<style type="text/css"> .wpb_animate_when_almost_visible { opacity: 1; }</style> Enap catalog › Details for: Rethinking Rouse and Daellenbach's retingking :
Normal view MARC view ISBD view

Rethinking Rouse and Daellenbach's retingking : isolating vs. testing for sources of sustainable competitive advantage

By: LEVITAS, Edward.
Contributor(s): CHI, Tailan.
Material type: materialTypeLabelArticlePublisher: 2002Subject(s): Resource-based View | Sources of Competitive Advantage | Empirical Methodology | Large-sample Studies | Intrusive MethodsStrategic Management Journal 23, 10, p. 957-962Abstract: In a recent paper, Rouse and Dalellenbach (1999) provide a five-step methodological approach which they feel will cure alleged inadequacies in empirical resource-based research. We suggest, however, that their methodology can provide only a useful aid for expanding our understanding of potential sustainable competitive advantages but will not allow researchers to effectively verify those hypothesized advantages. Specifically, we argue that Rouse and Daellenbach's methodology is plagued by three major shortcomings: (1) it confuses the important distinction between knowing-how and knowing-what; (2) it fails to recognize the importance of observable variables in verifying the sources of sustainable competitive advantage; and (3) it calls for sampling on the dependent variable
Tags from this library: No tags from this library for this title. Log in to add tags.
    average rating: 0.0 (0 votes)
Item type Current location Collection Call number Status Date due Barcode
Periódico Biblioteca Graciliano Ramos
Periódico Not for loan

In a recent paper, Rouse and Dalellenbach (1999) provide a five-step methodological approach which they feel will cure alleged inadequacies in empirical resource-based research. We suggest, however, that their methodology can provide only a useful aid for expanding our understanding of potential sustainable competitive advantages but will not allow researchers to effectively verify those hypothesized advantages. Specifically, we argue that Rouse and Daellenbach's methodology is plagued by three major shortcomings: (1) it confuses the important distinction between knowing-how and knowing-what; (2) it fails to recognize the importance of observable variables in verifying the sources of sustainable competitive advantage; and (3) it calls for sampling on the dependent variable

There are no comments for this item.

Log in to your account to post a comment.

Click on an image to view it in the image viewer

Escola Nacional de Administração Pública

Escola Nacional de Administração Pública

Endereço:

  • Biblioteca Graciliano Ramos
  • Funcionamento: segunda a sexta-feira, das 9h às 19h
  • +55 61 2020-3139 / biblioteca@enap.gov.br
  • SPO Área Especial 2-A
  • CEP 70610-900 - Brasília/DF
<
Acesso à Informação TRANSPARÊNCIA

Powered by Koha