Performance differences across strategic groups: an examination of financial market‐based performance measures

Pandian, J. Rajendran; Thomas, Howard; Furrer, Olivier; Bogner, William C.

doi:10.1002/jsc.769

Cited by 15 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 47 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Indeed, intangible assets such as intellectual human capital, scientific expertise, and patents, which are the primary value drivers of research oriented firms, are not fully captured by accounting measures (Tan and Lim, 2007). Moreover, accounting based performance measures may be subject to managerial discretion and may suffer for short‐term bias (Pandian et al., 2006). Therefore, to evaluate the sensitivity of our findings to the performance indicator, we used price to book ratio as a second measure of firm performance.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Multimarket Competition, Mobility Barriers, and Firm Performance

Guedri

McGuire

2011

J Management Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study develops and tests a theoretical framework which suggests interactive dynamics, with strong performance implications, between the height of mobility barriers surrounding strategic groups and the extent of within-group multimarket competition. Empirical analysis drawn from a longitudinal sample of pharmaceutical firms indicates that within-group multimarket competition has strong positive effect on firm performance for strategic groups surrounded by high mobility barriers. As we move lower on the mobility barriers hierarchy, this effect decreases, becoming non-significant for groups surrounded by moderate mobility barriers and negative for groups surrounded by low mobility barriers. These findings highlight the conditions under which mobility barriers and multimarket competition have significant performance implications. In addition, our results suggest that mobility barriers and multimarket competition are not substitutive but complementary devices promoting mutual coordination within strategic groups. Finally, our findings point to the need to consider multimarket contacts as an aggregate property of strategic groups.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Multimarket Competition, Mobility Barriers, and Firm Performance

Guedri

McGuire

2011

J Management Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There has been some variance in the role that objective performance indicators play in identifying the performance differences across groups in an industry (Pandian et al, 2006). Moreover, these measures are difficult to obtain at the plant level, especially when some plants are a part of a larger corporation.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Intra‐industry shared cognitions and organizational competitiveness

2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

᭹ Managers and researchers have long debated the role of industry cognition in guiding strategic change. Still unresolved within this discussion, however, is the degree to which cognition-based strategic change is directed at being more similar to -and different from -competitors. ᭹ This paper uses multi-source data collected for 380 corrugated box manufacturing plants in the USA to suggest that managers in different cognitive groups within the industry place differing degrees of importance on two fundamental organizational activities, namely: innovation and customer service. More importantly, the extent to which a plant manager's ratings of the importance of these two activities deviated from the cognitive group's norms is found to be negatively related to organizational performance.

show abstract

“…Research on the explanation of performance has emphasized the determinants at three principal levels of analysis: (1) the firm, (2) the strategic group, and (3) the industry (McGee and Thomas, ; Short et al ., ). The lack of conclusive empirical support for the relationship between membership in a group and the group performance casts doubt on the very foundations of the underlying theory of strategic groups (Pandian et al ., ). Two types of effect merit analysis (Short et al ., ).…”

Section: Strategic Group Theory In the Context Of The Pharmaceutical mentioning

confidence: 99%