Edith Penrose, organisational economics and business strategy: an assessment and extension

Pitelis, Christos N.

doi:10.1002/mde.1215

Cited by 36 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 59 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Second, the impact of the R&D investment on market value is higher in small firms. Hence, our finding give evidence to the theoretical arguments of Penrose (1959) as quoted in Pitelis (2005) and Arrow (1962) who, even though starting from different theoretical perspective, argue that small firms in a competitive market have a higher inventive (rent) to innovate. Third, the stock market discounts a significant part of the expected returns from the R&D investment in the first year of the announcement but the full valuation takes up to 2 years, a finding signalling the existence of myopia at least in the Greek financial markets.…”

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 74%

R&D and Tobin's q in an emerging financial market: the case of the Athens Stock Exchange

Parcharidis

Varsakelis

2010

Manage Decis Econ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 74%

R&D and Tobin's q in an emerging financial market: the case of the Athens Stock Exchange

Parcharidis

Varsakelis

2010

Manage Decis Econ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In this context the next best thing organizations can hope to do is create the preconditions that will allow them to compete in the market place from a position of relative strength, that is co-create markets, value and prices, so as to capture as much of it as possible (Pitelis and Teece 2009). In the case of an aspiring entrepreneur, this could often involve the creation of an organization -firm that helps them do so (Pitelis 2005).…”

Section: Figure 2 Around Herementioning

confidence: 99%

The Co-Evolution of Organizational Value Capture, Value Creation and Sustainable Advantage

Pitelis

2009

SSRN Journal

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite recent emphasis on intra-organizational issues, scholarship on organizations, management and strategy remains unduly reliant on economic models, such as the industrial organization (IO) market structure-based analysis. The focus of such models is on price-output determination by firms and the economy-wide efficient allocation of scarce resources under conditions of full knowledge and certainty. This limits their usefulness for students of organizations who have concerns that are simultaneously wider and also focused on organizations, as opposed to just markets. In this paper, we aim to provide an answer and framework for analysing the most fundamental, indeed existential, issue of organization studies and strategic management scholarship. This is whether and how the pursuit of value capture from economic agents who perceive that they possess appropriable value creating advantages, capabilities and action potential, can motivate the emergence of organizations and their strategies and actions intended to capture socially co-created value in conditions of real life . To do so, we explore (the co-evolution of) value capture and creation and (their relationship to) organizational sustainable advantage (SA). In particular, we delve into the nature, determinants and relationship between organizational value capture and creation and explore causal pathways, trade-offs and their co-evolution, as well as vehicles through which SA can be effected in an evolving and uncertain environment.We also discuss implications for managerial practice, limitations and future research opportunities.3

show abstract

“…This clearly distinguishes her case from businesses in the 1990s when divestment takes a more central role in firms' growth processes. Thus, the brief treatment of divestment and downsizing is, from today's perspective, a major gap in Penrose's theory (Pitelis, 2005, Thompson and Wright, 2005). Yet, Penrose's theoretical arguments, notably the above citation, contain the core for an explanation of divestment.…”

Section: Theoretical Perspectivesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Globalfocusing: From Domestic Conglomerates to Global Specialists*

Meyer

2006

J Management Studies

119

107

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Globalization is changing the competitive terrain on which companies develop their corporate strategy. On the global stage, key competitive advantages are gained through internationally fungible resources. Consequently, diversified conglomerates are converting to global specialists in narrower niche markets and competing with a small number of multinational enterprises operating worldwide. Their internationalization and their reduction of product diversification are opposite sides of the same coin: globalfocusing. I extend Penrosian resource-based theory to analyse this change process, notably by distinguishing country and industry specificity of firms' core competences, and by integrating divestment as part of firm growth processes. Globalfocusing is driven by shifts in the relative importance of country-specific and industry-specific resources and capabilities due to changes in the internal and external environment, notably the globalization of markets and supply chains. The argument is developed using case studies of restructuring of two Danish manufacturing enterprises. On this basis, I analyse the forces driving globalfocusing processes and suggest propositions for empirical testing.

show abstract

Edith Penrose, organisational economics and business strategy: an assessment and extension

Cited by 36 publications

References 59 publications

R&D and Tobin's q in an emerging financial market: the case of the Athens Stock Exchange

R&D and Tobin's q in an emerging financial market: the case of the Athens Stock Exchange

The Co-Evolution of Organizational Value Capture, Value Creation and Sustainable Advantage

Globalfocusing: From Domestic Conglomerates to Global Specialists*

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About