استراتژی ها و عملکرد شرکت در انگلستان
Abstract
Introduction
Market and nonmarket strategy, capabilities and turbulence
Hypotheses development
Methods
Findings
Discussion
Conclusions and future directions
References
Abstract
Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to investigate the influence of internal capabilities and environmental turbulence on market (e.g. cost leadership and differentiation) and nonmarket (e.g. political and social) strategies (NMS), and considers how these strategies impact financial and non-financial performance in firms in the United Kingdom.
Design/methodology/approach - A survey was administered online to 215 practicing managers in the UK. Measures for competitive strategy (i.e. cost leadership and differentiation), NMS, strategic capabilities, market turbulence and firm performance were adopted from or based on previous work. Hypotheses were tested via SmartPLS.
Findings - Findings underscore the impact of market turbulence across all market and nonmarket strategy dimensions. Multiple links between capabilities and strategies were identified. Both cost leadership and differentiation were significantly linked to non-financial performance, but only differentiation was significantly linked to financial performance. An increased emphasis on social NMS was linked to higher financial performance, but not non-financial performance. Political NMS was linked to neither financial nor non-financial performance.
Research limitations/implications - The sample included managers in multiple industries. Self-typing scales were utilized to measure market turbulence, emphasis on capabilities, strategic emphasis and firm performance.
Practical implications - Emphasis on social NMS can promote financial performance, but political NMS does not appear to drive either financial or non-financial performance.
Originality/value - This paper provides empirical support for a UK-based model linking market turbulence, strategic capabilities, market and nonmarket strategies, and both social and firm performance. It supports NMS as a key performance driver, but with caveats.
Introduction
Traditional thinking on strategy and firm performance is informed by a strong market orientation. Although nonmarket strategy (NMS) is not new, its deployment in both political and social dimensions has become more common in recent years (Bach and Allen, 2010; Buli, 2017; Mellahi et al., 2016; Parnell and Brady, 2018). Whereas market activity concentrates on improving organizational performance through market-oriented mechanisms such as advertising or product design, NMS includes patterns of organizational activity that seek to improve performance by managing the institutional or societal context of competition (Lux et al., 2012; Lux et al., 2011). The complexity of the NMS-performance link has prompted a greater focus on underlying mechanisms that appear to influence how NMS drives performance, its influence on consumer perceptions of the firm (Luo and Bhattacharya, 2006), access to financial resources (Madsen and Rodgers, 2015), and preferential access to political resources (Frynas et al., 2006). Global complexity and the lack of multilaterally accepted norms, processes and rules render cross-border NMS impractical and ineffective. As a result, a need for nation-specific assessment of nonmarket activity is germane (Kobrin, 2015).