Knowledge that Transforms

The current study investigates a central premise of the resource‐based view of the firm—that managers are a potential source of value creation for the firm. Using data from professional sports teams, we test theory regarding the effects of managerial ability, human resource stocks, and managers' actions on resource value creation. While results indicate managerial ability affects resource productivity, this effect is less pronounced with increases in the quality of firm resources. Further, we investigate the extent to which managerial actions that synchronize resource bundles account for the influence of managerial ability and resource context on a firm's performance advantage. These results contribute to our understanding of resource management and provide empirical evidence for the importance of managerial ability in the resource‐based view.

We examine the effect of a firm's relations with its nonfinancial stakeholders, including its employees, suppliers, customers, and communities, on the persistence of both superior and inferior financial performance. In particular, integrating and extending the resource‐based view of the firm and stakeholder management literatures, we develop the arguments that good stakeholder relations not only enable a firm with superior financial performance to sustain its competitive advantage for a longer period of time, but more importantly, also help poorly performing firms to recover from disadvantageous positions more quickly. The arguments are supported by the analysis of a series of first‐order autoregressive models. Our findings further suggest that the positive effect of good stakeholder relations on the persistence of superior performance is not as strong as that of some other firm resources, such as technological knowledge, but it is the only factor examined that promises to help a firm recover from inferior performance. Therefore, the role of positive stakeholder relations in helping poorly performing firms recover is found to be more critical than its role in helping superior firms sustain their performance advantage.

Do shareholders gain when managers disperse corporate resources through activities classified as corporate social responsibility (CSR)? Strategy scholars have recently developed a theoretical model that links such activities to shareholder value when a firm suffers a negative event; we test key portions of this theory of the ‘insurance‐like’ property of CSR activity. We posit that such activity leads to positive attributions from stakeholders, who then temper their negative judgments and sanctions toward firms because of this goodwill. We extend the risk management model by theorizing that some types of CSR activities will be more likely to create goodwill and offer insurance‐like protection than other types. We delineate several firm and event specific characteristics that we expect to influence the link between CSR activities and an insurance effect. We then test our model using an event study of 178 negative legal/regulatory actions against firms throughout the 11 years from 1993–2003. We find that participation in institutional CSR activities—those aimed at a firm's secondary stakeholders or society at large—provides an ‘insurance‐like’ benefit, while participation in technical CSRs—those activities targeting a firm's trading partners—yields no such benefits. We conclude by considering the implications of our findings for future theorizing and research into the economic value of CSR engagement.

Critics of the CEO/COO duo have stressed that this arrangement burdens the firm with increased costs and decreases the CEO's effectiveness. This study adopts an upper echelon perspective to argue that the presence of a COO may also create TMT‐level information‐processing benefits that can improve firm performance in certain conditions. Data from a sample of 153 firms in five industries highlight a strong positive relationship between the presence of a COO and two established measures of firm performance: return on assets and market‐to‐book ratio. The data also suggest that those relationships are contingent on the broader characteristics of the TMT.

Drawing on traditional resource‐based theory and its recent dynamic capabilities theory extensions, we examine both the possession of a market orientation and the marketing capabilities through which resources are deployed into the marketplace as drivers of firm performance in a cross‐industry sample. Our findings indicate that market orientation and marketing capabilities are complementary assets that contribute to superior firm performance. We also find that market orientation has a direct effect on firms' return on assets (ROA), and that marketing capabilities directly impact both ROA and perceived firm performance.

Dynamic managerial capabilities focus on managers' resource‐related decisions. Asset orchestration, a central component of dynamic managerial capabilities and of resource management, highlights the importance of integrating (matching) resource investment and deployment decisions. Building on these recent theoretical advances, we examine the contingent nature of resource investment and deployment decisions. The results, based on a sample of banking firms, indicate that firm performance suffers when managers' investment decisions deviate from the norms of rivals for both human and physical capital. However, when deployment decisions support investment decisions, greater investment deviation, both high and low, generally enhances performance. Specifically, firm performance is optimized by making congruent resource investment and deployment decisions as opposed to maximizing or economizing either decision independently. Therefore, resource management via asset orchestration is vital for superior performance.