Abstract not found

On behalf of:

On behalf of:

Two strategic perspectives are analyzed, the neoclassical microeconomic perspective (using the Ricardo-Marshall approach to rent) and the Market Process perspective (using the Fetter approach to rent). In a neoclassical world, rents indicate "unsolved" or unexploited "inefficiencies" as every hypothetical outcome is viewed against the standard of perfect competition. By contrast, in the market process world there is no single ideal standard by which to measure any particular outcome. All action takes place in an open ended universe in which the future is continually being created, in which, competition is a "discovery process." A market process approach is not only more "realistic," it is better suited to the Resource-Based Theory of corporate and business strategy. 3 Rent and Resources: A market process perspective Introduction: Resource Based Theory and Rents The new resource based theory (RBT) of the firm relies, in many ways, on economic foundations. It takes as its point of d...

This paper develops an approach to organizational governance decisions that recognizes how the choice of organizational governance form affects both the creation and appropriation of economic value. The paper begins with a detailed survey of three theoretical approaches— transaction cost economics (TCE), the resource based view (RBV), and real options analysis (RoA) to the study of organizational governance. This review serves to provide background material on each theory as well as to identify the similarities and differences in the assumptions underlying these perspectives. A concluding section provides a series of propositions for future empirical research that may help to integrate these theories by incorporating notions of both value creation and value appropriation.

request. The Pennsylvania State University is committed to the policy that all persons shall have equal access to programs, facilities, admission, and employment without regard to personal characteristics not related to ability, performance, or qualifications as determined by University policy or by state or federal authorities. The Pennsylvania StateUniversity does not discriminate against any person because of age, ancestry, color, disability or handicap, national origin, race, religious creed, sex, sexual orientation, or veteran status. Direct all inquiries regarding the

Correspondence should go to this author.

Enhanced information sharing among criminal justice agencies is a critical concern and a goal of much IT investment. Understanding agencies ’ capabilities to achieve this goal is central to successful planning and investments, but indeed a difficult endeavor. The difficulty rests in part on the multiple and divergent theory frames for describing and understanding capability. This paper proposes a way of describing and assessing capabilities that goes beyond traditional resource-based models of organizational capability to include ideas from institutional and practice based perspectives. In this new perspective, capabilities are seen as multidimensional phenomena that are resource based and embedded in organizational routines, but we argue they are enacted through work practices, located in and bounded by their institutional contexts. The paper draws on literature from strategic management, information systems and organizational studies as well as practice theories to support this perspective. It then describes how this multidimensional perspective was used to develop an assessment tool for use in the criminal justice information initiatives. This is followed by a brief description of how the capability assessment tool was developed with a national panel of practitioners responsible for justice information integration initiatives and then applied within the context of one initiative. The test results illustrate the potential of the extended model in building a fuller understanding of the dimensions of organizational capability in practice and the utility of practical tools based on these dimensions. Categories and Subject Descriptors K.6.1 [Project and People Management]: Life cycle management techniques (e.g., PERT/CPM), Staffing, Strategic

Performance Excellence (CPE) have played a significant role in the practice of quality management, researchers have been slow to embrace the CPE framework. By viewing the CPE as an integrative model of organizational effectiveness that encompasses a number of cross-functional disciplines, one is led to speculate that a large body of literature relevant to the CPE framework exists. Indirectly, through their functional research, scholars from a variety of disciplines have been investigating the theoretical issues that embody the CPE. This article compares the strategic planning category of the CPE against the scholarly literature. The planning framework embedded in the CPE aligns considerably with the conceptual literature on strategic planning. These findings suggest some validity for the CPE framework, which demonstrates the translation of research into managerial practice and might inspire further research. Key words: action plans, long-range planning, strategy deployment, strategy development The Malcolm Baldrige Criteria for Performance Excellence (CPE) are designed to help organizations enhance competitiveness through the delivery of everimproving value to customers and improvements of overall organizational performance and capabilities. The CPE serve as a basis for organizational self-assessments, as well as the basis for the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award. Numerous state and local agencies (Bobrowski and Bantham 1994) and other countries (Powell 1995) have adopted similar award frameworks. As such, the CPE have attracted considerable industry interest. The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), which manages the National Quality Program

This paper maintains that the consistent application of subjectivism helps to reconcile contemporary entrepreneurship theory with strategic management research in general, and the resource−based view in particular. The paper synthesizes theoretical insights from Austrian economics and Penrose’s (1959) resources approach, arguing that entrepreneurship is inherently subjective and firm specific. This new synthesis describes how entrepreneurship is manifested in teams, and is driven by both heterogeneity of managerial mental models and shared team experiences.