市场营销外文文献翻译及市场营销参考文献
INTRODUCTION resources drive firm performance (e.g., Helfat,
2000). More recently, the focus of much RBV
Under the resource-based view of the firm (RBV), research has been on understanding the outcomes
resources drive the firm’s ability to design, pro- of resource deployment processes (e.g., Barney
duce, market, and distribute its goods and ser- and Mackey, 2005; Sirmon, Hitt, and Ireland,
vices. The RBV has provided important theoretical 2007) often referred to as organizational capabili-
foundations for understanding how heterogeneous ties (e.g., Kale and Singh, 2007; Slater, Olson, and
Hult, 2006). Capabilities research has recognized
that a firm’s ability to deploy resources through
Keywords: marketing capabilities; product-market strat-
egy; business performance; capabilities integration organizational capabilities may be more important
than absolute resource levels in driving perfor-
mance (e.g., DeSarbo, Di Benedetto, and Song,
2007). This emerging research stream has enabledtheoretical explanations regarding how some firms 1995).Thisissue,whilefrequently discussedinthe
overcome resource deficiencies by deploying their RBVliterature(DeSarboet al.,2007),hasnotbeen
available resources in ways that outperform sim- empirically examined in previous studies (New-
ilar deployments by competitors (DeSarbo, Di bert, 2007). This omission is surprising given the
Benedetto, Song, and Sinha, 2005), such as occurs, important role this theoretical assumption plays in
for example, when small firms create innovative capabilities theory, which stresses the importance
new products that offer customers more value than of resource deployment as a way of protecting
those offered by larger competitors (Qian and Li, competitive advantage from erosion.
2003). An additional deficiency highlighted by New-
An important part of the RBV-capabilities lit- bert (2007) relates to both theoretical and empir-
erature has highlighted the value of developing ical research dealing with capabilities integration
organizational capabilities as a means of imple-
(e.g., Dutta, Narasimhan, and Rajiv, 1999; Grant,
menting firm strategies (Slater et al., 2006; Zott,
1996; Teece, Pisano, and Schuen, 1997). Capabil-
1
2003). Beginning with Penrose (1959), strate-
ities integration has been proposed as a key fac-
gic management research has postulated that the
tor leading to superior performance and ultimately
deployment of those capabilities that best serve to
sustainablecompetitiveadvantage.However,capa-
implement the firm’s strategic plans yields both
bilities integration has been investigated in only
higher growth and improved performance. Yet,
two of the 55 studies empirically examining ele-
despite the theoretical and practical resonance of
ments of the RBV (Newbert, 2007), thus leaving a
this issue, surprisingly little empirical work has
potential source of sustainable competitive advan-
assessed whether firm capabilities aid in imple-
tage largely unresearched. Also absent from the
menting firm strategies, as capabilities theory pre-
RBV literature is any focus on marketing capa-
dicts (DeSarbo, Di Benedetto, Jedidi, and Song,
bilities and strategy in previous RBV studies. No
2006). This deficiency was illustrated in a recent
article within Newbert’s (2007) list of empirical
review of the RBV, which noted that only eight
RBV research investigates any form of marketing
of 55 related articles appearing in leading man-
capabilities as a vehicle for implementing strat-
agement journals dealt with aspects of both strat-
egy. This finding is particularly anomalous, given
egy and capabilities (Newbert, 2007). Within those
that strategic management research has historically
eight articles, only about half of the hypotheses
recognized the important role marketing plays in
tested were supported, leading the author to con-
determining firm performance (Hult, Ketchen, and
clude that manager原文请找腾讯752018766优,文-论'文.网http://www.youerw.com/ s and academics know signifi-
Slater, 2005; Katsikeas, Samiee, and Theodosiou,
cantly lessabouthowfirmcapabilities operate than
2006).
had originally been believed.
The opportunity to resolve these deficiencies
Newbert (2007) points out other deficiencies in
provides the motivation for this study. To do this,
the RBV literature. Of key importance to theory
we address critical gaps in both the theoretical and
development in the RBV is the issue of whether
empirically based RBV literature. As a result, our
absolute resource levels, versus their deployment
research further informs capabilities and RBV the-
via firm capabilities, are more important in dif-
ories and makes five distinct contributions to the
ferentiating firm performance over time. This has
strategic management literature. First, we investi-
been a long-standing criticism of the RBV litera-
gate directly how two predicted, butnot previously
ture where the role of specific resources in creat-
studied forms of marketing capabilities—known
ing competitive advantage has overshadowed the
asspecialized andarchitectural marketingcapabili-
process by which these resources are transformed
ties—enable afirm’sproduct-marketstrategytobe
into output that is of value (Srivastava, Fahey,
realized. To analyze these capabilities in the con-
and Christensen, 2001). It is the outcome of these
text of RBV theory, we test whether absolute mar-
processes that dictate whether or not resources
keting resource levels versus their deployment via
provide the firm with the presence and relative
worth of its capabilities (Collis and Montgomery, specialized andarchitectural marketing capabilities
are more important in driving firm performance.
Second, we develop theory that supports the inte-
1
The heritage of this literature can be sourced to a special issue
gration of specialized and architectural marketing
of Strategic Management Journal (Henderson and Mitchell,
1997) where the debate began to develop. capabilities asanidiopathicapproachtopreventing
Copyright (C) 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Strat. Mgmt. J., 30: 1310–1334 (2009)
DOI: 10.1002/smj1904