Knowledge that Transforms

The decision to build market share has major resource‐allocation implications. To aid managers in assessing these implications, research was conducted to determine general relationships between changes in market share and variables representing market strategies and competitive position. The research was based on multiproduct, cross‐sectional regression analyses and includes variables that are—or should be—readily available to most businesses.

Previous research has suggested that low share market businesses have dismal prospects. This study examines low share businesses which are effective. In particular, it examines the product‐market choices and competitive strategies of effective low share businesses, comparing them with two control groups: effective high share and ineffective low share businesses. Data are drawn from PIMS data bases and hypotheses are tested using cluster analysis and discriminant analysis. Effective low share businesses are found to locate in stable rather than protected environments. Their competitive strategies are strongly characterized by selective focus on specific strengths.

Thirty‐three case histories of the process of formulating the nature of a strategic decision are analysed to determine what patterns emerge when they are compared with the Lyles' model of strategic problem formulation. A description of each pattern, its causes, and results are discussed.

The paper contains a review and evaluation of empirical and case studies on the performance of whole enterprises. Research from a diverse array of academic disciplines and research traditions is included. The central focus is on identifying factors that influence organizational performance, and discussing implications for future interdisciplinary research and the strategic management of contemporary organizations.

The relationships between the difficulty of entry and competitive strategies in five industries, chosen for their differing structural contexts, were tested. Statistical support was found for the value of pre‐entry analysis of entry barriers and of firms' predicted responses to potential entry. In particular, the creation of idle productive capacity appears to be a potent deterrent to new entrants.

Abstract ‘Strategic awareness’ is viewed in two ways: the extent to which an executive's perception of the organization's strategy aligns (a) with the organization's ‘realized’ strategy and (b) with the chief executive's perception. Strategic awareness is positively related to hierarchical level, but differs across the three industries studied. Awareness is greater in organizations that have recently changed their strategies than in those that have not.

This paper incorporates both diversification strategy and market structure variables in a study of corporate economic performance. A subsample of 128 firms from Rumelt's 1974 study was updated and utilized to investigate the possibility that market structure variables might moderate or confound the diversification/performance relationship he reported. Study results indicate that performance differences could be demonstrated for some of Rumelt's categories, but, across the range of categories, a hypothesis of performance differences was rejected. As expected, categories associated with distinctly high or distinctly low economic performance were also associated with significant differences in a series of market structure variables.

This paper investigates performance differences (in terms of ROA) between related and unrelated diversified firms. Two regression models of performance are estimated using a sample of 80 firms. Performance differences are associated with advertising expenditures, accounting determined risk, research and development expenditures and capital intensity. The models suggest that research and development expenditures are an important determinant in the performance advantage enjoyed by related diversified firms.