دانلود رایگان مقاله انگلیسی استراتژی های بازاری و غیر بازاری، عدم قطعیت استراتژیک و ظرفیت های استراتژیک - امرالد 2017

Abstract

Purpose – Amidst rapid development in emerging economies, greater emphasis on public–private partnerships and a more complex regulatory environment, nonmarket strategy (NMS) is now widely viewed as a key component of a firm’s overall strategy. This paper aims to investigate how nonmarket and market strategies are influenced by strategic uncertainties and capabilities and ultimately drive firm performance. Design/methodology/approach – A survey addressing strategic uncertainties, capabilities, NMS and market strategy and firm performance was administered online to 193 practicing managers in the USA. Measures for competitive strategy (i.e. cost leadership and differentiation), NMS, management and marketing capabilities, competitive and technology uncertainties and firm performance were adopted from or based on previous work. Hypotheses were tested via SmartPLS. Findings – Emphasis on NMS was linked to high marketing capability, high competitive uncertainty and high technology uncertainty. Cost leaders were more likely than differentiators to emphasize on NMS, although all three strategies were positive drivers of performance. NMS appears to be viewed as a part of an integrated strategic approach by managers in many organizations. Research limitations/implications – The sample included mangers in multiple industries. Self-typing scales were used to assess strategic emphasis and firm performance. Practical implications – Emphasis on NMS can promote firm performance, but the relationship is complex. Strategic managers should align the NMS with organizational capabilities and a market-oriented strategy appropriate for the firm. Originality/value – This paper provides empirical support for a model linking select strategic uncertainties, capabilities, market strategy and NMS and firm performance. It supports NMS as a key performance driver, but with links to uncertainties and capabilities that differ from those of market strategies.

Conclusions

The increased emphasis on NMS as an integrated part of an organization’s broad strategic effort rekindles a decades-old debate over the relative influence of industry and firm-specific factors on organizational performance (Karniouchina et al., 2013). The fallout from this debate transitioned the field from an industrial organization orientation to one that focuses on firm-level resources and capabilities (O’Regan et al., 2011; Barney, 1996). Regardless of one’s perspective on integration, MS and NMS represent distinct paths to firm performance (Bach and Allen, 2010; dos Reis et al., 2012; Henisz and Zelner, 2012; Lux et al., 2011; Cavazos and Rutherford, 2012; Vázquez-Maguirre and Hartmann, 2013). Within this context, the present study investigated the performance impact of NMS as it relates to traditional cost leadership and differentiation strategies, as well as NMS links to strategic uncertainties and capabilities. It is distinctive in four ways, the latter three of which remain relatively unexplored in the literature.

First, the direct performance impact of NMS was positive and significant. When compared to the performance links of market strategies (i.e. cost leadership and differentiation), the effect size (f2 ) of the NMS–performance nexus was the greatest. While the results of a single study should not be overgeneralized, the findings presented herein suggest that MS and NMS affect performance in similar ways. While this does not run counter to previous work in the field (Mellahi et al., 2016), it demonstrates support for a model that considers MS and NMS as competing and direct drivers of firm performance.