Typology and strategic analysis of intangible resources

Fernández, Estéban; Montes, José María de las Heras; Vázquez, Camilo J.

doi:10.1016/s0166-4972(99)00115-7

Cited by 155 publications

(99 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…As such, the results presented here, firstly, provide evidence of the value that intangible resources have for SMEs because they have limited physical and slack resources . Intangible resources such as social capital and technological capital or competence (including the creation and adoption of innovations) Fernandez, Montes, & Vázquez, 2000;Lee, 2010) are therefore indispensable for SMEs in building sustainable competitive advantage (Newbert, 2007). This thesis not only highlights the importance of such intangible resources (Study One) but also provides evidence of its positive association with SME performance (Study Two and Three).…”

Section: Summary Of Main Contributionsmentioning

confidence: 78%

SME performance: the role of networking, innovation breadth, and business model design

Gronum¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Because small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) are pivotal to the health and vibrancy of economies, it is crucial for researchers to understand the factors that significantly underlie SME performance. Two of the most widely identified antecedents to SME performance are innovation and networking. However, despite widespread attention, the theoretical and empirical status of the relationships between innovation, networks and SME performance remain uncertain. Some researchers note that claims regarding a direct positive relationship between innovation and networks with performance fail to adequately account for the variables that mediate this relationship.In contrast, while much research has been undertaken into the performance benefits of innovation and networks, the exponential increase in the number of publications heralding the performance benefits of business model design and business model innovation received very scant empirical support, almost non-existent for SMEs. Business model design is seen as a powerful mechanism for unlocking and enhancing the value of business processes, including innovation.Empirical evidence presented in this thesis tangibly supports this assertion and thus creates a more solid foundation for future development of the business model view of the firm.The purpose of this thesis, comprising four studies, is to theorise and research the nature of the relationship between innovation breadth, networks and business model design with SME performance. The central research question of this thesis asks: How do innovation breadth, networks and business model design relate to SME performance?Study One systematically reviews a large sample of SME growth and performance literature to identify and interpret emergent concepts, themes, trends and gaps. Study One backgrounds the three empirical studies that that follow to argue, using Resource-Based Theory, that the resources required for developing competitive advantage are both physical and intangible; of the two, intangible resources have the greatest strategic potential. In other words, the thesis finds that SMEs lacking physical resources could develop more sustainable competitive advantage by relying more heavily on leveraging path dependent, socially complex, and causally ambiguous intangible resources. Social capital and technological competence, associated with networks and innovation, represent highly desired intangible resources. Business model design organises these resources to create value for the customer. Therefore, innovation across the elements of the business model when designing or reconfiguring the SME's business model acts as dynamic capabilities that enhance SME performance.iii The systematic literature review is followed by three empirical studies that use longitudinal and cross-sectional datasets of Australian SMEs. Study Two introduces the concept of innovation breadth, as the number of distinct types of innovation that firms use, or their innovation diversity, and examines the linearity and temporality of its re...

show abstract

Section: Summary Of Main Contributionsmentioning

confidence: 78%

SME performance: the role of networking, innovation breadth, and business model design

Gronum¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…1) Tangible resources which include (Grant, 1991) (a) Financial assets (b) Physical assets 2) Intangible resources that are assets which include (a) Intellectual property assets (Hall, 1993) (b) Organizational assets (Fernández, Montes, & Vázquez, 2000); (Hall, 1993) (c) Reputational assets (Dowling, 2006) 3) Intangible resources that are skills and dynamic capabilities (Eisenhardt & Martin, 2000) (expertise, knowledge, technology) (Hall, 1993) Tangible financial assets are financial capital, cash on hand, and investments measured by the firm's balance sheet. Tangible resources include those factors containing financial or physical value which can be recorded in the institutions' balance sheet (Jeremy, 2005).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Technological Entrepreneurship Framework for University Commercialization of Information Technology

Amboala

Richardson

2016

IISIT

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

One effective way of accelerating the commercialization of university innovations (inventions) is to execute a "Technological Entrepreneurship" framework that helps the execution of agreements between universities and industry for commercialization. Academics have been encouraged to commercialize their research and findings yet the level of success of commercialization of inventions (innovations) in industry is questionable. As there is no agreed commercialization framework to guide the execution of processes to support inventions moving from laboratories to the right market. The lack of capabilities of appropriate processes have undermined the turning of innovation and products into wealth. The research questions are designed to identify the constraints and hindrances of commercialization and the characteristics of successful processes built from framework based on selected case studies of incubation capabilities within universities commercialization program.

show abstract

“…Others have provided a typology for intangible resources differentiating between human, organizational, technological and relational capital (Fernández et al, 2000). What is common across studies is that most resource typologies have been inspired by resourcebased theory and have focused on resources that exist within organizational boundaries, with some extensions to relational resources (Dyer and Singh, 1998 The overview suggests that AMJ articles that mention the term 'resources' fall under three broad categories: (1) people as resources, including the human resource, human capital and social capital perspectives; (2) organizational assets as resources that frame resources as a state (slack or distribution), type (specific capabilities or assets) and action (bundling or deploying) and (3) interorganizational and societal resources that address jointly produced or controlled resources that lie outside the focal firm or within or across firms and communities.…”

Section: 'Resources' In Amjmentioning

confidence: 99%