Can resources act as capabilities foundations? A bibliometric analysis

¿Pueden los recursos actuar como origen de capacidades? Un análisis bibliométrico

Mileidy Álvarez-Melgarejo mileidyalvarez@hotmail.es

Universidad de Investigación y Desarrollo, Colombia

Martha Torres-Barreto mltorres@uis.edu.co

Universidad Industrial de Santander, Colombia

This work is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivs 4.0 International.

The research on Resource Based View of the Firm (RBV) is one of the most influential tendencies of strategic management, proving this in numerous studies on the relevance of resources and capabilities in terms of generating competitive advantages for companies [1], [2], [3], [4]. The literature suggests that the RBV attempts to answer the enigma of the differences in business performance, specifically: how competitive advantages are obtained? what generates them? what are their scope? and how do organizations sustain them in time?

From the contributions of Penrose (1959) the company was understood as a set of productive resources, later on, the seminal work of Wernerfelt (1984) gave way to the study of the RBV in terms of use, growth, capacity and development of resources that lead to business economic returns. From that moment this theory has been addressed by numerous authors [5], [6], [7], [8], [1], [9], [10], [4], [11], [12], who agree that their study is relevant because it attempts to explain the development of competitive advantages based on the resources and capabilities (R&C) that companies possess or develop, and indeed, in the literature there are pieces of evidence that show that the integration and perfect combination of R&C translates into the generation of business competitiveness [13], [14], [15], [16], [12]. At this point, one question arises: what resources and what capabilities need to be working together to obtain higher yields compared to those of the competition?

Thus, the objective of this paper is to provide a theoretical basis on the different authors who have addressed the study of R&C, actual concepts and classifications of them as well as to analyze the relationships between their approach to literature. Next, there will be a consideration of certain resources that could be generating entrepreneurial skills and, under this dynamic, the companies that own them could enhance a set of capabilities to generate more competitive advantages. The result of the bibliometric review reveals an agenda to follow in future research in this area.

This document begins with the description of resources and capabilities and some classifications, the relationships found in the literature between these two elements are presented below; finishing with the conclusions of the study of this topic and a suggested agenda for researchers who want to delve into this topic.

The RBV tries to explain the paradigm of the differences between the organizations of the same industry in terms of performance and competitiveness. Its initial idea exposes the premise that the company is a set of productive resources that can increase and enhance its value to obtain a competitive advantage [17]. Its study is approached with force from the work of Wernerfelt (1984), who considers the company as a set of resources that are heterogeneously distributed. These differences are persistent over time [18], [19], [17], [4], [20], [69], this heterogeneity would explain the different results between companies. Based on this assumption, researchers have theorized that one of the sources of competitive advantages are the resources, when they possess VRIN attributes, that says they are valuable, rare, inimitable and non-substitutable [5], [4], [12], [20], however, these VRIN resources in dynamic market environments do not persist over time and become outdated [11], [12], additionally they are not very productive by themselves. The types, quantities, qualities and the way resources are used, is what determines the results the company could achieve [1] this is what has been called "routines" or "capabilities" of the companies.

In the literature, numerous studies are identified on the importance of resources for companies in the development of their economic activity [21]. In fact, historically they have generated numerous definitions and classifications; perhaps the most influential is its conception as tangible and intangible assets, which are semi-permanently tied to the company and are controlled by it [5], [10], [11], [20]. Some authors argue that these assets are specific to the company, so it is difficult to imitate them or transfer trade secrets and specialized production facilities [22]. Similarly, Grant (1991) defines resources as inputs used in the production process and, the basic units of analysis, since they represent both the foundation of the company and its capabilities [12]. Table 1 shows a historical set of the different conceptions of the term "Resources".

In terms of the typology of resources, perhaps the most popular is the one that divides them into tangible and intangible [10], [20]. Tangible resources have a physical support of a material nature, they are easy to identify, count, measure and value [15]. Examples of them are: property, plant and machinery. Intangibles resources refer to things that cannot be physically perceived, and are difficult to reproduce and imitate; they are based on information and knowledge. Some examples are brand names, internal knowledge in the technology field and efficient procedures [20].

Table 1.
Definition of the concept "resources"

Other categories have also been stated, for example: physical, financial, human capital, technological and organizational resources [1], [5], [10], [18]. The physical resources are those used to develop the economic activity and the achievement of goals within the company (plant, equipment, geographical location and access to raw materials); The financial ones are those necessary to cover the costs of the other resources involved (cash, stocks, credits and investments). Given their tangible nature, these resources can be identified and valued more easily through the information provided by the financial statements [1], [10], [14], [15]. The human resource does not refer to the human being as such, it refers to their knowledge, training, experience, intelligence, loyalty and reasoning skills [10], [15]. The technological resources would be constituted by the technological knowledge available that allows the development of products, being specified in patents and databases [10], [15].

Finally, organizational resources include the organizational structure, the line of authority, brand, reputation, among others. Table 2 shows the different classifications of resources found in the literature.

On the other hand, the capabilities have also been studied, and the results are well documented in the literature [23], [22], [21]. Some researchers consider that it is necessary for the capabilities to be internally and externally exploited by the organization [12], [17], [20], [23] in order to recognize, detect, identify, discover and develop opportunities that are necessary for business success [24], since the sustainability of capabilities varies with the dynamism of the market [25]. Considering that these are inherent skills of the personnel and the organization, the capabilities should be understood as organizational structures and managerial processes that support productive activity [23].

They do not come spontaneously; these are routines that are developed from the interaction between the resources and the companies [18], [23], [27], [28]. As a result, capabilities are considered a source for competitive advantage, since not all companies can have and adopt them in the same way and under the same conditions since it is not possible to buy them in the market as any resource, they are created and developed within the organization, this makes them unique, difficult to imitate, transfer and duplicate [29].

Table 2.
Classification of resources.

Several experts agree that the capabilities are different constructs integrated in the companies to generate competitive development, there is a set of skills and knowledge of a company to deploy a team of resources working and interacting together achieving a desired end [1], [12], [18]. For example, Teece et al. (1997) argue that the term refers to the key role of strategic management in adapting, integrating and reconfiguring internal and external organizational skills, resources and functional competencies to meet the needs of a changing environment. However, they have been defined as a set of routines that imply the stability and repeatability of the behaviors and processes of an organization [1], [2], [28], [30], [31], this indicates that for the execution and development of a capability, a process of integration and combination of resources is required and its effectiveness will be achieved through repetition, becoming routine [1], [25]; therefore, a routine is necessary for operational efficiency [24] and the creation of tacit knowledge [28], [32]. Scholars who have addressed the issue suggest that the traditional conception of routines applies to relatively static, stable or predictably changing environments, whose process relies on existing knowledge [12], [24], [25]; In contrast, for high-speed exchange environments, a distinctive type of capability is required to respond to the dynamism of the market, these are called dynamic capabilities and they are based on the generation of new knowledge [11], [12], [23], [25], [33]. Table 3 presents different conceptions of the term capabilities over time.

Capabilities, just like resources, have been the subject of numerous classifications throughout academic history, suggesting that they can go from basic and common to advanced, scarce and strategically important capabilities [16]. The literature distinguishes a considerable variety of capabilities that operate in stable and dynamic environments [22], [25], [33], [2], [37]. Recently research has identified and categorize capabilities in three levels [32], [38], level zero or ordinary (allowing the company to earn its livelihood), first level or dynamic capabilities, related to the ability of a company to adapt, create, develop and modify the resources base in response to environmental changes [25], [33], [39]; and the higher order capabilities that result in modification of the previous level.

In the same way Wang & Ahmed (2007) proposed three levels. In level one, the company's capabilities are found, in level two there are the basic, essential or central capabilities, and level three the dynamics or organizational capacities can be found. However, Alarcón et al. (2013) distinguish technological capabilities (technological knowledge, trade secrets, the know-how generated by R&D and specific technological intellectual capital) and marketing (corporate image, reputation and social recognition), considered important to obtain competitive advantages, since they increase the ability to discover and exploit existing opportunities. Table 4 shows the classifications of capabilities offered by the literature in detail Despite the fact that most studies on RBV highlight a strong connection between the set of R&C and the increases in productivity or economic and financial results [45], [46], [11], [47], or between the R&C and the generation of competitive advantages [5], [6], [48], [49], [50], [51], [52], [53], [54], [55], [56] [57], [20], [58], [59], comparatively there are very few empirical studies on the relations between resources and capabilities themselves. In this sense, there are investigations that propose a direct influence of resources in the generation and improvement of capabilities. Helfat&Peteraf (2003) state that capabilities have an evolutionary life cycle inherent to a work team and that they form the basis of competitive advantage. They consider that the capability starts in a group of individuals (resources), with different attributes or characteristics and an objective that implies generating a skill, then it evolves to a stage of development where it is combined with the accumulated experience. The development of capability depends on what individuals can achieve with the available resources. Finally, it enters a phase of maturity in which it is maintained through its regular execution and is incorporated into the memory of the organization.

Table 3.
Definition of the term "capacity"

The development of capabilities involves learning activities, integration and coexistence among the members of the company, resources and allied companies. These interactions generate new knowledge which adopted by organizations along with the knowledge acquired from past experiences, give way to new capabilities or can improve existing ones, allowing to develop competitive advantages [60], [61], [62].

Table 4.
Classification of capabilities.

This study explores existing literature on the relationships between resources and capabilities in themselves. To achieve this, a complete bibliometric analysis was done. This is a discipline that applies mathematical and statistical methods to examine activity and productivity. Scientifically saying it evaluates the development of knowledge on a specific topic, scientific quality and the influence of different works and sources [63], [64], [65]. This type of analysis is completed through indicators that measure the bibliographic material in terms of productivity and impact of the publications.

The first step was choosing the Web of Science (WOS) from Thomson Reuters, since it is one of the most used databases for this type of analysis due to the quality of its scientific information. WOS journals have impact factors in the Journal Citation Report (JCR), providing academic validation to the research. The areas of knowledge included are: economy, administration and business. The indicators to be used are of quantity and quality [63], [64], [66]. The first one’s measures productivity through the number of publications, the second, measures the impact of a publication in relation to the number of citations received, with this it is intended to determine how interest has grown in knowing the relationship between resources and capabilities in the last years.

The search generated 258 documents hosted by the WOS that consider the existence of a relationship between resources and capabilities. 237 articles, 7 working documents, 17 reviews of literature, 4 categorized as editorial material, and 1 publication retracted (a public statement about a paper that is drawn). Only the number of published research articles were considered because these are the types of documents used to communicate the results of research in a clear and concise manner in scientific journals. For the period 2001 - 2016, the following items were analyzed:

• Number of articles per year.

• Countries with higher productivity.

• More productive authors.

• Magazines with the highest number of publications.

• Most cited articles.

4.1. Articles per year

The study of the relations between R&C becomes visible to the academic community since 2001, this is contrasted in two databases (WOS and Scopus), verifying that in previous years a maximum of two articles per year were published, making the period 2001 – 2016 of feasible study. Figure 1 present the number of publications per year, there is evidence that in 2001 only 6 articles were published in the WOS, a figure that increased in the following 15 years, however, its growth did not keep a clear trend. The largest number of studies was concentrated in 2010, when 27 documents were published. Between 2014 and 2015 the number of publications remained stable, while in 2016 there was again a decrease.

Figure 1.
Trend in the study of the relationship between R&C.

4.3. Authors with higher productivity

Table 7 presents the countries where the authors executed their research activity, together with their bibliometric indicators. The first six authors (Bowman Cliff, Hartmann Evi, Kaufmann Lutz, Duysters G, Lengnick-Hall CA and Lengnick-Hall ML) have 3 publications each. Although they are the most productive, it is still a small number compared to studies that analyze the impact of resources and capabilities on competitive advantage (these reach, for example, 3,187 documents in the WOS). On the other hand, the most productive authors do not necessarily have the most citations, the analysis reflects that authors with lower productivity are positioned with a high number of citations as in the case of Duysters, G (408 citations), Kale Prashant (344 citations) and Hartmann Evi (245 citations). It should be noted that for this analysis the number of academics working in the European continent more precisely in Germany is remarkable (p.e. Table 7).

Table 5.
Countries with the highest rate of productivity.

Web of Science.

Table 6 shows the number of studies published in the ten most productive countries between 200-2016. It is evident that the majority of articles visible in the WOS were published in the United States; however, during 2016 this figure significantly decreased, while in England, China and Australia increased (p.e. Table 6).

Table 6.
The 10 countries with the highest annual productivity.

Vantage Point Software from WOS data.

4.4. Authors with higher productivity

Table 7 presents the countries where the authors executed their research activity, together with their bibliometric indicators. The first six authors (Bowman Cliff, Hartmann Evi, Kaufmann Lutz, Duysters G, Lengnick-Hall CA and Lengnick-Hall ML) have 3 publications each. Although they are the most productive, it is still a small number compared to studies that analyze the impact of resources and capabilities on competitive advantage (these reach, for example, 3,187 documents in the WOS). On the other hand, the most productive authors do not necessarily have the most citations, the analysis reflects that authors with lower productivity are positioned with a high number of citations as in the case of Duysters, G (408 citations), Kale Prashant (344 citations) and Hartmann Evi (245 citations). It should be noted that for this analysis the number of academics working in the European continent more precisely in Germany is remarkable (p.e. Table 7).

Table 7.
Influential authors in the literature on relationship between R & C.

Web of Science.

4.5. Most productive magazines

We identified 102 journals that published articles exploring the relationships between resources and capabilities. Table 8 presents the most productive journals in this sense together with its impact factor (used to know the importance of a journal within a research area). The two journals with the highest number of publications are: Strategic Management Journal and Technovation, with 12 documents each. Subsequently, three journals with 7 publications each are placed, among them: Journal of International Business Studies, R & D Management and Technological Forecasting and Social Change. Although most publications focus on certain types of journals, it does not mean that they have the highest impact factor (p.e. Table 8).

Table 8.
Magazines with more publications.

Web of Science.

4.6. Most cited articles

The most relevant article has received 993 citations, it was published in 2003 by Helfat and Peteraf, and is entitled: The dynamic resource-based view: capability lifecycles. It should be noted that the documents found indicate different internal and external sources that generate capabilities, study the relationship between resources and capabilities, the influence of resources on capabilities and analyze the relationship of some type of resource or capacity with competitive advantage or performance of the company. Complete trends are shown in Table 9.

Table 9.
Most cited above relations R & C Studies.

Table 9.
Most cited above relations R & C Studies. (continuación)

Table 9.
Most cited above relations R & C Studies. (continuación)

This bibliometric analysis concludes that the research on the impact of resources on capabilities is still scarce in the literature. The research is focused on the study of the impact of resources and capabilities on the competitive advantage or performance of companies. 25 articles out of the 50 most cited indeed, address this issue. On the other way, 18 articles studied capabilities as sources of other capabilities.

Although the theoretical literature is clear about the approach that resources are generating capabilities, and these might turn into competitive advantages [18], [23], [27], [28], [67], [68], empirical research on resources as antecedents of capabilities is still scarce. It is considered that the research agenda derived from this paper should focus on the role of resources as an important source in the development of capabilities, given that this issue has not been addressed in depth and is relevant for companies. In a concrete way, it is suggested to approach the empirical study by dividing into the resources and capabilities by their typologies, for example: tangible or intangible resources and organizational or dynamic capabilities, as well as to initiate a study about what type of resources are precursors of what kind of capabilities. It might be considered that, in companies of different sectors, the results might not be the same, therefore, an appropriate strategy would be to aggregate by industrial activity.

This research reveals the results of previous works on the relationship between resources and capabilities between 2001 and 2016, available in the Web of Science. The results provide an overview of the evolution of the study of the subject, which serve as a guide for future researchers who wish to delve into the analysis of the relationship between resources and capabilities of companies. The document analyzes in detail the trends in the study period. It is noted that the predominant documents types in the WOS are articles (237). The findings reveal that for the year 2010 productivity in this particular area of ​​knowledge experienced an increase (27 published documents), a figure that decreased in the following six years. It is also evident that 100 articles were published in the United States during the study period, ranking as the most productive country with the highest number of citations (5,122). The authors maintain a homogeneous productivity level (2 to 3 publications) and a fairly similar H-index (2 to 3). The journals with the highest number of publications are Strategic Management Journal and Technovation with 12 documents each, however these publications do not have the greatest impact factor. The most cited article was published in 2003 and has 993 citations. Finally, this analysis points out that research on the relationships between resources and capabilities have not been adequately explored, and this subject is indeed, in its initial stages, considering the importance of resources as generators of capabilities and the potential of them as sources of business competitiveness. It is suggested that for future studies impact or causality relationships be explored among different types of resources and capabilities making a sectorial distinction, since it is foreseen that for different sectors, the impact that resources may have on capabilities varies significantly.

This study presents a series of limitations, on the one hand, a single database was used, excluding other bases with indexed journals, and even, with non-indexed publications that could contain related articles. Future analyzes of this type could take into account additional databases such as Scopus and Google Scholar, since they also have valuable research content. However, when defining the specific areas of the study, other areas that could possibly address the issue were not taken into account. Finally, it should be noted that the high citation figures that an author receives give him certain status so that other scholars may cite his work without prior review of the content. In the same sense, recent publications have little or no citation, giving them less relevance, since they require time to value themselves and become influential in the field.

Cómo citar este artículo: M. Álvarez-Melgarejo; M. Torres-Barreto, “Can resources act as capabilities foundations? A bibliometric analysis,” Rev. UIS Ing., vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 185-200, 2018.