IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hhb/aarmap/0063.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Sources of competitive advantages and business performance within the European meat processing industry

Author

Listed:
  • Strandskov, Jesper

    (Department of International Business)

Abstract

1. The aim of the paper is to investigate the relative importance of three sets of sources of competitive advantages on business performance in a specific industry context, ie the European meat processing industry. The three sets of competitive sources are Firm Specific Advantages (FSAs), Localizational Specific Advantages (LSAs) and Relationship Specific Advantages (RSAs). Based on a literature study, each set of competitive advantages is briefly described in terms of their theoretical antecedents. Seven hypotheses are formulated regarding the direct as well as the indirect relationships between the FSAs, LSAs and RSAs and business performance. Also, the direction of causality between the various sets of explanatory variables is considered. The hypotheses are combined in a structural modelling of firm competition. 2. Data and measurements are derived from a survey in the European meat processing industry in which 133 meat processors from 10 EU countries agreed to participate. A total of 17 variables of sources of advantage were developed and analysed (nine FSAs, four LSAs and four RSAs). Examples of the FSA measures are level of process technology; product development efforts; new product introductions and marketing mix efforts. The LSAs include variables related to national endowment of resources and industry-related factors such as for example the degree of industry concentration. The RSA measurements include relationships with retailers; relationships to suppliers; access to raw materials and distribution costs. Business performance was measured by applying the following indicators: return of investments, sales growth and market share. 3. The data set was subjected to conformative factor analysis and structural equation modelling using LISREL8. Based on an evaluation of the reliability values and t-values of each item, only seven of the measurements of competitive advantages were further analysed. A three-factor model was found to fit the data best, viz. that firm, localisational and relationship-specific advantages together should be treated as independent constructs. Six structural equation models were estimated of which one model, in particular, seems to fit the data best. 4. The meat processing industry results of the analysis show that the FSAs and the RSAs are the most important explanatory variables as regards business performances, however, with strong interaction effects between the two sets of variables. LSAs such as industry structure and national endowment of resources do not seem to influence the business performance of the meat processors. Moreover, the paper shows that those meat processing firms developing strong ties with the retailing sector will have their business performance increased as well as their firm-specific advantages (such as product development, process development etc.) being improved by strong retail relationships. Finally, the paper supports the view that investments in process and/or product innovation will pay off in the meat processing industry

Suggested Citation

  • Strandskov, Jesper, 1999. "Sources of competitive advantages and business performance within the European meat processing industry," MAPP Working Papers 63, University of Aarhus, Aarhus School of Business, The MAPP Centre.
    • Handle: RePEc:hhb:aarmap:0063
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.mapp.asb.dk/WPpdf/wp63.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gary S. Hansen & Birger Wernerfelt, 1989. "Determinants of firm performance: The relative importance of economic and organizational factors," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 10(5), pages 399-411, September.
    2. Michael A. Hitt & R. Duane Ireland, 1985. "Corporate distinctive competence, strategy, industry and performance," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 6(3), pages 273-293, July.
    3. Rita Gunther McGrath & Ian C. Macmillan & S. Venkataraman, 1995. "Defining and developing competence: A strategic process paradigm," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(4), pages 251-275.
    4. John H Dunning, 1988. "The Eclectic Paradigm of International Production: A Restatement and Some Possible Extensions," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 19(1), pages 1-31, March.
    5. Christine Oliver, 1997. "Sustainable competitive advantage: combining institutional and resource‐based views," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(9), pages 697-713, October.
    6. Ingemar Dierickx & Karel Cool, 1989. "Asset Stock Accumulation and Sustainability of Competitive Advantage," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 35(12), pages 1504-1511, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Jan Schiefer & Monika Hartmann, 2008. "Determinants of competitive advantage for German food processors," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 24(3), pages 306-319.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Holm, Ulf & Sharma, D. Deo, 2006. "Subsidiary marketing knowledge and strategic development of the multinational corporation," Journal of International Management, Elsevier, vol. 12(1), pages 47-66, March.
    2. Pursey Heugens & Stelios Zyglidopoulos, 2008. "From social ties to embedded competencies: the case of business groups," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 12(4), pages 325-341, November.
    3. Alain Asquin & Emmanuelle Reynaud & Marion Polgé, 2001. "Entrepreneurship: what are the typical capabilities to create competitive resources? A discussion from case studies," Post-Print hal-00379862, HAL.
    4. Abraham Carmeli & Asher Tishler, 2004. "Resources, capabilities, and the performance of industrial firms: A multivariate analysis," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 25(6-7), pages 299-315.
    5. Carpano, Claudio & Rahman, Manzur & Roth, Kendall, 2003. "Resources, mobility barriers, and the international competitive position of an industry," Journal of International Management, Elsevier, vol. 9(2), pages 153-169.
    6. Sharma, Sunil, 2015. "Relevance of Resource Based View Themes for Capability Evolution," IIMA Working Papers WP2015-03-30, Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad, Research and Publication Department.
    7. Chan, Ricky Yee-kwong & Wong, Y. H., 1999. "Bank generic strategies: does Porter's theory apply in an international banking center," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 8(5-6), pages 561-590, October.
    8. Mahoney, Joseph T., 1995. "The management of resources and the resource of management," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 91-101, June.
    9. Shih-Chang Hung & Yung-Ching Tseng, 2017. "Extending the LLL framework through an institution-based view: Acer as a dragon multinational," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 34(4), pages 799-821, December.
    10. Wang, Chengqi & Hong, Junjie & Kafouros, Mario & Boateng, Agyenim, 2012. "What drives outward FDI of Chinese firms? Testing the explanatory power of three theoretical frameworks," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 21(3), pages 425-438.
    11. Laurence Capron & Will Mitchell, 2009. "Selection Capability: How Capability Gaps and Internal Social Frictions Affect Internal and External Strategic Renewal," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(2), pages 294-312, April.
    12. Patnaik, Swetketu & Munjal, Surender & Varma, Arup & Sinha, Sujay, 2022. "Extending the resource-based view through the lens of the institution-based view: A longitudinal case study of an Indian higher educational institution," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 124-141.
    13. Gaffney, Nolan & Cooper, Danielle & Kedia, Ben & Clampit, Jack, 2014. "Institutional transitions, global mindset, and EMNE internationalization," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 383-391.
    14. Buckley, Peter J. & Munjal, Surender & Enderwick, Peter & Forsans, Nicolas, 2016. "Cross-border acquisitions by Indian multinationals: Asset exploitation or asset augmentation?," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 25(4), pages 986-996.
    15. Alain Asquin & R. Moore, 2003. "Trajectories, Strategic Formulas and Contingencies : pathways to entrepreneurial success," Post-Print halshs-00688892, HAL.
    16. Vi Dung Ngo & Frank Janssen & Marine Falize, 2016. "An incentive-based model of international entrepreneurship in emerging and transition economies," Journal of International Entrepreneurship, Springer, vol. 14(1), pages 52-74, March.
    17. Ito, Kiyohiko & Rose, Elizabeth L., 1999. "Innovations and geographic focus: A comparison of US and Japanese firms," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 8(1), pages 55-74, January.
    18. Bandeira-de-Mello, Rodrigo & Fleury, Maria Tereza Leme & Aveline, Carlos Eduardo Stefaniak & Gama, Marina Amado Bahia, 2016. "Unpacking the ambidexterity implementation process in the internationalization of emerging market multinationals," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(6), pages 2005-2017.
    19. Zheng Zhao & Jaideep Anand & Will Mitchell, 2005. "A Dual Networks Perspective on Inter‐Organizational Transfer of R&D Capabilities: International Joint Ventures in the Chinese Automotive Industry," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(1), pages 127-160, January.
    20. Fernández, Zulima & J.Nieto, María, 2002. "International involvement of smes: the impact of ownership," DEE - Working Papers. Business Economics. WB wb025821, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid. Departamento de Economía de la Empresa.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Competitive power; Meat industry; Europe;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hhb:aarmap:0063. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Helle Vinbaek Stenholt (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/hahoadk.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.