speaking, among the resource components we may entail such crucial elements as competences (Prahalad and Hamel, 1990), capabilities (Kogut and Zander, 1992; Teece, Pisano and Shuen, 1997; Eisenhardt and Martin, 2000), routines (Nelson and Winter, 1982), knowledge (Grant, 1996; Nonaka, 1994), and culture (Barney, 1986). In this vein, reviving Edith Penrose's seminal work (1959) and moving on from it, in the second part of the 1990s and in the first of the 2000s strategic heterogeneity has progressively come to be considered as the cornerstone of a novel strategic way of thinking and a brand new self-supporting stream of research, which is rooted in the so called resource-based view (RBV) (Barney, 1991) and in its current dynamic and evolutionary understandings. Different from the SCP approach entrenched in the renown industrial economics paradigm, the RBV is therefore seen as a creative strategic paradigm which, more indirectly or straightforwardly, links idiosyncratically firm resources and capabilities to performance. Notwithstanding that, with very few recent exceptions (i.e., the October 2003 Strategic Management Journal Special Issue and the November 2004 College of Organization Science-COS Conference, held at Dartmouth's Tuck School of Business, both articulated on "Competitive Heterogeneity"), the concept of heterogeneity and its inner relevance have frequently been overlooked or simply believed as given in strategy investigation. The purpose of this track is to focus on the concept of strategic heterogeneity and to contribute to shed new light on: (a) its basic conceptual definition;(b) the characterization of its scientific domain at the firm, network and industry levels, paying particular attention to the dichotomy between strategy statics and strategy dynamics;(c) the explanation of the several nexuses and trade-offs between strategic heterogeneity and various areas of scholarly research such as the resource-, competence-, capability- and knowledge-based perspectives;(d) the multiple links and trade-offs between strategic heterogeneity and knowledge dynamics at the firm, network and industry levels;(e) the causal and empirical explanation of its (direct and mediated) impact on performance. Track Themes: Theoretical contributions that shed new light on strategic heterogeneity: genesis, evolution, and disruption of firm, network, and industry heterogeneity; Strategic heterogeneity and sustainable superior performance; Strategic heterogeneity between static and dynamic processes; Strategic heterogeneity and knowledge dynamics: (a) theory development, (b) qualitative and (c) quantitative empirical evidence; Knowledge dynamics and performance: industrial, network and firm perspectives; Strategic heterogeneity, complementarity and interorganizational relationships; Strategic heterogeneity and local and regional clusters: industrial, network and firm perspectives; Strategic heterogeneity, differentiation and strategic groups: qualitative and quantitative empirical evidences; Limits and boundaries of strategic heterogeneity. Proposed Research Questions: How is it possible to define the concept of strategic heterogeneity? How can the heterogeneity construct be operationalized? At what levels? What are the links among resource/capability heterogeneity and tacit and explicit knowledge? Does strategic heterogeneity lead to superior performance? And, if yes, how and under what circumstances? Does strategic heterogeneity lead to superior knowledge endowments? And, if yes, how? Under what circumstances knowledge dynamics leads to superior performance? In what particular industrial sectors or ecosystems? What kind of role do learning effects play in the evolution of strategic heterogeneity? Is strategic heterogeneity the outcome of static or dynamic processes? Why is it so? What forms does strategic heterogeneity assume in interorganizational relationships? What are the limits of strategic heterogeneity? What are the boundaries of strategic heterogeneity?"
"There is currently a budding consensus among scholars in the strategic management field on the fact that firm resources can be a source of competitive advantage and of sustainable performance. Accordingly, resources have to be unique, scarce or rare, not easy to acquire on factor markets, and thus neither easily imitable nor tradable: These features make resources an embedded bundle of components, heterogeneous from one firm to another. Broadly speaking, among the resource components we may entail such crucial elements as competences (Prahalad and Hamel, 1990), capabilities (Kogut and Zander, 1992; Teece, Pisano and Shuen, 1997; Eisenhardt and Martin, 2000), routines (Nelson and Winter, 1982), knowledge (Grant, 1996; Nonaka, 1994), and culture (Barney, 1986). In this vein, reviving Edith Penrose's seminal work (1959) and moving on from it, in the second part of the 1990s and in the first of the 2000s strategic heterogeneity has progressively come to be considered as the cornerstone of a novel strategic way of thinking and a brand new self-supporting stream of research, which is rooted in the so called resource-based view (RBV) (Barney, 1991) and in its current dynamic and evolutionary understandings. Different from the SCP approach entrenched in the renown industrial economics paradigm, the RBV is therefore seen as a creative strategic paradigm which, more indirectly or straightforwardly, links idiosyncratically firm resources and capabilities to performance. Notwithstanding that, with very few recent exceptions (i.e., the October 2003 Strategic Management Journal Special Issue and the November 2004 College of Organization Science-COS Conference, held at Dartmouth's Tuck School of Business, both articulated on "Competitive Heterogeneity"), the concept of heterogeneity and its inner relevance have frequently been overlooked or simply believed as given in strategy investigation. The purpose of this track is to focus on the concept of strategic heterogeneity and to contribute to shed new light on: (a) its basic conceptual definition;(b) the characterization of its scientific domain at the firm, network and industry levels, paying particular attention to the dichotomy between strategy statics and strategy dynamics;(c) the explanation of the several nexuses and trade-offs between strategic heterogeneity and various areas of scholarly research such as the resource-, competence-, capability- and knowledge-based perspectives;(d) the multiple links and trade-offs between strategic heterogeneity and knowledge dynamics at the firm, network and industry levels;(e) the causal and empirical explanation of its (direct and mediated) impact on performance. Track Themes: Theoretical contributions that shed new light on strategic heterogeneity: genesis, evolution, and disruption of firm, network, and industry heterogeneity; Strategic heterogeneity and sustainable superior performance; Strategic heterogeneity between static and dynamic processes; Strategic heterogeneity and knowledge dynamics: (a) theory development, (b) qualitative and (c) quantitative empirical evidence; Knowledge dynamics and performance: industrial, network and firm perspectives; Strategic heterogeneity, complementarity and interorganizational relationships; Strategic heterogeneity and local and regional clusters: industrial, network and firm perspectives; Strategic heterogeneity, differentiation and strategic groups: qualitative and quantitative empirical evidences; Limits and boundaries of strategic heterogeneity. Proposed Research Questions: How is it possible to define the concept of strategic heterogeneity? How can the heterogeneity construct be operationalized? At what levels? What are the links among resource/capability heterogeneity and tacit and explicit knowledge? Does strategic heterogeneity lead to superior performance? And, if yes, how and under what circumstances? Does strategic heterogeneity lead to superior knowledge endowments? And, if yes, how? Under what circumstances knowledge dynamics leads to superior performance? In what particular industrial sectors or ecosystems? What kind of role do learning effects play in the evolution of strategic heterogeneity? Is strategic heterogeneity the outcome of static or dynamic processes? Why is it so? What forms does strategic heterogeneity assume in interorganizational relationships? What are the limits of strategic heterogeneity? What are the boundaries of strategic heterogeneity?"
