We develop an approach to analyzing the sustainability of competitive advantage that emphasizes demand‐side factors. We extend the added‐value approach to business strategy by introducing an explicit treatment of how firms create value for consumers. This allows us to characterize how consumer heterogeneity and marginal utility from performance improvements on the demand side interact with resource heterogeneity and improving technologies on the supply side. Using this approach, we address a variety of questions including whether technology substitutions will be permanent or transitory; the sequence in which new technologies attack different market segments; how rents from different types of resources change over time; whether decreasing marginal utility and imitation give rise to similar rent profiles; the extent of synergies within a firm's resource portfolio; the emergence of new generic strategies; and the conditions that support strategic diversity in a market. Our focus on consumer utility and value creation complements the traditional focus in the strategy literature on competition and value capture. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

We study how diversity evolves at a firm with entry-level and upper-level employees who vary in ability and "type" (gender or ethnicity). The ability of entry-level employees is increased by mentoring. An employ receives more mentoring when more upper-level employees have the same type. Optimal promotions are biased by type, and this bias may favor either the minority or the majority. We characterize possible steady states, including a "glass ceiling," where the upper level remains less diverse than the entry level. A firm may have multiple steady states, whereby temporary affirmative-action policies have a long-run impact.

No abstract

Horizontal scope--the set of products and services offered--is an important dimension of firm strategy and a potentially significant source of competitive advantage. On one hand, the ability to build close buyer-supplier relationships over multiple transactions can give an advantage to broad firms that offer buyers "one-stop shopping." On the other hand, the existence of organizational tradeoffs can give an advantage to firms that specialize in a narrower range of products or services. We develop a biform game that incorporates this tension and show how the use of three generic scope strategies--specialist, generalist, and hybrid--depends on organizational tradeoffs, client-specific scope economies, barriers to entry, heterogeneity in buyer task requirements, and the bargaining power of suppliers relative to buyers. We then use the model to study a variety of issues in supply chain management, including the gains to coordinating suppliers, the optimal level of buyer power, and the desirability of subsidizing suppliers. One of our objectives is to show how biform games, which introduce unstructured negotiations into game theory analysis, can be used to develop applied theory relevant to strategy. Generalizing from our stylized model, we identify a class of biform games involving buyers and suppliers that is useful for strategy analysis. Games in this class have the attractive property of each supplier's share of industry total surplus being the product of its added value and its relative bargaining power.added value, biform games, client-specific scope economies, generalists versus specialists, supply chain management

We use a formal value-based model to study how frictions-incomplete linkages in the industry value chain that keep some parties from meeting and transacting-affect value creation and value capture. Frictions arise from search and switching costs and moderate the intensity of industry rivalry and the efficiency of the market. We find that firms with a competitive advantage prefer industries with less, but not zero, frictions. We show that rivalry interacts nontrivially with other competitive forces to affect industry attractiveness. Firm heterogeneity emerges naturally when we introduce resource development. Heterogeneity falls with frictions, but the sustainability of competitive advantage increases. Overall, we show that introducing frictions makes value-based models very effective at integrating analyses at the industry, firm, and resource levels. AbstractWe use a formal value-based model to study how frictions in the product market affect value creation and value capture. We define frictions as incomplete linkages in the industry value chain that keep some parties from meeting and transacting. Frictions, which arise from search and switching costs, vary across markets and over time as, for example, products commoditize and competition becomes more global. Importantly, frictions moderate the intensity of industry rivalry, as well as the efficiency of the market. We find that firms with a competitive advantage prefer industries with lower levels of frictions than their disadvantaged rivals. We show that the impact of rivalry on industry attractiveness cannot be analyzed independently of other competitive forces such as barriers to entry and buyer bargaining power. We introduce resource development in our model to study the emergence and sustainability of competitive advantage. Firm heterogeneity emerges naturally in our model. We show that the extent of firm heterogeneity falls with the level of frictions, but sustainability increases. Overall, we show that introducing frictions makes value-based models of strategy even more effective at integrating analyses at the industry, firm and resource levels.