Empirical Research within Resource-Based Theory: A Meta-Analysis of the Central Propositions

326 Pages·2008·2.456 MB·English

by  Katja Nothnagel (auth.)

Katja Nothnagel
Empirical Research within Resource-Based Theory
GABLER EDITION WISSENSCHAFT
Strategisches Kompetenz-Management
Herausgegeben von
Univ.-Prof. Dr. Klaus Bellmann,
Universität Mainz
Univ.-Prof. Dr. Christoph Burmann,
Universität Bremen
Univ.-Prof. Dr. Jörg Freiling (geschäftsführend),
Universität Bremen
Univ.-Prof. Dr. Hans Georg Gemünden,
Technische Universität Berlin
Univ.-Prof. Dr. Peter Hammann (†),
Universität Bochum
Univ.-Prof. Dipl.-Ing. Dr. Hans H. Hinterhuber,
Universität Innsbruck
Univ.-Prof. Dr. Thomas Mellewigt,
Freie Universität Berlin
Univ.-Prof. Dr. Dietrich von der Oelsnitz,
Technische Universität Braunschweig
Univ.-Prof. Dr. Heike Proff,
Univ.-Prof. Dr. Christoph Rasche,
Universität Potsdam
Univ.-Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. Günter Specht,
Technische Universität Darmstadt
Univ.-Prof. Dr. Erich Zahn,
Universität Stuttgart
Der Resource-based View und – in enger Verbindung dazu – das Ma-
nagement von (Kern-)Kompetenzen haben in den vergangenen Jahren
die Unternehmensführung nachhaltig beeinflusst. Wissenschaft und
Praxis beteiligen sich gleichermaßen an Fragen der ressourcenorien-
tierten Unternehmensführung und des Knowledge Managements. Die
Schriftenreihe greift diese Entwicklung auf und schafft ein Forum für
wissenschaftliche Beiträge und Diskussionen.
Katja Nothnagel
Empirical Research within
Resource-Based Theory
A Meta-Analysis of the
Central Propositions
With a foreword by Prof. Dr. Thomas Mellewigt
GABLER EDITION WISSENSCHAFT
Bibliographic information published by the Deutsche Nationalbibliothek
The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliografie;
detailed bibliographic data are available in the Internet at http://dnb.d-nb.de.
Dissertation Universität Paderborn, 2007 u.d.T.: Nothnagel, Katja: Empirical Research within
Resource-based Theory. Methodological Challenges and a Meta-Analysis of the Central
Propositions.
1st Edition 2008
All rights reserved
© Gabler | GWV Fachverlage GmbH, Wiesbaden 2008
Readers: Frauke Schindler / Sabine Schöller
Gabler is part of the specialist publishing group Springer Science+Business Media.
www.duv.de
No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system
or transmitted, mechanical, photocopying or otherwise without prior
permission of the copyright holder.
Registered and/or industrial names, trade names, trade descriptions etc. cited in this publica-
tion are part of the law for trade-mark protection and may not be used free in any form or by
any means even if this is not specifically marked.
Cover design: Regine Zimmer, Dipl.-Designerin, Frankfurt/Main
Printed on acid-free paper
Printed in Germany
ISBN 978-3-8349-0921-3
To my parents, Karlheinz and Ulla, with love and gratitude.
Foreword
In the last ten years, the Resource-Based View (RBV) has become an important theoretical
approach in strategic management. Concurrently, or at least since the contribution of
Priem/Butler, there has been an increase in criticism of the theoretical and empirical power of
the RBV. In this context Katja Nothnagel identifies three main deficiencies in the present
discussion on the RBV:
1. An inadequate understanding of the central constructs and the empirically
revisable hypotheses of the RBV.
2. An insufficient comprehension regarding the state of the art of the empirical
research on the RBV and therefore of the empirical power of the RBV.
3. An inadequate systematic in respect to the methodical problems and the evaluation
of alternative methods of research.
This is the starting point of Katja Nothnagel’s thesis, in that she aims to contribute to the
elimination of all three deficiencies.
Firstly, she concentrates on the ten most important theoretical publications on the RBV and
thus identifies the three central constructs: resources, performance, and markets. These three
central constructs are described in detail and defined. This represents an essential step in the
establishment of a theory. Based on this she develops six central empirically revisable
hypotheses for the RBV.
Subsequently, she presents a review of the empirical research. Based on a very extensive
process of selection, Ms Nothnagel identifies 192 empirical investigations, which were
published between 1984 and 2004. This chapter delivers a first-class overview of the
empirical research on the RBV, which hitherto was not to be found in international research in
this quality. It is a veritable treasure trove for all those, who in the future wish to indulge in
empirical research on the RBV. Overall a large number of interesting facts has been divulged.
Not surprisingly the focus of empirical research lies on intangible resources (72% of
empirical investigations). On the other hand, it is astonishing that scarcity, non-limitability,
and non-substitutability are hardly to be encountered in empirical research up to date.
Furthermore it is innovative and commendable, that Ms Nothnagel has carried out a vote
counting as well as a meta-analysis to systematically test the performance of the RBV. The
results of the vote counting show that 60% of the tests confirm a positive effect of resources
on the success of an enterprise. Secondly, it is shown that the conditions of the factor market
VIII Foreword
have not been included in empirical tests. Consequently the meta-analysis confirms the
significant but very slight correlation between resources and success of the enterprise. These
small magnitudes of effect are, however, normal for the meta-analysis.
Finally, Ms Nothnagel addresses the methodical problem of the measurement of especially
unobservable resources. From the 192 empirical investigations those that are particularly well
qualified are identified as best practice. Furthermore a check-list for future empirical RBV-
research has been developed.
In summary, it can be stated that in her thesis Ms Nothnagel has involved herself with a
highly pertinent topic of research. Particularly of note from a theoretical point of view are the
identification of the three central constructs of the RBV, the derivation of six empirically
revisable hypotheses and the very extensive and competently integrated assessment of the
literature. All three contributions are of great importance for the further development of the
theoretical aspects of the RBV. Furthermore an important enhancement to the empirical side
of the RBV has been made by the vote counting and meta-analysis. The empirical analysis has
been performed very well and is informative and differentiated. I am sure, that no future
empirical researcher in the field of the RBV will be able to ignore the opus of Ms Nothnagel.
Moreover extracts of the work have stood up to the first market tests. Excerpts of the thesis
were presented to the Academy of Management in 2005 and at the conference of the Strategic
Management Society in 2004, 2005 and 2007. Of further note is, that the work has profited
from a period of research at the Ohio State University and a collaboration with the professors
Barney and Leiblein.
The work presented fulfils all the requirements of international research standards. My wish is
that this work finds acceptance in the community of RBV-researchers and strategic
management. In my estimation it deserves to do so.

Univ.-Prof. Dr. Thomas Mellewigt
Preface
“The greatest achievement of the human spirit is to live up to one’s opportunities and make
the most of one’s resources.”
Luc de Clapiers, Marquis de Vauvenargues (1715-1747).
Writing the preface in one’s book is usually the last thing a Ph.D. candidate has to do. It’s the
time and place to say thank you – and to acknowledge the support and encouragement of the
advisor and faculty, fellow students, and, of course family and friends. And I certainly have a
lot to be thankful for! But before I get to that, I want to take a moment to reflect on the past
four years (unbelievable!) and to encourage everyone who is currently thinking about making
the journey of writing a dissertation. And believe me – it really is a journey, one that you will
only be able to understand if you experience it yourself!
I was excited at the beginning, studying previous dissertations, and reading – with
anticipation, a little anxiety, and a tremendous respect – the prefaces of those authors,
wishing, yet not really believing that I might get there as well. After several months of
digging into the literature, I finally found the right research question and I felt ecstatic.
Suddenly, I understood why everybody kept telling me that this is one of the best moments in
the journey: I was like a teenager in love, one who could not stop smiling and who wanted to
embrace the whole world. After that, I felt that I was on a roller coaster. I was satisfied while
putting together my table of contents, yet dissatisfied as well, since I had to change it over and
over and over again. I felt lucky, when finding the exact source I needed to cite, and stupid,
while spending more than 8 hours on a single (and of course perfect) sentence. I felt proud,
because part of my work got accepted for a presentation at a conference, and I also freaked
out, because my computer thought the perfect time to give me a blue screen was two days
before that conference. I was also excited to hear that I got a scholarship to Ohio State
University, yet, devastated when I discovered (with the help of my fellow OSU colleagues)
that I had to recode half of my database because of a beginner’s mistake…
I could go on like this for many more pages. The important thing, however, is that in the end,
after holding the hardcover version of my dissertation and passing my disputation, I just felt
one thing, namely I was truly happy! And I still am!
Now, I guess I just want to say THANK YOU to all of you who helped me to get to this point:
first of all, to my doctoral advisor Prof. Thomas Mellewigt, for your encouragement and your
thoughtful guidance – I really enjoyed working with you. Also, to my fellow colleagues at
X Preface
OSU, Assistant Prof. Mona Makhija, Associate Prof. Michael J. Leiblein, and Prof. Jay B.
Barney, for our incredible discussions and the interest that you all showed in my work. It was
an honor for me to work with you. Furthermore, to John Trelfa, for all your helpful
corrections; and to IMPAQ AG, for giving me the support and the space I needed for my
development. Also, to our “first generation”, for so many helpful feedbacks during our
doctoral seminars – this is to Leipzig, Paderborn, and Berlin and I hope we will see each other
more often in the future. In particular, to Dr. Anna Krzeminska and Dr. Franziska König – I
hope you know that I would not have survived this journey if both of you had not been part of
it, and I will always cherish our time together at the SMS conferences. And of course, to all
my friends, especially Maria Zwickler, Regine Lampert, Michael Bohn, Kerstin Dauscher,
Gaby Strotmann, Erika Kunze, Steffen Groß, and Annette Kroh for your ongoing
encouragement, your patience with me, and simply for your friendship. Furthermore, to
Ernesto Heller, for helping me with my database, but most important, for showing me new
perspectives in so many ways that I will never forget, as well as to Katja Lehn, for picking me
up when I needed that, and celebrating with me every little step – you are always there for me
and I thank you for that. And finally, I want to thank you, Mom and Dad, for all your support,
help, time, effort, and encouragement – and most important, for always believing in me and
raising me to believe in myself. I dedicate my dissertation to both of you, with deep love and
eternal gratitude.
As the quote in the beginning said, “The greatest achievement of the human spirit is to live up
to one’s opportunities and make the most of one’s resources.” – this statement not only
captures the essence of my dissertation, but also conveys what I have learned, personally,
throughout the past four years. Writing a dissertation, and doing it with an open-heart, gets
you intensely in touch with yourself. And I, for the first time, have truly appreciated all the
resources that were provided to me, and all the opportunities that were – and still are – being
presented to me…
Finally, to all the doctoral students out there: Good luck with your own journey – trust me, it
is worth every bit of your investment!

Dr. Katja Nothnagel