Business strategies and manufacturing decisions

Abstract

Purpose-This paper seeks to investigate whether linkages, proposed by previous researchers, among business strategies and structural and infrastructural investment decisions of manufacturing are empirically supported. Design/methodology/approach-A sample of 101 US manufacturing firms is classified into three groups based on their predominant business strategies. The classification is validated using analysis of variance (ANOVA) tests on the taxons and on the environment in which the firms operate. ANOVA tests on manufacturing investment decisions are then used to address the central question of the paper-whether the three business strategy groups differ in their emphasis on structural and infrastructural areas of manufacturing. Findings-The three business strategy-based groups of firms, labeled broad-based competitors, differentiators, and price leaders, differ in their emphasis on several of the structural and infrastructural areas of manufacturing, thus supporting the contention of linkages among business strategy and manufacturing investment decisions. Originality/value-The popular notion of linkages among business strategies and investments in structural and infrastructural areas of manufacturing is empirically tested.

An impact of manufacturing flexibility and technological dimensions of manufacturing strategy on improving supply chain responsiveness: Business environment perspective

“…The research of Ward et al provided empirical evidences that the association exists between business strategy and investments on manufacturing (Ward et al, 2007). Zhao et al recognized taxonomy of manufacturing strategies in China and empirically investigated the relationship between manufacturing strategy and financial performance (Zhao et al, 2006).…”

How hotels compete on the basis of competitive priorities and their relationship with infrastructural and structural decisions

“…Diaz- , Avella (1999) Organizational structure Boyer and McDermott (1999), Avella (1999), Ferdows et al (1986) Human resources management Ward et al (2007), Kim and Arnold (1996) T. F. Espino-Rodríguez (Lawrence and Hottenstein 1995;Flynn et al 1990). Cronbach's alpha scores for the scales that measure the operations decisions and competitive priorities ranged from a low of 0.60 to a high of 0.87, indicating that they have a sufficiently high degree of inter-item reliability (Nunnally 1978) (see Table 4).…”

“…Christiansen et al (2003) suggest that certain practices, such as total quality management, human resources management and maintenance, positively influence competitive priorities. Likewise, Ward et al (2007) state that the most competitive firms are those with a greater investment in structural and infrastructural aspects directed toward creating capabilities. Moreover, Swink et al (2005) indicate that certain structural and infrastructural decisions are positively related to competitive priorities based on cost and quality.…”

“…The study tries to identify different groups of hotels, where each group presents a certain configuration based on competitive priorities. A firm's strategic effectiveness depends on the compatibility of the structures and processes both within and with the environment where the firm operates (Miller 1996;Ward et al 2007). Table 2 presents studies that have obtained taxonomies of firms using different classification criteria and theoretical frameworks.…”

Alignment in the organizations strategy window (concentration on business strategy and operations strategy)

“…Their findings imply that a differentiation strategy works when it is supported by manufacturing capability, that is, quality. Ward et al (2007) have conducted an applied research on creating relationship and alignment between business strategy and structural and infrastructural production decisions. The findings show that the type of business strategy (cost leadership, differentiation, concentration) influences the type of structural and infrastructural production decisions; therefore, there is a relationship between business strategy and production strategy.…”