Resources and Capabilities: Further Reading Self-Study Questions Notes
Resources and Capabilities: Further Reading Self-Study Questions Notes
Resources and Capabilities: Further Reading Self-Study Questions Notes
www.foundationsofstrategy.com
82 Introduction and objectives
In this chapter, we shift our focus from the external environment to the internal environment.
F O U N DAT I O N S O F S T R AT E G Y
We look within the firm and concentrate our attention on the resources and capabilities that
firms possess. In doing so, we build the foundations for our analysis of competitive advantage
which began in Chapter 2 with the discussion of key success factors.
By the time you have completed this chapter, you will be able to:
●● appreciate the role a firm’s resources and capabilities play in formulating strategy;
●● identify and appraise the resources and capabilities of a firm;
●● evaluate the potential for a firm’s resources and capabilities to confer sustainable
competitive advantage;
●● use the results of resource and capability analysis to formulate strategies that exploit
internal strengths while defending against internal weaknesses.
www.foundationsofstrategy.com
83
Opening Case
CHAPTER 3
Harley‐Davidson, Inc.
In 2014, Harley‐Davidson, Inc. was not only the world’s oldest motorcycle company but also,
after recovering from the trauma of the financial crisis of 2008/9, the world’s most financially
R e s o u rce s a n d capa b i l i t i e s
successful producer of motorcycles. Since its management buyout in 1981, it had grown its
annual sales of motorcycles from 40 000 to 260 000 and its revenues from $0.5m to $5727m.
Its sales margin and return on equity exceeded that of all its major rivals, and in heavyweight
motorcycles it was the market leader in the US, Canada, Japan and Brazil. How was it possible
that a company that had been on the brink of bankruptcy during the early 1980s could have
outperformed the motorcycle divisions of automotive giants such as Honda and BMW? And,
with its retro‐styling and lack of leading‐edge technology, could Harley‐Davidson sustain its
remarkable performance into the future (Table 3.1)?
www.foundationsofstrategy.com
84
its range of models around a standardized set of major components such as engines, frames,
▲
F O U N DAT I O N S O F S T R AT E G Y
suspension systems and fuel tanks. It based its product strategy on the notion that every Harley
rider should have the possibility of owning a unique personalized motorcycle. To that end, it
created a wide range of customization opportunities and each year offered limited‐edition,
customized versions of some of its most popular models.
During this period, the demographic and socio‐economic profile of its customers
continued to shift. In the early years, its customers were primarily blue‐collar youngsters, but
by the 1990s, they were mainly middle‐aged and upper income. To meet the preferences of
these customers, the dealership network was overhauled. Harley dealerships were required
to be exclusive and to offer a retail experience appropriate to the sale of high‐priced leisure
products to sophisticated customers.
Despite premium pricing (in 2014, US retail prices for Harley motorcycles ranged from
$8250 to $32 500), Harley’s share of the super‐heavyweight market (over 850cc) grew from
about 30% in 1986 to over 60% in 1990. The 1990s saw uninterrupted growth in the heavyweight
motorcycle market and a continued increase in Harley’s market share. The company’s biggest
challenge became that of systematically expanding production capacity to meet the surging
demand for its products.
However, when Keith Wandell took over the reins as CEO in May 2009, Harley had
suffered dramatic deterioration in its fortunes. The onset of the financial crisis of 2008/9 had
radically shifted the balance of supply and demand: between 2007 and 2009, motorcycle
shipments plunged from 342 100 to 232 400 and net income from $934m to a loss of $55m.
After decades of customer waiting lists and capacity shortages, Harley‐Davidson found itself
in a very different position. In response Wandell laid off staff, instituted radical cost cutting,
amalgamated plants to cut capacity and disposed of assets that were not central to Harley’s
core business.
Harley‐Davidson in 2014
Some of the key features of Harley’s business in 2014 included:
●● The product portfolio: Compared to other motorcycle producers, Harley served a narrow
market niche. Within the heavyweight segment (> 500cc), it was present only in super‐
heavyweight bikes (> 750cc) and here Harley produced only ‘cruisers’ (macho‐styled,
low‐riding bikes for urban leisure use) and touring bikes (designed for long‐distance
travel). Performance motorcycles, the largest part of the heavyweight segment, Harley
left to Japanese and European manufacturers. Harley’s past efforts to expand into
performance bikes and smaller models had been unsuccessful: in 2009, it closed its Buell
motorcycle business and sold off the Italian motorcycle company, MV Agusta, that it
had acquired a few years earlier. Within its model range, Harley remained committed
to traditional designs and traditional technologies: its large capacity, V‐twin, air‐cooled
engines made limited concessions to modern automotive technology. In addition, its
focus on traditional bikes limited Harley’s ability to grow its market share at the expense
of rivals. Harley already accounted for more than 50% of the US heavyweight motorcycle
market. Indeed, Harley’s own market was vulnerable to competition. While no other
company could replicate the emotional attachment of riders to the ‘Harley Experience’,
younger motorcycle riders sought a different type of experience and became more
www.foundationsofstrategy.com
85
attracted to the highly engineered sports models produced by European and Japanese
CHAPTER 3
manufacturers.
●● The brand: Harley‐Davidson’s brand and the loyalty it engendered among its customers
were its greatest assets. The famed spread eagle signified not just the brand of one of the
world’s oldest motorcycle companies but also an entire lifestyle and was an archetype
R e s o u rce s a n d capa b i l i t i e s
of American style. Harley had a unique relationship with American culture. The values
that Harley represented – individuality, freedom and adventure – could be traced back
to the cowboy and frontiersman of yesteryear and before that to the quest for space and
liberty that had brought people to America in the first place. As the sole survivor of the
once‐thriving American motorcycle industry, Harley‐Davidson represented a tradition of
US engineering and manufacturing.
The appeal of the brand was central not just to Harley’s marketing but also to its
strategy as a whole. Harley‐Davidson had long emphasized that it was not in the
business of selling motorcycles: it was selling the ‘Harley Experience’. A critical question
for Harley was: ‘How broad is the appeal of the brand and the Harley Experience?’
Harley’s core market was US white male baby‐boomers: could the Harley image have the
same appeal to younger generations and in overseas markets?
●● Operations: Despite expanding capacity and upgrading its manufacturing operations,
Harley’s low production volumes and dispersed plants limited its access to scale
economies. It also lacked the buying power of its bigger rivals. To offset its lack of
purchasing power Harley fostered close relations with its key suppliers and placed
purchasing managers at senior levels within its management structure.
●● Distribution: In the past, Harley dealerships had been operated by enthusiasts, with
erratic opening hours, poor stocks of bikes and spares and indifferent customer service.
Recognizing that it was in the business of selling a lifestyle and an experience and that
its dealers played a pivotal role in delivering that experience, Harley transformed its
dealership network. Its dealer programme provided extensive support for dealers while
requiring high standards of pre‐ and after‐sales service. Dealers were obliged to carry a
full line of Harley replacement parts and accessories and to perform services on Harley
bikes. Training programmes helped dealers meet the higher service requirements and
encouraged them to recognize and meet the needs of the professional, middle‐class
clientele that formed the bulk of Harley’s customer base by offering test ride facilities,
rider instruction classes, motorcycle rental and assistance in customizing bikes. About
85% of Harley’s US dealerships were exclusive – far more than for any other motorcycle
manufacturer.
●● Sales of related products: Sales of parts, accessories and ‘general merchandise’
(clothing and collectibles) represented 20% of Harley’s total revenue in 2008 –
much higher than for any other motorcycle company. Clothing sales included not
just traditional riding apparel but also a wide range of men’s, women’s and children’s
leisurewear. Almost all clothing, accessories, giftware, jewellery, toys and other products
were produced by third‐party manufacturers who paid licensing fees to Harley‐Davidson.
▲
▲
F O U N DAT I O N S O F S T R AT E G Y
www.foundationsofstrategy.com
The role of resources and capabilities in strategy formulation 87
We saw in Chapter 1 that strategy is concerned with matching a firm’s resources and capabilities
to the opportunities that arise in the external environment. In Chapter 2, our emphasis was on
CHAPTER 3
the identification of profit opportunities in the external environment of the firm. In this chapter,
our emphasis shifts from the interface between strategy and the external environment towards
the interface between strategy and the internal environment of the firm – more specifically,
the relationship between strategy and the resources and capabilities of the firm (Figure 3.1).
R e s o u rce s a n d capa b i l i t i e s
Moving from the external to the internal is a logical way of proceeding with our exploration
of strategy that also resonates with a theme we noted in Chapter 1: the trend over time from
seeing sources of profit as lying mainly in the external environment to seeing sources of profit
being located within firms. Competitive advantage rather than industry attractiveness is the
primary source of superior profitability.
The The
Firm–Strategy Environment–Strategy
Interface Interface
Figure 3.1 Analysing resources and capabilities: The interface between strategy
and the firm.
www.foundationsofstrategy.com
Honda Motor Company is the world’s biggest motorcycle producer and a lead supplier
88 of cars, but it has never defined itself either as a motorcycle company or as a motor vehicle
company. Since its foundation in 1948, its strategy has been built around its expertise in the
F O U N DAT I O N S O F S T R AT E G Y
development and manufacture of engines; this capability has successfully carried it from
motorcycles to a wide range of gasoline‐engine products.
Canon, Inc. had its first success producing 35mm cameras. Since then it has gone on
to develop fax machines, calculators, copy machines, printers, video cameras, camcorders,
semiconductor manufacturing equipment and many other products. Almost all Canon’s
products involve the application of three areas of technological capability: precision mechanics,
microelectronics and fine optics.
3M Corporation expanded from sandpaper into adhesive tapes, audio and videotapes,
road signs, medical products and floppy disks. Its product list now comprises over 30 000
products. Is it a conglomerate? Certainly not, claims 3M. Its vast product range rests on
a foundation of key technologies relating to adhesives, thin‐film coatings and materials
sciences supported by outstanding capability in the development and launching of new
products.
In general, the greater the rate of change in a firm’s external environment, the more likely
it is that internal resources and capabilities rather than external market focus will provide
a secure foundation for long‐term strategy. In fast‐moving, technology‐based industries,
basing strategy upon capabilities can help firms outlive the lifecycles of their initial products.
Microsoft’s initial success was the result of its MS‐DOS operating system for the IBM PC.
However, by building outstanding capabilities in developing and launching complex software
products and in managing an ecosystem of partner relationships, Microsoft extended its
success to other operating systems (e.g. Windows), to applications software (e.g. Office) and to
Internet services (e.g. Xbox Live). Similarly, Apple’s remarkable ability to combine technology,
aesthetics and ease of use has allowed it to expand beyond its initial focus on desktop and
notebook computers into MP3 players (iPod), smartphones (iPhone) and tablet computers
(iPad).
Conversely, those companies that when faced with radical technological change attempted
to maintain their market focus have often experienced huge difficulties in building the new
technological capabilities needed to serve their customers.
Eastman Kodak is a classic example. Its dominance of the world market for photographic
products was threatened by digital imaging. From 1990 onwards, Kodak invested billions of
dollars developing digital technologies and digital imaging products. Yet, in January 2012,
continuing losses on digital products and services forced Kodak into bankruptcy. Might
Kodak have been better off by sticking with its chemical know‐how, allowing its photographic
business to decline while developing its interests in specialty chemicals, pharmaceuticals and
healthcare?4
Olivetti, the Italian manufacturer of typewriters and office equipment, offers a similar
cautionary tale. Despite its early investments in electronic computing, Olivetti’s attempt to
recreate itself as a supplier of personal computers and printers was a failure. Might Olivetti
have been better advised to deploy its existing expertise in electrical and precision engineering
in other products?5 This pattern of established firms failing to adjust to disruptive technological
change within their own industries is well documented: in typesetting and in disk drive
manufacturing, successive technological waves have caused market leaders to falter and have
allowed new entrants to prosper.6
www.foundationsofstrategy.com
Identifying the organization’s resources and capabilities 89
The first stage in the analysis of resources and capabilities is to identify the resources and
capabilities of the firm – or, indeed, any organization since the analysis of resources and
CHAPTER 3
capabilities is as applicable to not‐for‐profit organizations as it is to business enterprises. It is
important to distinguish between the resources and the capabilities of the firm: resources are the
productive assets owned by the firm; capabilities are what the firm can do. Individual resources
do not confer competitive advantage; they must work together to create organizational
R e s o u rce s a n d capa b i l i t i e s
capability. Capability is the essence of superior performance. Figure 3.2 shows the relationships
between resources, capabilities and competitive advantage.
Our discussion of key success factors (KSFs) – the sources of competitive advantage within
an industry – in Chapter 2 offers a starting point for our identification of key resources and
capabilities. Once we have identified the KSFs in an industry, it is a short step to identifying the
resources and capabilities needed to deliver those success factors. For example:
●● In budget airlines the KSF is low operating cost. This requires a standardized fleet of fuel‐
efficient planes; a young, motivated, non‐unionized workforce; and a culture of frugality.
●● In pharmaceuticals the KSF is the discovery and launch of new drugs. This requires high‐
quality researchers and drug‐testing, marketing and distribution capability.
Identifying resources
Drawing up an inventory of a firm’s resources can be surprisingly difficult. No such document
exists within the accounting or management information systems of most corporations. The
COMPETITIVE INDUSTRY
STRATEGY
ADVANTAGE KEY SUCCESS
FACTORS
ORGANIZATIONAL
CAPABILITIES
RESOURCES
Figure 3.2 The links between resources, capabilities and competitive advantage.
www.foundationsofstrategy.com
corporate balance sheet provides a limited view of a firm’s resources; it comprises mainly
90 financial and physical resources. To take a wider view of a firm’s resources it is helpful to
identify three principal types of resource: tangible, intangible and human resources.
F O U N DAT I O N S O F S T R AT E G Y
Source: ‘Rap’s Unlikely Mogul’ Financial Times (August 7, 2002). From the Financial Times © The Financial Times
Ltd. 2002. All rights reserved.
TANGIBLE RESOURCES Tangible resources are the easiest to identify and evaluate: financial
resources and physical assets are identified and valued in the firm’s financial statements. Yet,
balance sheets are renowned for their propensity to obscure strategically relevant information
and to under‐ or overvalue assets. Historical cost valuation can provide little indication of
an asset’s market value. For example, Disney’s movie library had a balance sheet value of
$5.4 billion in 2008, based on production costs. Its land assets (including its 28 000 acres in
Florida) were valued at a paltry $1.2 billion.
However, the primary goal of resource analysis is not to value a company’s assets but
to understand their potential for creating competitive advantage. Information that British
Airways possessed fixed assets valued at £8 billion in 2013 is of little use in assessing the
airline’s strategic value. To assess British Airways’ ability to compete effectively in the world
airline industry we need to know about the composition of these assets: the location of land
and buildings, the types of plane, the landing slots and gate facilities at airports and so on.
www.foundationsofstrategy.com
Once we have fuller information on a company’s tangible resources we explore how we
can create additional value from them. This requires that we address two key questions: 91
●● What opportunities exist for economizing on their use? It may be possible to use fewer
CHAPTER 3
resources to support the same level of business, or to use the existing resources to support
a larger volume of business. In the case of British Airways, there may be opportunities
for consolidating administrative offices and engineering and service facilities. Improved
inventory control may allow economies in inventories of parts and fuel. Better control of
R e s o u rce s a n d capa b i l i t i e s
cash and receivables permits a business to operate with lower levels of cash and liquid
financial resources.
●● What are the possibilities for employing existing assets more profitably? Could British
Airways generate better returns on some of its planes by redeploying them into cargo
carrying? Should British Airways seek to redeploy its assets from Europe and the North
Atlantic to Asia‐Pacific? Might it reduce costs in its European network by reassigning
routes to small franchised airlines?
INTANGIBLE RESOURCES For most companies, intangible resources are more valuable than
tangible resources. Yet, in company financial statements, intangible resources remain largely
invisible. The exclusion or undervaluation of intangible resources is a major reason for the
large and growing divergence between companies’ balance sheet valuations (‘book values’)
and their stock market valuations (Table 3.2). Among the most important of these undervalued
or unvalued intangible resources are brand names. Table 3.3 shows companies owning brands
valued at $15 billion or more.
Brand names and other trademarks are a form of reputational asset: their value is in
the confidence they instil in customers. The brand valuations in Table 3.3 are based upon
the operating profits for each company (after taxation and a capital charge), estimating the
proportion attributable to the brand and then capitalizing these returns.
Table 3.2 Large companies with the highest valuation ratios, April 2014.
Valuation Valuation
Company ratio Country Company ratio Country
Hindustan Unilever 46.6 India Alexion Pharma. 11.9 US
Tesla Motors 37.7 US Starbucks 11.8 US
Colgate‐Palmolive 26.3 US ITC Ltd. 11.7 India
Altria 18.3 US MasterCard 11.4 USA
AbbVie 16.7 US Roche Holding 11.3 Swz.
Yum! Brands 15.4 US GlaxoSmithKline 11.0 UK
Regeneron Pharma. 15.0 US Salesforce.com 11.0 US
Amazon 14.9 US Hermes Intl. 11.0 France
British Sky Broadcasting 14.0 UK ARM Holdings 10.7 UK
United Parcel Service 13.8 US CSL 10.6 Australia
Note: the table shows companies from the FT Global 500 with the highest ratios of market capitalization to balance sheet
net asset value (‘market‐to‐book’ ratios).
Source: Google Finance, Financial Times.
www.foundationsofstrategy.com
Table 3.3 The world’s most valuable brands, 2013.
92
Rank Brand Value in 2013 ($ billion) Change from 2012 Country of origin
F O U N DAT I O N S O F S T R AT E G Y
Note: Brand values are calculated as the net present value of future earnings generated by the brand.
Source: Interbrand.
The value of a company’s brands can be increased by extending the range of products
over which a company markets its brands. Johnson & Johnson, Samsung and General Electric
derive considerable economies from applying a single brand to a wide range of products. As a
result, companies that succeed in building strong consumer brands have a powerful incentive
to diversify, for example Nike’s diversification from athletic shoes into apparel and sports
equipment.
Like reputation, technology is an intangible asset whose value is not evident from most
companies’ balance sheets. Intellectual property – patents, copyrights, trade secrets and
trademarks – comprises technological and artistic resources where ownership is defined in
law. Over the past 20 years, companies have become more attentive to the value of their
intellectual property. For IBM (with the world’s biggest patent portfolio) and Qualcomm (with
its patents relating to CDMA digital wireless telephony), intellectual property is the most
valuable resource they own.
www.foundationsofstrategy.com
HUMAN RESOURCES Human resources of the firm comprise the expertise and effort
offered by employees. Like intangible resources, human resources do not appear on the 93
firm’s balance sheet – for the simple reason that the firm does not own its employees;
CHAPTER 3
it purchases their services under employment contacts. The reason for including human
resources as part of the resources of the firm is their stability. Although employees are free
to move from one firm to another – most employment contracts require no more than a
month’s notice on the part of the employee – in practice most employment contracts are
long term. In the US the average length of time an employee stays with an employer is
R e s o u rce s a n d capa b i l i t i e s
four years; in Europe it is longer: 8.4 years in Britain to 13 and 11.7 in France and Italy
respectively.7
Most firms devote considerable effort to appraising their human resources. This
appraisal occurs at the hiring stage when potential employees are evaluated in relation to the
requirements of their job and as part of an ongoing appraisal process of which annual employee
reviews form the centrepiece. The purposes of appraisal are to assess past performance for
the purposes of compensation and promotion, set future performance goals and establish
employee development plans. Trends in appraisal include greater emphasis on assessing results
in relation to performance targets (e.g. management‐by‐objectives) and broadening the basis
of evaluation (e.g. 360‐degree appraisal).
Over the past decade, human resource evaluation has become far more systematic and
sophisticated. Many organizations have established assessment centres specifically for the
purpose of providing comprehensive, quantitative assessments of the skills and attributes of
individual employees, and increasingly appraisal criteria are based upon empirical research
into the components and correlates of superior job performance. Competencies modelling
involves identifying the set of skills, content knowledge, attitudes and values associated with
superior performers within a particular job category and then assessing each employee against
that profile.8 An important finding of research into HR competencies is the critical role of
psychological and social aptitudes in determining superior performance; typically these factors
outweigh technical skills and educational and professional qualifications. Interest in emotional
intelligence reflects the recognition of the importance of interpersonal skills and emotional
awareness.9 Overall, these findings explain the trend among companies to ‘hire for attitude;
train for skills’.
The ability of employees to harmonize their efforts and integrate their separate skills
depends not only on their interpersonal skills but also on the organizational context. This
organizational context as it affects internal collaboration is determined by a key intangible
resource: the culture of the organization. The term organizational culture is notoriously ill
defined. Sebastian Green defines organizational (or corporate) culture as ‘an amalgam of
shared beliefs, values, assumptions, significant meanings, myths, rituals, and symbols that are
held to be distinctive’.10 The observation that companies with sustained superior financial
performance are frequently characterized by strong organizational cultures has led Jay Barney
to view organizational culture as a firm resource of great strategic importance that is potentially
very valuable.11
www.foundationsofstrategy.com
94
Case Insight 3.1
F O U N DAT I O N S O F S T R AT E G Y
www.foundationsofstrategy.com
Prahalad and Hamel criticize US companies for emphasizing products over capabilities.
Global leaders are those companies that develop core competencies over the long term. 95
Individual products may succeed or fail; the key is to learn from both success and failure in
CHAPTER 3
order to build capability.
R e s o u rce s a n d capa b i l i t i e s
disaggregating its activities. Two approaches are commonly used:
www.foundationsofstrategy.com
In Case Insight 3.2, we illustrate how this functional approach could be used to audit
96 Harley‐Davidson’s capabilities. In some areas, Harley’s capabilities are equivalent to those
of other motorcycle manufacturers; in others, Harley has developed capabilities that are
F O U N DAT I O N S O F S T R AT E G Y
2 Value chain analysis separates the activities of the firm into a sequential chain and
explores the linkages between activities in order to gain insight into a firm’s competitive
position. Michael Porter’s representation of the value chain distinguishes between
primary activities (those involved with the transformation of inputs and interface with
the customer) and support activities (Figure 3.3). Porter’s generic value chain identifies
www.foundationsofstrategy.com
FIRM INFRASTRUCTURE SUPPORT
ACTIVITIES
97
HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT
CHAPTER 3
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT
PROCUREMENT
R e s o u rce s a n d capa b i l i t i e s
INBOUND OPERATIONS OUTBOUND MARKETING SERVICE
LOGISTICS LOGISTICS AND SALES
PRIMARY ACTIVITIES
a few broadly defined activities that can be separated to provide a more detailed
identification of the firm’s activities (and the capabilities that correspond to each
activity). Case Insight 3.3 shows how this could look for firms like Harley‐Davidson
operating in the motorcycle industry. Thus, marketing can include market research, test
marketing, advertising, promotion, pricing and dealer relations. By exploring different
activities and, most crucially, the linkages between them, it is possible to gain a sense of
an organization’s main capabilities.
www.foundationsofstrategy.com
98
Case Insight 3.3
Using Porter’s value chain to explore the capabilities of firms in the
F O U N DAT I O N S O F S T R AT E G Y
motorcycle industry
Illustrative examples of activities and
Generic value chain associated capabilities required in the
Type of activity activity motorcycle industry
Primary activities Inbound logistics Purchasing
Supply chain management
Component manufacture
Operations Design and product development
Assembly
Flexible manufacturing
Quality control
Outbound logistics Distribution coordination and support
Dealer relationships and management
Marketing and sales Market research
Test marketing
Advertising
Promotion
Pricing
Service Warranty and servicing arrangements
Parts
Recycling
Support activities Infrastructure Strategic management
Managing external relations
Financial and risk management
Legal affairs
Human resource management Training and skills development
Staff recruitment and retention
Staff appraisal and performance management
Technology development Technology‐managed design and
manufacturing
Integrated management information systems
Technology linked manufacture and sales
Procurement Database management and IT controlled
purchasing of parts and sub‐assemblies
Inventory management
Supply chain integration and coordination
www.foundationsofstrategy.com
of the pickle on the burger to the maintenance of the milkshake machine. In practice,
personnel are routinized through continual repetition, meaning operating manuals are 99
seldom consulted.
These organizational routines – ‘regular and predictable behavioral patterns [comprising]
CHAPTER 3
repetitive patterns of activity’17 – are viewed by evolutionary economists as the fundamental
building blocks of what firms do and who they are. It is through the adaptation and
replication of routines that firms develop. Like individual skills, organizational routines
develop through learning by doing. Just as individual skills become rusty when not
R e s o u rce s a n d capa b i l i t i e s
used, so it is difficult for organizations to retain coordinated responses to contingencies
that arise only rarely. Hence, there tends to be a trade‐off between efficiency and flexibility.
A limited repertoire of routines can be performed highly efficiently with near‐perfect
coordination. The same organization may find it extremely difficult to respond to novel
situations.18
Creating organizational capability is not simply a matter of allowing routines to
emerge. Combining resources to create capability requires conscious and systematic actions
by management. These actions include: bringing the relevant resources together within an
organizational unit, designing processes, creating motivation and aligning the activity with the
overall strategy of the organization.
Figure 3.4 offers a partial view of the hierarchy of capabilities of a telecom equipment
maker. As we ascend the hierarchy, capabilities become progressively more difficult to develop:
higher‐level capabilities require the broadest integration of know‐how, typically across different
functional departments.
www.foundationsofstrategy.com
100 CROSS- New product Customer Quality
FUNCTIONAL development support management
CAPABILITIES capability capability capability
F O U N DAT I O N S O F S T R AT E G Y
SPECIALIZED Printed
Telset System
CAPABILITIES circuit-board
assembly assembly
(Manufacturing assembly
related only)
SINGLE-TASK Automated
Manual Surface
CAPABILITIES through-hole Wave
insertion of mounting of
(Only those component soldering
components components
related to PCB insertion
assembly)
www.foundationsofstrategy.com
THE EXTENT OF
THE COMPETITIVE
Scarcity 101
ADVANTAGE
ESTABLISHED
CHAPTER 3
Relevance
Durability
THE PROFIT-EARNING
SUSTAINABILITY OF
POTENTIAL
R e s o u rce s a n d capa b i l i t i e s
THE COMPETITIVE Transferability
OF A RESOURCE OR
ADVANTAGE
CAPABILITY
Replicability
Property rights
Relative
APPROPRIABILITY
bargaining power
Embeddedness
advantage. In oil and gas exploration, technologies such as directional drilling and 3D
seismic analysis are widely available – hence they are ‘needed to play’ but they are not
‘sufficient to win’.
●● Relevance: A resource or capability must be relevant to the KSFs in the market. British
coal mines produced some wonderful brass bands, but these musical capabilities
did little to assist the mines in meeting competition from cheap imported coal and
North Sea gas. As retail banking shifts towards automated teller machines and online
transactions, so the retail branch networks of the banks have become less relevant for
customer service.
●● Durability: The more durable a resource, the greater its ability to support a competitive
advantage over the long term. For most resources, including capital equipment and
proprietary technology, the quickening pace of technological innovation is shortening
their lifespans. Brands, on the other hand, can show remarkable resilience to time. Heinz
sauces, Kellogg’s cereals, Guinness stout, Burberry raincoats and Coca‐Cola have been
market leaders for over a century.
●● Transferability: Competitive advantage is undermined by competitive imitation. If
resources and capabilities are transferable – they can be bought and sold – then
www.foundationsofstrategy.com
any competitive advantage that is based upon them will be eroded. Some resources,
102 such as finance, raw materials, components, machines produced by equipment
suppliers and employees with generic skills are transferable and can be bought
F O U N DAT I O N S O F S T R AT E G Y
and sold with little difficulty. Other resources and most capabilities are not easily
transferred – either they are entirely firm‐specific or their value depreciates on
transfer. Some resources are immobile because they are specific to certain locations
and cannot be relocated. A competitive advantage of the Laphroaig distillery and
its 10‐year‐old, single malt whisky is its water spring on the Isle of Islay, which
supplies water flavoured by peat and sea spray. Capabilities, because they combine
multiple resources embedded in an organization’s management systems, are also
difficult to move from one firm to another. Another barrier to transferability is
limited information regarding resource quality. In the case of human resources, hiring
decisions are typically based on very little knowledge of how the new employee
will perform. Sellers of resources have better information about the performance
characteristics of resources than buyers do. This creates a problem of adverse
selection for buyers.19 Jay Barney has shown that different valuations of resources
by firms can result in their being either underpriced or overpriced, giving rise to
differences in profitability between firms.20 Finally, resources are complementary:
they are less productive when detached from their original home. Typically, brands
lose value when transferred between companies: the purchase of European brands
by Chinese companies – Aquascutum by YGM, Cerruti by Trinity Ltd., Volvo by
Geely – risks the diminution of brand equity.
●● Replicability: If a firm cannot buy a resource or capability, it must build it. In financial
services, most new product innovations can be imitated easily by competitors. In
retailing, too, competitive advantages that derive from store layout, point‐of‐sale
technology and marketing methods are easy to observe and easy to replicate. Capabilities
based on complex organizational routines are less easy to copy. Federal Express’s
national, next‐day‐delivery service and Singapore Airlines’ superior in‐flight services are
complex capabilities based on carefully honed processes, well‐developed HR practices
and unique corporate cultures. Even when resources and capabilities can be copied,
imitators are typically at a disadvantage to initiators.21
www.foundationsofstrategy.com
103
Case Insight 3.4
CHAPTER 3
Building and sustaining competitive advantage at Harley‐Davidson
Harley‐Davidson’s strategy is built around its brand and its ability to maintain and enhance its
American pioneering image. The company’s stated vision22 is that of ‘fulfilling its customers’
dreams of personal freedom’ and it endeavours to do this through its ‘commitment to
R e s o u rce s a n d capa b i l i t i e s
exceptional customer service’ in everything it does. To that end the company makes it easy
for customers to personalize their bikes, invests in its dealer network, offers financing and
ancillary merchandise and organizes social events for owners.
But how sustainable is Harley’s advantage? While the design, engineering, manufacturing
and sales capabilities that Harley has are widely available throughout the industry, its
marque is unique and has proved very enduring. The Harley‐Davidson brand is rooted in
the company’s history and protected by a portfolio of trademarks, copyrights and patents.
The gradual development and enhancement of the brand over time makes it difficult for
others to achieve similar levels of brand awareness quickly or easily. The uniqueness of the
company’s image is reinforced by the complementarity and fit that Harley has achieved
between different parts of its organization. It has built up complex organizational routines
and relationships over time and integrated these into a unique company culture. Harley’s
competitive advantage, therefore, appears durable and difficult to acquire or imitate. The
challenge, however, is whether the brand will transfer easily to new markets and market
segments.
www.foundationsofstrategy.com
104
Featured Example 3.2
F O U N DAT I O N S O F S T R AT E G Y
In professional sport, it would appear that star players are well positioned to exploit
the full value of their contribution to their team’s performance. The $27.8 million salary paid
to Kobe Bryant for the 2012/13 NBA season seems likely to fully exploit his value to the Los
Angeles Lakers.
Similarly with CEOs. Disney’s CEO, Robert Iger, was paid $31.4 million in 2011. But
determining how much Iger contributed to Disney’s 2011 net income of $5260 million as
compared with that of Disney’s other 156 000 employees is unknown.
The more an organization’s performance can be identified with the expertise of an
individual employee, the more mobile is that employee, and the more likely that the
employee’s skills can be deployed with another firm, the stronger is the bargaining position
of that employee.
Hence, the emphasis that many investment banks, advertising agencies and other
professional service firms give to team‐based rather than individual skills. ‘We believe our
strength lies in … our unique team‐based approach,’ declares audit firm Grant Thornton.
However, employees can reassert their bargaining power through emphasizing team mobility:
in September 2010, most of UBS’s energy team moved to Citi.
However, benchmarking carries risks. Dan Levinthal points to the danger of looking at
specific practices without taking account of interdependencies with other processes and the
organizational context more broadly: ‘Companies should be cautious about benchmarking
or imitating certain policies and practices of other firms … the implicit assumption in this
thinking is that the policy that is benchmarked and adopted is independent of what my firm is
www.foundationsofstrategy.com
already doing. The best human resource management practice for Nordstrom may not be the
best for McDonald’s. It may actually be dysfunctional.’27 105
The authors’ own experiences with companies point to the need for benchmarking to
CHAPTER 3
be supplemented by more reflective approaches to recognizing strengths and weaknesses. It
is useful to get groups of managers together to ask them to identify things that the company
has done well in recent years and things that it has done badly, and then to ask whether any
patterns emerge.
R e s o u rce s a n d capa b i l i t i e s
Case Insight 3.5
Appropriating the returns from competitive advantage
As Figure 3.6 illustrates, the results posted by Harley‐Davidson from the mid‐1990s onwards
suggest that the company has been successful in appropriating the superior returns it
earns from its unique resources and capabilities. The company’s motorcycles sell at a
premium price and its share price, revenue and net income have (the recent economic
downturn apart) shown an upward trajectory. The strike at the York manufacturing plant
in 2007 illustrates the struggle that is present in many companies between employees and
shareholders as to the division of ‘rents’ between different stakeholders but, across the
piece, Harley has a track record of harmonious relationships with its employees, suppliers
and dealers.
8.0B
HOG Price
HOG Revenue 70 7.0B
HOG Net Income
60 6.0B
$58.7
$5.6B
50 5.0B
40 4.0B
30 3.0B
20 2.0B
10 1.0B
$6.23.9M
0 0.0B
–10 –1.0B
1995 2000 2005 2010
Figure 3.6 Harley‐Davidson’s share price, revenue and net income: 1995–2013.
Source: www.gurufocus.com.
www.foundationsofstrategy.com