management(动态能力与战略管理)

1、.：.；企业如何竞争？企业如何赚取高于正常的报答吗？什么是需求长期坚持杰出的性能呢？一个日益强大的运营战略这些根本问题的答案在于动态才干的概念。这些的技艺，程序，例程，组织构造和学科，使公司建立，聘请和协调相关的无形资产，以满足客户的需求，并不能随便被竞争对手复制。具有较强的动态才干是企业剧烈的进取精神。他们不仅顺应商业生态系统，他们也塑造他们经过创新，协作，学习和参与。大卫蒂斯是动态才干的角度来看的先驱。它植根于25年，他的研讨，教学和咨询。他的思想曾经在企业战略，管理和经济学的影响力，创新，技术管理和竞争政策有关。经过他的顾问和咨询任务，他也带来了这些想法，承当业务和政策，使周围的世界。本

2、书的中心思想动态才干是最明晰和最简约的语句。蒂斯解释其成因，运用，以及如何他们提供了一个替代的方法很多传统的战略思想，立足于简单和过时的产业组织和竞争优势的根底的了解。通俗易懂撰写并发表了，这将是一个非常珍贵的工具，为一切那些谁想要了解这一重要的战略思想的奉献，他们的MBA学生，学者，管理人员，或顾问和刺激。Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 18:7, 509533 (1997)The dynamic capabilities framework analyzes the sources and methods of wealth creation and

3、capture by private enterprise firms operating in environments of rapid technological change. The competitive advantage of firms is seen as resting on distinctive processes (ways of coordinating and combining), shaped by the firms (specific) asset positions (such as the firms portfolio of difficult-t

4、o-trade knowledge assets and complementary assets), and the evolution path(s) it has adopted or inherited. The importance of path dependencies is amplified where conditions of increasing returns exist. Whether and how a firms competitive advantage is eroded depends on the stability of market demand,

5、 and the ease of replicability (expanding internally) and imitatability (replication by competitors). If correct, the framework suggests that private wealth creation in regimes of rapid technological change depends in large measure on honing internal technological, organizational, and managerial pro

6、cesses inside the firm. In short, identifying new opportunities and organizing effectively and efficiently to embrace them are generally more fundamental to private wealth creation than is strategizing, if by strategizing one means engaging in business conduct that keeps competitors off balance, rai

7、ses rivals costs, and excludes new entrants. (C) 1997 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.战略管理杂志。 18:7 ， 509-533 1997 动态才干框架分析方法的来源和财富发明和捕捉由私人企业公司在环境的技术快速变化。竞争优势的公司被视为搁在独特的过程(方法的协调和结合),遭到公司的(特定的)资产头寸(如该公司的投资组合的难以贸易知识资产和互补资产),和演化途径(s)已采取或承继。途径依赖的重要性是放大收益递增的情况存在。能否和怎样一个公司的竞争优势是侵蚀取决于市场需求的稳定性,易于复现性(扩展内部)和imitatab

8、ility(复制竞争对手)。假设正确,框架阐明,私人财富发明在政权的技术快速变化很大程度上取决于内部技术、组织、珩磨和管理流程在公司。总之,识别新的时机和组织有效和高效地拥抱他们通常更根本的私人财富发明比谋略,假设经过谋划一个意味着从事商业行为,使对手失去平衡,提高竞争对手的本钱,不包括新进入者。(C)1997年由约翰威利父子公司。 INTRODUCTIONThe fundamental question in the field of strategic management is how firms achieve and sustain competitive advantage. We

9、 confront this question here by developing the dynamic capabilities approach, which endeavors to analyze the sources of wealth creation and capture by firms. The development of this framework flows from a recognition by the authors that strategic theory is replete with analyses of firm-level strateg

10、ies for sustaining and safeguarding extant competitive advantage, but has performed less well with respect to assisting in the understanding of how and why certain firms build competitive advantage in regimes of rapid change. Our approach is especially relevant in a Schumpeterian world of innovation

11、-based competition, price/performance rivalry, increasing returns, and the creative destruction of existing competences. The approach endeavors to explain firm-level success and failure. We are interested in both building a better theory of firm performance, as well as informing managerial practice.

12、 In order to position our analysis in a manner that displays similarities and differences with existing approaches, we begin by briefly reviewing accepted frameworks for strategic management. We endeavor to expose implicit assumptions, and identify competitive circumstances where each paradigm might

13、 display some relative advantage as both a useful descriptive and normative theory of competitive strategy. While numerous theories have been advanced over the past two decades about the sources of competitive advantage, many cluster around just a few loosely structured frameworks or paradigms. In t

14、his paper we attempt to identify three existing paradigm and describe aspects of an emerging new paradigms that we label dynamic capabilities. The dominant paradigm in the field during the 1980s was the competitive forces approach developed by Porter (1980). This approach rooted in the structurecond

15、uctperformance paradigm of industrial organization (Mason, 1949 Bain, 1959), emphasizes the actions a firm can take to create defensible positions against competitive forces. A second approach, referred to as a strategic conflict approach (e.g., Shapiro, 1989) is closely related to the first in its

16、focus on product market imperfections, entry deterrence and strategic interaction. The strategic conflict approach uses the tools of game theory and thus implicitly views competitive outcomes as a function of the effectiveness with which firms keep their rivals off balance through strategic investme

17、nts, pricing strategies, signaling, and the control of information. Both the competitive force and the strategic conflict approaches appear to share the view that rents flow from privileged product market positions. Another distinct class of approaches emphasizes building competitive advantage throu

18、gh capturing entrepreneurial rents stemming from fundamental firm-level efficiency advantages. These approaches have their roots in a much older discussion of corporate strengths and weaknesses they have taken on new life as evidence suggest that firms build enduring advantages only through efficien

19、cy and effectiveness, and as development in organizational economics and the study on technological and organizational change become applied to strategy questions. One strand of this literature, often referred to as the resource-based perspective, emphasizes firm-specific capabilities and assets and

20、 the existence of isolating mechanisms as the fundamental determinants of firm performance (Penrose, 1959; Rumelt, 19842). This perspective recognizes but does not attempt to explain the nature of the isolating mechanisms that enable entrepreneurial rents and competitive advantage to be sustained.简介

21、在战略管理领域的根本问题是企业如何获得和坚持竞争优势。我们面对这个问题，在这里开展动态才干的方法，努力发明财富的来源进展分析，并捕获由企业。这个框架的开展，从战略实际是由作者充溢维持和维护现存的竞争优势的企业级战略分析确认，但对于协助了解如何以及为什么某些公司的表现稍逊在快速变化的制度，建立竞争优势。在熊彼特创新为根底的竞争，价钱/性能的竞争，报酬递增，现有的才干和“发明性破坏的世界，我们的做法是特别相关。的方法解释企业层面的胜利和失败的努力。我们有兴趣在这两个建筑企业绩效的一种较好的实际，以及通知管理实际。为了定位我们的分析，我们首先简要回想公认的框架，战略管理的方式显示与现有方法的异同。我

22、们将尽力揭露隐含的假设，并找出有竞争力的情况下，作为一个有用的描画性和规范性的竞争战略实际，每个范式能够显示一些相对的优势。虽然曾经提出了许多实际在过去二十年的竞争优势来源，许多集群周围只是一个构造松散的框架或范式。在本文中，我们试图找出现有三个范式和描画方面的一门新兴的新的范式，我们的标签动态才干。在20世纪80年代在该领域的主导范式是由波特 1980接近开发的竞争力。这种做法植根于工业组织梅森，1959年， 1949年贝恩的构造 - 行为 - 绩效范式，强调企业可以创建守难攻的位置，对竞争力的行动。第二种方法称为一个战略冲突的方法例如，1989年，夏皮罗是亲密相关的第一个专注于产品市场的不

23、完善，进入威慑和战略互动。战略冲突的方法是运用博弈论的工具，从而隐含地以为，有竞争力的结果作为一个功能与企业坚持他们的对手失去平衡，经过战略投资，定价战略，信令和控制信息的有效性。竞争力和战略冲突的方法似乎赞同这样的观念租金流特权产品的市场位置。另一个不同的类的方法，强调建立竞争优势，经过捕捉创业租金源于根本的企业级的效率优势。这些方法都有其根源在旧讨论企业的优点和短处，他们曾经采取了新的生活的证听阐明，企业建立耐久的优势，只能经过效率和效益，组织经济学的开展和研讨的技术和组织变革成为适用于战略问题。这种文学的一个链，通常被称为“资源为根底的角度，强调企业的详细才干和资产隔离机制的存在，作为企

24、业绩效的根本决议要素彭罗斯， 1959 ;罗曼尔特的， 19842 。这个角度认识，但并不试图解释性质的隔离机制，使企业家租和竞争优势得以继续。Another component of the efficiency-based approach is developed in this paper. Rudimentary efforts are made to identify the dimensions of firm-specific capabilities that can be sources of advantage, and to explain how combinatio

25、ns of competences and resources can be developed, deployed, and protected. We refer to this as the dynamic capabilities approach in order to stress exploiting existing internal and external firm specific competences to address changing environments. Elements of the approach can be found in Schumpete

26、r (1942), Penrose (1959), Nelson and Winter (1982), Prahalad and Hamel (1990), Teece (1976, 1986a, 1986b, 1988) and in Hayes, Wheelwright, and Clark (1988): Because this approach emphasizes the development of management capabilities, and difficult-to-imitate combinations of organizational, functiona

27、l and technological skills, it integrates and draws upon research in such areas as the management of R&D, product and process development, technology transfer, intellectual property, manufacturing, human resources, and organizational learning. Because these fields are often viewed as outside the tra

28、ditional boundaries of strategy, much of this research has not been incorporated into existing economic approaches to strategy issues. As a result, dynamic capabilities can be seen as an emerging and potentially integrative approach to understanding the newer sources of competitive advantage.We sugg

29、est that the dynamic capabilities approach is promising both in terms of future research potential and as an aid to management endeavoring to gain competitive advantage in increasingly demanding environments. To illustrate the essential elements of the dynamic capabilities approach, the sections tha

30、t follow compare and contrast this approach to other models of strategy. Each section highlights the strategic insights provided by each approach as well as the different competitive circumstances in which it might be most appropriate. Needless to say, these approaches are in many ways complementary

31、 and a full understanding of firm-level, competitive advantage requires an appreciation of all four approaches and more.本文开发的效率为根底的方法的另一个组成部分。简陋的努力都是为了确定企业特定的才干，可以尺寸的优势来源，并解释如何组合的才干和资源可以开发，部署和维护。我们称此为“动态才干的做法，为了强调利用现有的内部和外部公司的详细才干，以应对不断变化的环境。元素的方法，可以发如今熊彼特1942，彭罗斯1959，纳尔逊和温特1982，普拉哈拉德和哈默尔1990，蒂斯1976

32、，1986A，1986b，1988和海耶斯，车匠，和克拉克1988：由于这种做法强调了管理才干的开展，并难以-到-模拟的组织功能和技术技艺的组合，它整合并绘制后，在研发管理，产品和工艺开发，技术等领域的研讨转让，知识产权，制造，人力资源，组织学习。由于这些领域往往被视为传统的战略边境外，本研讨还没有被纳入到现有的经济战略问题的方法。因此，动态才干，可以被看作是一个新兴市场和潜在的综合性的方法来了解新的竞争优势来源。我们以为，动态才干的方法是看好双方未来的研讨潜力和管理，努力在日益苛刻的环境中获得竞争优势的援助。为了阐明动态才干方法的根本要素，下面的章节中比较和对比其他车型战略方针。每节突出了每

33、种方法，以及不同的竞争环境下，它能够是最适宜的战略洞察力。不用说，这些方法在许多方面互补性和充分的了解企业层面，竞争优势，需求一切四个方法和更多的升值。MODELS OF STRATEGY EMPHASIZING THE EXPLOITATION OF MARKET POWERCompetitive forcesThe dominant paradigm in strategy at least during the 1980s was the competitive forces approach. Pioneered by Porter (1980), the competitive fo

34、rces approach views the essence of competitive strategy formulation as relating a company to its environment . The key aspect of the firms environment is the industry or industries in which it competes. Industry structure strongly influences the competitive rules of the game as well as the strategie

35、s potentially available to firms. In the competitive forces model, five industry-level forcesentry barriers, threat of substitution, bargaining power of buyers, bargaining power of suppliers, and rivalry among industry incumbentsdetermine the inherent profit potential of an industry or sub-segment o

36、f an industry. The approach can be used to help the firm find a position in an industry from which it can best defend itself against competitive forces or influence them in its favor (Porter, 1980: 4). This five-forces framework provides a systematic way of thinking about how competitive forces work

37、 at the industry level and how these forces determine the profitability of different industries and industry segments. The competitive forces framework also contains a number of underlying assumptions about the sources of competition and the nature of the strategy process. To facilitate comparisons

38、with other approaches, we highlight several distinctive characteristics of the framework. Economic rents in the competitive forces framework are monopoly rents (Teece, 1984). Firms in an industry earn rents when they are somehow able to impede the competitive forces (in either factor markets or prod

39、uct markets) which tend to drive economic returns to zero. Available strategies are described in Porter (1980). Competitive strategies are often aimed at altering the firms position in the industry vis-a-vis competitors and suppliers. Industry structure plays a central role in determining and limiti

40、ng strategic action. Some industries or subsectors of industries become more attractive because they have structural impediments to competitive forces (e,g: entry barriers) that allow firms better opportunities for creating sustainable competitive advantages. Rents are created largely at the industr

41、y or subsector level rather than at the firm level. While there is some recognition given to firm-specific assets, differences among firms relate primarily to scale. This approach to strategy reflects its incubation inside the field of industrial organization and in particular the industrial structu

42、re school of Mason and Bain(Teece, 1984).模型开发的战略强调市场力量竞争力在战略上，至少在上世纪80年代的主导范式是竞争力的方法。波特1980 ，首创竞争力的方法对待一家公司有关其环境制定竞争战略的精华. T他公司的环境的关键环节是它竞争的行业或产业。产业构造剧烈地影响着竞争的游戏规那么，以及能够提供应企业的战略。在竞争力模型，五个行业级部队进入壁垒，替代要挟，买方议价才干，供应商的议价才干，行业之间的竞争现任确定一个行业或一个行业的细分市场固有的潜在利润。该方法可以用来协助 公司在一个行业中找到一个位置，它最能捍卫本身对竞争力影响他们对其有利波特，19

43、80：4。这“五力框架提供了一个系统的竞争力如何，在行业层面的任务，这些力量如何确定不同行业和细分行业的盈利才干的思索方式。竞争力框架还包含了一些竞争的来源和性质的战略过程中的根本假设。为了便于与其他方法比较，我们强调几个特征鲜明的框架。竞争力框架中的经济租金的垄断租金蒂斯，1984。在一个行业的企业赚取租金时，他们曾经在某种程度上可以妨碍竞争力无论是要素市场或产品市场倾向于推进经济报答为零。波特1980年中描画可用的战略。竞争战略往往是为了改动公司的面对面的人在行业竞争对手和供应商的位置。工业构造中起着中心的作用，在确定和限制战略行动。一些行业或子行业变得更加“有吸引力，由于他们有竞争力E，

44、G：准入门槛，建立可继续的竞争优势，使企业更好的开展时机的构造性妨碍。租金主要是在行业或界别分组的程度，而不是在企业层面建立。虽然有一些公司特定资产的识别，企业之间的差别主要涉及规模。这种战略的方法来反映其孵化产业组织领域内，特别是产业构造学校梅森和贝恩蒂斯，1984。Strategic conflict The publication of Carl Shapiros 1989 article, confidently titled The Theory of Business Strategy, announced the emergence of a new approach to bu

45、siness strategy, if not strategic management. This approach utilizes the tools of game theory to analyze the nature of competitive interaction between rival firms. The main thrust of work in this tradition is to reveal how a firm can influence the behavior and actions of rival firms and thus the mar

46、ket environment. Examples of such moves are investment in capacity (Dixit, 1980), R&D (Gilbert and Newberry, 1982), and advertising (Schmalensee,1983). To be effective, these strategic moves require irreversible commitments. The moves in question will have no effect if they can be costlessly undone.

47、 A key idea is that by manipulating the market environment, a firm may be able to increase its profits.This literature, together with the contestability literature (Baumol, Panzar, and Willig, 1982), has led to a greater appreciation of the role of sunk costs, as opposed to fixed costs, in determini

48、ng competitive outcomes. Strategic moves can also be designed to influence rivals behavior through signaling. Strategic signaling has been examined in a number of contexts, including predatory pricing (Kreps and Wilson, 1982a, 1982b) and limit pricing (Milgrom and Roberts, 1982a, 1982b). More recent

49、 treatments have emphasized the role of commitment and reputation (e.g., Ghemawat, 1991) and the benefits of firms simultaneously pursuing competition and cooperation (Brandenburger and Nalebuff, 1995, 1996).战略冲突公布1989年卡尔夏皮罗的文章，自信题为“企业战略实际，宣布的运营战略出现了一种新的方法，假设没有战略管理。这种方法利用博弈论分析工具的性质，有竞争力的对手公司之间的互动。在这

50、一传统中任务的主旨在于提示企业如何影响对手企业的行为和动作，因此市场环境。这些举措的例子是投资的才干迪克西特1980 ， R D吉尔伯特和纽贝里，1982年 ，广告施马兰西，1983 。是有效的，这些战略举措，需求不可逆转的承诺。挪动不会有任何影响，假设他们可以无本钱地吊销。一个关键的想法是，经过支配的市场环境，公司或答应以添加其利润。这种文学与的可争议文学 1982鲍莫尔，帕恩查和威利格，导致更大的升值沉没本钱，而不是固定的本钱，决议竞争结果的作用。战略举措，也可以经过信令来影响对手的行为。战略信号已检查在一些情况下，包括掠夺性定价克瑞普斯和威尔逊，1982年， 1982b ，限制定价米尔格

51、罗姆和罗伯茨， 1982a ， 1982b 。最近的治疗强调承诺和信誉的作用例如，格玛沃特，1991 ，同时追求竞争的协作勃兰登堡和纳尔巴夫的， 1995年， 1996年的企业的益处。 In many instances, game theory formalizes long-standing intuitive arguments about various types of business behavior (e.g., predatory pricing, patent races), though in some instances it has induced a substan

52、tial change in the conventional wisdom. But by rationalizing observed behavior by reference to suitably designed games, in explaining everything these models also explain nothing, as they do not generate testable predictions (Sutton, 1992). Many specific game-theoretic models admit multiple equilibr

53、ium, and a wide range of choice exists as to the design of the appropriate game form to be used. Unfortunately, the results often depend on the precise specification chosen. The equilibrium in models of strategic behavior crucially depends on what one rival believes another rival will do in a partic

54、ular situation. Thus the qualitative features of the results may depend on the way price competition is modeled (e.g., Bertrand or Cournot) or on the presence or absence of strategic asymmetries such as first-mover advantages. The analysis of strategic moves using game theory can be thought of as dy

55、namic in the sense that multiperiod analyses can be pursued both intuitively and formally. However, we use the term dynamic in this paper in a different sense, referring to situations where there is rapid change in technology and market forces, andfeedback effects on firms. 博弈论在许多情况下，正式长期直观的各种类型的商业行

56、为如掠夺性定价，专利竞赛的争论，虽然在某些情况下，它引发了本质性的变化，在传统的智慧。但经过察看到的行为合理化的参考设计适宜的游戏，解释一切，这些模型也可以解释什么，由于他们不产生可检验的预测萨顿，1992年 。许多详细的博弈论模型的多个平衡成认，存在广泛的选择，要运用的适当的游戏的方式设计。不幸的是，其结果通常依赖于所选择的准确规格。战略行为模型的平衡，关键取决于一个对手，置信另一个对手将在特定情况下做什么。因此，定性特征的结果能够依赖于价钱竞争方式是仿照如伯特兰或古诺 ，或如先发优势的战略不对称的存在或不存在。运用博弈论分析的战略举措，可以被以为是在这个意义上，可以追求多期分析直观正式为“

57、动态 。然而，我们在本文在不同的意义上运用的术语“动态，指的是快速变化的技术和市场的力量，和“反响对企业的影响情况。We have a particular view of the contexts in which the strategic conflict literature is relevant to strategic management. Firms that have a tremendous cost or other competitive advantage vis-a-vis their rivals ought not be transfixed by the m

58、oves and countermoves of their rivals. Their competitive fortunes will swing more on total demand conditions, not on how competitors deploy and redeploy their competitive assets. Put differently, when there are gross asymmetries in competitive advantage between firms, the results of game-theoretic a

59、nalysis are likely to be obvious and uninteresting. The stronger competitor will generally advance, even if disadvantaged by certain information asymmetries. To be sure, incumbent firms can be undone by new entrants with a dramatic cost advantage, but no gaming will overturn that outcome. On the oth

60、er hand, if firms competitive positions are more delicately balanced, as with Coke and Pepsi, and United Airlines and American Airlines, then strategic conflict is of interest to competitive outcomes. Needless to say, there are many such circumstances, but they are rare in industries where there is