Loading...
|
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/49538
|
| Title: | 單一事業中小企業資源拉撐與規模成長關聯性之探索
An exploratory study on the relationship between resource stretching and scale growth of the single-business small-and medium-sized firms |
| Authors: | 商倩鳳
Shang, Cian Fong |
| Contributors: | 司徒達賢
于卓民
商倩鳳
Shang, Cian Fong |
| Keywords: | 拉撐
資源短缺
資源基礎
企業規模成長
中小企業
stretch
resource shortage
resource base
scale growth of the firm
small- and medium-sized firms |
| Date: | 2009 |
| Issue Date: | 2010-12-08 13:21:26 (UTC+8) |
| Abstract: | 企業的成長與規模擴大，能賦予企業許多優勢與利益，故一直是企業經營者關注的重點，也是策略與組織領域的學者所關注的議題。自從Penrose（1959）的企業內生成長理論提出多餘資源（尤其是管理資源）為企業成長的機制之後，後續的策略學者大多延續這樣的觀點，假設有多餘資源之後，才能進一步追求成長，並深入探討多餘資源的特性、成長策略的特性與成長率之間的關係。
然而，實務上卻發現擁有多餘資源未必能成長，而有些成功的企業反而是在資源不足之下而成長。Hamel and Prahalad（1993）即挑戰多餘資源的成長觀點，認為企業成長的動力其實是來自於經理人拉撐（stretch）其雄心與渴望水準，願意去追求既有資源與能力所無法達到的策略目標，透過善用資源而能在資源不足的情境下實踐成長，但其並未清楚說明拉撐的內涵與促進成長的機制。
本研究以Hamel and Prahalad（1993）所提出的拉撐概念為基礎，探討中小企業在資源有限、甚至不足的情境之下，如何透過拉撐其既有資源基礎，而能達成企業規模的成長。由於相關文獻不足，本研究採用Eisenhardt（1989）的探索性個案研究方法，以單一事業中小企業的規模成長現象為研究情境，總共研究了七個個案，發現了規模有所成長的中小企業所採行的拉撐式策略邏輯及形成拉撐情境的因素，從實務中歸納出五大類型拉撐資源的行動內涵，並發現了拉撐資源的行動為何能形成中小企業長期之下規模的成長。因此，本研究證實了拉撐的成長機制確實存在，Hamel and Prahalad（1993）所主張的拉撐邏輯，確實能夠促進中小企業的成長，有其獨特的成長邏輯。
中小企業為何經常處於拉撐的情境，主要因為資源不足、成長所造成的現象與長期採行拉撐式策略邏輯所致。而拉撐式策略邏輯為：追求較高的經營目標，因而使資源略顯不足，並在資源尚未完全到位時即著手進行，故必須透過拉撐、擠壓既有的資源基礎以彌補資源的缺口，克服困難而能掌握成長的機會，此外，為了避免風險，資源的投資採行精簡、小額與逐步的擴充，解決資源瓶頸而能使整體資源發揮更大的效用，並能穩健地擴充與成長。
本研究歸納出五大類型的拉撐資源行動，包括資源突破、資源重組、資源調度、資源提取與資源精簡，皆能擠壓既有的資源基礎而達到原先難以達成的目標，能增進生產績效並提昇企業的競爭力。資源突破與資源重組即為創業者的創新活動，前者針對資源本身進行創新突破；改善或增加系統中的關鍵因子，使整個系統的功能有所突破。資源重組即是將相同的人力與實體資源重新配置，改善流程或資源使用的方法，達到創新的效果並提昇生產的績效。資源調度是刻意發展資源的多功能性與通用性，能夠彈性地調度不同資源互相支援，以因應急需或降低產能的閒置。資源提取則是延長資源的使用時間，或使既有的人力資源願意與能夠提供更多、更好的服務。最後，資源精簡意指資源的投資盡量不足額，甚至延遲投資，以降低風險，並因而設法增加資源的使用效率。
為何拉撐資源的行動能使中小企業整體資源基礎得以擴充與成長？本研究發現主要是透過拉撐資源的短期與中長期效果綜合而達成。拉撐資源的短期效果為提昇既有資源的績效而能彌補資源的缺口，掌握成長的機會，因而帶來資金的挹注而能累積資本。拉撐資源的中長期效果即是短期效果的累積，包括不斷地掌握機會而持續創造出後續成長的踏腳石（亦即突破經營局面而帶來新的成長機會）；經常拉撐資源形成了獨特的、公司專屬的資源基礎與組織能力，能有效提昇公司的競爭力而增加經營的績效，進一步帶來資金的挹注；透過累積資本之後再謹慎地、精簡地擴充資源，增強資源基礎的內涵，企業內部的資源基礎因此逐步地擴充與成長。
The growth and scale expansion of firms results in a lot of advantages and benefits for firms, therefore, it has been the focus of managerial attention and an important topic for scholars in fields of strategic management and organization theory. Most scholars follow Penrose (1959)’s internal growth theory of the firm to assume slack resources as the prerequisite of firm growth, and investigate the relationships among attributes of resources, growth strategies, and growth rates.
In practice, however, firms with slack resources do not necessarily grow. Oppositely, there’re successful firms growing under resource shortage. Hamel and Prahalad (1993) had challenged the perspective of growing by slack resources and proposed that the real driver of firm growth comes from the stretching of managerial ambition and aspirations to pursue strategic goals beyond the firm’s existing resources and capabilities. Nonetheless, the authors didn’t explain clearly the contents and growth mechanisms of stretch.
This study takes the view of stretch to investigate how small-and-medium-sized firms （thereafter SMEs） can achieve scale growth by stretching their limited or even infertile resource base. Due to the lack of related literature, this study adopts Eisenhardt (1989)’s explorative case study method, and choose the phenomenon of scale growth of the single-business SMEs as the research context. After investigating seven cases, this study finds the strategic discipline of stretch of SMEs, factors that result in condition of stretch, five categories of actions of resource stretching, and the relationship between resource stretching and long-term scale growth of SMEs. Hence, this study verifies that the concept of stretch proposed by Hamel and Prahalad (1993) do facilitate the scale growth of SMEs with its unique logic of growth.
This study finds that SMEs are often in condition of stretch due to their insufficiencies of resources, the outcome of continued growth, and the results of running business by strategic discipline of stretch. The strategic discipline of stretch includes pursuing higher business goals by making existing resources slightly insufficient; proceeding without all resources needed so that SMEs have to stretch and squeeze the existing resource base to fill the resource gap and overcome difficulties so as to seize the opportunities for growth; and investing resources by small amount in a parsimonious way to solve the resource bottleneck so as to improve the effectiveness of the whole resource base and to make SMEs soundly expand and grow.
Furthermore, this study concludes inductively with five categories of actions of resource stretching, including resource breakthrough, resource reconfiguration, resource mobilization, resource extraction, and resource parsimony, all of which can squeeze the existing resource base to achieve the unattainable goals and can improve productive performance and competitiveness of the SMEs. Resource breakthrough and resource reconfiguration are entrepreneurial activities of the entrepreneurs. The former is making innovative breakthrough to firm resources, and improving or adding critical elements in a system to make the function of the whole system upgraded. Resource reconfiguration is reconfiguring the same human and physical resources by improving the processes or methods of resource use so as to innovate and to improve productive performance. Resource mobilization is to develop the versatility and interchangeable use of resources deliberately so that all resources can be mobilized flexibly to support one another in order to response to emergent demands or to reduce the idle hours of all the resources. Resource extraction is to make longer use of resources, or to make employees willing and able to offer more and better services. Lastly, resource parsimony refers to make resource investments less than needed or even delayed, and by doing so, SMEs can reduce investment risks and are forced to raise the efficiency of their resource use.
Why does resource stretching facilitate the expansion and growth of SMEs’ resource base (i.e. scale growth)? This study finds it is by the short-term and medium- and long-term effects of resource stretching. The former refers to the immediate outcomes of resource stretching, which fill the resource gap to help seize the opportunity of growth so as to obtain cash inflows for capital accumulation. The accumulation of short-term effects results in medium- and long-term effects of resource stretching, including continuously creating stepping stones for later growth by seizing opportunities; developing and accumulating distinctive and firm-specific resource base and organizational capabilities by constantly stretching resources so that SMEs improve their competitiveness and gain cash inflows; and prudently and parsimoniously expanding and enhancing resource base so that SMEs gradually expand and grow. |
| Reference: | 一、中文部份
陳向明（2002），「社會科學質的研究」，五南圖書出版，台北。
二、英文部份
Alvarez, S.A. and Barney, J.B. (2000), “Entrepreneurship capabilities: a resource-based view,” in G.D. Meyer and K. A, Heppard (Eds.), Entrepreneurship as Strategy: Competing on the Entrepreneurial Edge. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
Autio, E., Sapienza, H.J. and Almeida, J.G. (2000), “Effects of age at entry, knowledge intensity, and imitability on international growth,” Academy of Management Journal, 43(5): 909-924.
Bamford, C.E., Dean, T.J. and McDougall, P.P.( 2000), “An Examination of the impact of initial founding conditions and decisions upon the performance of new bank start-ups,” Journal of Business Venturing, 15:253-277.
Barney, J.B. (1986a), “Strategic factor markets: expectations, luck, and business strategy,” Management Science, 32(10): 1231-1241.
Barney, J.B. (1986b), “Organizational culture: can it be a source of sustained competitive advantage?” Academy of Management Review, 29: 656-665.
Barringer, B.R., Jones, F.F. and Lewis, P.S.(1998), “A qualitative study of the management practices of rapid-growth firms and how rapid-growth firms mitigate the managerial capacity problems,” Journal of Developmental Entrepreneurship, 3:97-122.
Barringer, B.R., Jones, F.F. and Neubaum, D.O. (2005), “A quantitative content analysis of the characteristics of rapid-growth firms and their founders,” Journal of Business Venturing, 20: 663-687.
Baum, J.A.C., Calabrese, T. and Silverman, B.S. (2000), “Don’t go it alone: Alliance network composition and startups’ performance in Canadian biotechnology,” Strategic Management Journal, 21(3): 267-294.
Baum, J.R. Locke, E.A. and Smith, K.G. (2001), “A multidimentional model of venture growth, “ Academy of Management Journal, 44(2): 292-303.
Bowman, E. H. and Hurry, D (1993), “Strategy through the option lens: an integrated view of resource investments and the incremental-choice process,” Academy of Management Review, 18(4):760-782.
Brush, C.G. and Chaganti, R. (1999), “Business without glamour? An analysis of resources on performance by size and age in small service and retail firms, Journal of Business Venturing, 14:233-257.
Brush, C.G., Greene, P.G. and Hart, M.M. (2001), “From initial idea to unique advantage: The entrepreneurial challenge of constructing a resource base,” Academy of Management Executive, 15(1): 64-78.
Covin, J.G. Slevin, D.P. and Heeley, M.B. (2000), “Pioneers and followers: competitive tactics, environment, and firm growth,” Journal of Business Venturing, 15:175-210.
Delmar, F. and Wiklund, J. (2003), “Growth motivation and growth: Untangling causal relationships,” Academy of Management Best Conference Paper, ENT: H1-H6.
Dewar, R.D. and Dutton, J.E. (1986), “The adoption of radical and incremental innovations: an empirical analysis,” Management Science, 32(11): 1422-1433.
Dierickx, I. and Cool, K.（1989）, “Asset stock accumulation and the sustainability of competitive advantage,” Management Science, 35:1504-1511.
Dunning, J.H. (1988), “The eclectic paradigm of international production: A restatement and some possible extensions,” Journal of International Business Studies, 19:1-31.
Eisenhardt, K.M. (1989), “Building Theories from Case Study Research,” Academy of Management Review, 14(4),pp.532-550.
Eisenhardt, K.M. and Graebner, M.E.(2007), ”Theory building from cases: opportunities and challenges,” Academy of Management Reviewl, 50(1): 25-32.
Ethiraj, S.K. (2007), “Allocation of inventive effort in complex product systems,” Strategic Management Journal, 28:563-584.
Galunic, D.C. and Rodan, S. (1998), “Resource recombinations in the firm: Knowledge structures and the potential for Schumpeterian innovation,” Strategic Management Journal, 19: 1193-1201.
Gatignon, H., Tushman, M.L., Simith, W. and Anderson, P. (2002), “A structural approach to assessing innovation: construct development of innovation locus, type, and characteristics, “Management Science, 48(9): 1103-1122.
Gilbert, B.A., McDougall, P.P. and Audretsch, D.B. (2006), “New venture growth: A review and extension,” Journal of Management, 32(6): 926-950.
Glaser, B. and Strauss, A., (1967), The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies in qualitative research, London: Wiedenfeld and Nicholson.
Grant, R.M. (1996), “Toward a knowledge-based theory of the firm,” Strategic Management Journal, Summer Special Issue, 17: 109-122.
Hamel, G and Prahalad, C.K. (1993), “Strategy as stretch and leverage,” Harvard Business Reiview, Mar.-Apr.: 75-84.
Henderson, R.M. and Clark, K.B. (1990), “Architectural innovation: The reconfiguration of existing product technologies and the failure of established firms,” Administrative Science Quarterly, 35: 9-30.
Helfat, C.E. and Peteraf, M.A. (2003), “The dynamic resource-based view: capability lifecycles,” Strategic Management Journal, 24: 997-1010.
Herbig, P.A.(1994), The innovation matrix: culture and structure prerequisites to innovation, Westport, CT: Quorum Books.
Kazanjian, R.K. (1988), “Relation of Dominant problems to stages of growth in technology-based new ventures, “ Academy of Management Journal, 31(2): 257-279.
Kogut, B. and Zander, U. (1993), “Knowledge of the firm and the evolutionary theory of the multinational corporation,” Journal of International Business Studies, 24:625-645.
Kogut, B. and Zander, U. (1992), “Knowledge of the firm, combinative capabilities, and the replication of technology,” Organization Science, 3: 383-397.
Kumar, M.V. S. (2009), “The relationship between product and international diversification: the effects of short-run constraints and endogeneity,” Strategic Management Journal, 30: 99-116.
Lavie, D. (2006), “Capability reconfiguration: an analysis of incumbent responses to technological change,” Academy of Management Review, 31(1): 153-174.
Marco, Alessandra de (2000), “Uncertainty and new venture investment: some empirical evidence from young Italian firms,” International Journal of Entrepreneurship, 4: 1-16.
McDougall, P. and Robinson, R.B. (1990), “New venture strategies: an empirical identification of eight ‘archetypes’ of competitive strategies for entry,” Strategic Management Journal, 11(6):447-467.
Metais, E. (2000), “SEB Group: Building a subversive strategy,” Business Strategy Review, 11(4): 39-47.
Mishina, Y. Pollock, T.G. and Porac, J.F. (2004),”Are more resources always better for growth? Resource stickiness in market and product expansion, “ Strategic Management Journal, 25: 1179-1197.
Montgomery, C.A. and Wernerfelt, B. (1988), “Diversification, Ricardian rents, and Tobin’s q,” RAND Journal of Economics, 19:623-632.
Niosi, J. (2003), “Alliances are not enough explaining rapid growth in biotechnology firms, “ Research Policy, 32: 737-750.
Ozcan, P. and Eisenhardt, K.M.(2009), ”Origin of alliance portfolios: entrepreneurs, networks strategies, and firm performance,” Academy of Management Journal, 52(2): 246-279.
Penrose, E. (1959), The theory of the growth of the firm (3rd edn). Oxford University Press: Oxford.
Pettus, M.L. (2001),”The resource-based view as a developmental growth process: evidence form the deregulated trucking industry, “ Academy of Management Journal, 44(4): 878-896.
Rumelt, R.P. (1974), Strategy, structure and economic performance, Harvard Business School Press: Boston, MA.
Sanchez, R. (1995), “Strategic flexibility in product competition,” Strategic Management Journal, 16: 135-159.
Schumpeter J.A. (1934), The theory of economic development, Harvard University Press: Cambridge, MA.
Shrader, R.C. and Simon, M. (1997), “Corporate versus independent new ventures: resource, strategy, and performance differences,” Journal of Business Venturing, 12: 47-66.
Simon, H. (1975), Administrative Behavior, 3rd ed., N.Y.: MacMillam.
Singh, J.V., Tucker, D.J. and House, R.J. (1986), “Organizational legitimacy and the liability of newness,” Administrative Science Quarterly, 31: 171-193.
Stevenson, H., Roberts, M. and Grousbeck, H. (1985), New Business Ventures and Entrepreneur, Homewood, IL: Irwin.
Stieglitz, N. and Heine, K. (2007), “Innovations and the role of complementarities in a strategic theory of the firm,” Strategic Management Journal, 28: 1-15.
Wernerfelt, B. (1984), “A resource-based view of the firm,” Strategic Management Journal, 5(2): 171-180.
Wiklund, J. and Shepherd, D. (2003), “Aspiring for, and achieving growth: the moderating role of resources and opportunities, “Journal of Management Studies, 40(8): 1919-1941.
Yin, R.K. (2003a), Case Study Research (3rd ed.), Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Yin, R.K. (2003b), Application of Case Study Research (2rd ed.), Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Yli-Renko, H. Autio, E. and Tontti, V. (2002), “Social capital, knowledge, and the international growth of technology-based new firms, “ International Business Review, 11: 279-304. |
| Description: | 博士
國立政治大學
企業管理研究所
90355504
98 |
| Source URI: | http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0903555041 |
| Data Type: | thesis |
| Appears in Collections: | [企業管理學系] 學位論文
|
Files in This Item:
| File |
Description |
Size | Format | |
|---|
| 55504101.pdf | | 219Kb | Adobe PDF2 | 1093 | View/Open | | 55504102.pdf | | 122Kb | Adobe PDF2 | 839 | View/Open | | 55504103.pdf | | 957Kb | Adobe PDF2 | 1286 | View/Open |
|
All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.
|
