企业如何竞争？企业如何赚取高于正常的回报吗？什么是需要长期保持卓越的性能呢？一个日益强大的经营策略这些基本问题的答案在于动态能力的概念。这些的技能，程序，例程，组织结构和学科，使公司建立，聘请和协调相关的无形资产，以满足客户的需求，并不能轻易被竞争对手复制。具有较强的动态能力是企业强烈的进取精神。他们不仅适应商业生态系统，他们也塑造他们通过创新，协作，学习和参与。大卫蒂斯是动态能力的角度来看的先驱。它植根于25年，他的研究，教学和咨询。他的思想已经在企业战略，管理和经济学的影响力，创新，技术管理和竞争政策有关。通过他的顾问和咨询工作，他也带来了这些想法，承担业务和政策，使周围的世界。本书的核心思想动态能力是最清晰和最简洁的语句。蒂斯解释其成因，应用，以及如何他们提供了一个替代的方法很多传统的战略思想，立足于简单和过时的产业组织和竞争优势的基础的理解。通俗易懂撰写并发表了，这将是一个非常宝贵的工具，为所有那些谁想要理解这一重要的战略思想的贡献，他们的MBA学生，学者，管理人员，或顾问和刺激。
Strategic Management Journal, V ol. 18:7, 509–533 (1997)
The dynamic capabilities framework analyzes the sources and methods of wealth creation and capture by private enterpri firms operating in environments of rapid technological change. The competitive advantage of firms is en as resting on distinctive process (ways of coordinating and combining), shaped by the firm‘s (specific) ast positions (such as the firm‘s portfolio of difficult-to-trade knowledge asts and complementary asts), and the evolution path(s) it has adopted or inherited. T
he importance of path dependencies is amplified where conditions of increasing returns exist. Whether and how a firm‘s competitive advantage is eroded depends on the stability of market demand, and the ea of replicability (expanding internally) and imitatability (replication by competitors). If correct, the framework suggests that private wealth creation in regimes of rapid technological change depends in large measure on honing in毕淑敏小说
ternal technological, organizational, and managerial process inside the firm. In short, identifying new opportunities and organizing effectively and efficiently to embrace them are generally more fundamental to private wealth creation than is strategizing, if by strategizing one means engaging in business conduct that keeps competitors off balance, rais rival‘s costs, and excludes new entrants. (C) 1997 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
战略管理杂志。18:7 ，509-533 （1997 ）
动态能力框架分析方法的来源和财富创造和捕捉由私人企业公司在环境的技术快速变化。竞争优势的公司被视为搁在独特的过程(方法的协调和结合)，受到公司的(特定的)资产头寸(如该公司的投资组合的难以贸易知识资产和互补资产)，和演化路径(s)已采取或继承。路径依赖的重要性是放大收益递增的情况存在。是否和怎样一个公司的竞争优势是侵蚀取决于市场需求的稳定性，易于复现性(扩大内部)和imit词根词缀表
atability(复制竞争对手)。如果正确，框架表明，私人财富创造在政权的技术快速变化很大程度
上取决于内部技术、组织、珩磨和管理流程在公司。总之，识别新的机会和组织有效和高效地拥抱他们通常更基本的私人财富创造比谋略，如果通过策划一个意味着从事商业行为，使对手失去平衡，提高竞争对手的成本，不包括新进入者。(C)1997年由约翰•威利父子公司。
INTRODUCTION
The fundamental question in the field of strategic management is how firms achieve and sustain competitive advantage. We confront this question here by developing the dynamic capabilities approach, which endeavors to analyze the sources of wealth creation and capture by firms. The development of this framework flows from a recognition by the authors that strategic
theory is replete with analys of firm-level strategies for sustaining and safeguarding extant competitive advantage, but has performed less well with respect to assisting in the understanding of how and why certain firms build competitive advantage in regimes of rapid change. Our approach is especially relevant in a Schumpeterian world of innovation-bad competition, price/performance rivalry, increasing returns, and the ‗creative destruction‘ of existing competences. The approach endeavors to explain firm-level success and failure. We are interested in both building a better theory of firm performance, as well as informing managerial practice.
In order to position our analysis in a manner that displays similarities and differences with existing approaches, we begin by briefly reviewing accepted frameworks for strategic management. We endeavor to expo implicit assumptions, and identify competitive circumstances where each paradigm might display some relative advantage as both a uful descriptive and normative theory of competitive strategy. While numerous theories have been advanced over the past two decades about the sources of competitive advantage, many cluster around just a few looly structured frameworks or paradigms. In this paper we attempt to identify three existing paradigm and describe aspects of an emerging new paradigms that we label dynamic capabilities.
The dominant paradigm in the field during the 1980s was the competitive forces approach developed by Porter (1980). This approach rooted in the structure–conduct–performance paradigm of industrial organization (Mason, 1949 Bain, 1959), emphasizes the actions a firm can take to create defensible positions against competitive forces. A cond approach, referred to as a strategic conflict approach (e.g., Shapiro, 1989) is cloly related to the first in its focus on product market imperfections, entry deterrence and strategic interaction. The strategic conflict approach us the tools of game theory and thus implicitly views competitive outcomes as a function of the effectiveness with which firms keep their rivals off balance through strategic investments, pricing strategies, signaling, and the contr
ol of information. Both the competitive force and the strategic conflict approaches appear to share the view that rents flow from privileged product market positions.
Another distinct class of approaches emphasizes building competitive advantage through capturing entrepreneurial rents stemming from fundamental firm-level efficiency advantages. The approaches have their roots in a much older discussion of corporate strength世界最大城市
s and weakness they have taken on new life as evidence suggest that firms build enduring advantages only through efficiency and effectiveness, and as development in organizational economics and the study on technological and organizational change become applied to strategy questions. One strand of this literature, often referred to as the ‗resource-bad perspective,‘ emphasizes firm-specific capabilities and asts and the existence of isolating mechanisms as the fundamental determinants of firm performance (Penro, 1959; Rumelt, 19842). This perspective recognizes but does not attempt to explain the nature of the isolating mechanisms that enable entrepreneurial rents and competitive advantage to be sustained.
简介
在战略管理领域的根本问题是企业如何获得和保持竞争优势。我们面对这个问题，在这里发展动态能
力的方法，努力创造财富的来源进行分析，并捕获由企业。这个框架的发展，从战略理论是由作者充满维持和维护现存的竞争优势的企业级战略分析确认，但对于协助了解如何以及为什么某些公司的表现稍逊在快速变化的制度，建立竞争优势。在熊彼特创新为基础的竞争，价格/性能的竞争，报酬递增，现有的能力和“创造性破坏”的世界，我们的
做法是特别相关。的方法解释企业层面的成功和失败的努力。我们有兴趣在这两个建筑企业绩效的一种较好的理论，以及通知管理实践。
为了定位我们的分析，我们首先简要回顾公认的框架，战略管理的方式显示与现有方法的异同。我们将尽力揭露隐含的假设，并找出有竞争力的情况下，作为一个有用的描述性和规范性的竞争战略理论，每个范式可能显示一些相对的优势。虽然已经提出了许多理论在过去二十年的竞争优势来源，许多集群周围只是一个结构松散的框架或范式。在本文中，我们试图找出现有三个范式和描述方面的一门新兴的新的范式，我们的标签动态能力。
在20世纪80年代在该领域的主导范式是由波特（1980）接近开发的竞争力。这种做法植根于工业组织（梅森，1959年，1949年贝恩）的结构- 行为- 绩效范式，强调企业可以创建守难攻的位置，对竞争力的行动。第二种方法称为一个战略冲突的方法（例如，1989年，夏皮罗）是密切相关的第一个专注于产品市场的不完善，进入威慑和战略互动。战略冲突的方法是使用博弈论的工具，从而隐含地认为，
有竞争力的结果作为一个功能与企业保持他们的对手失去平衡，通过战略投资，定价策略，信令和控制信息的有效性。竞争力和战略冲突的方法似乎赞同这样的观点租金流特权产品的市场地位。
另一个不同的类的方法，强调建立竞争优势，通过捕捉创业租金源于基本的企业级的效率优势。这些方法都有其根源在旧讨论企业的长处和短处，他们已经采取了新的生活的证据表明，企业建立持久的优势，只能通过效率和效益，组织经济学的发展和研究的技术和组织变革成为适用于战略问题。这种文学的一个链，通常被称为“资源为基础的角度，强调企业的具体能力和资产隔离机制的存在，作为企业绩效的根本决定因素（彭罗斯，1959 ；罗曼尔特的，清浊辅音
19842 ）。这个角度认识，但并不试图解释性质的隔离机制，使企业家租和竞争优势得以持续。
Another component of the efficiency-bad approach is孙权劝学的译文
developed in this paper. Rudimentary efforts are made to identify the dimensions of firm-specific capabilities that can be sources of advantage, and to explain how combinations of competences and resources can be developed, deployed, and protected. We refer to this as the ‘dynamic capabilities‘ approach in order to stress exploiting existing internal and external firm specific competences to address changing environments. Elements of the approach can be found in Schumpeter (1942), Penro (1959), Nelson and Winter (1982), Prahalad and Hamel (1990), Teece (1976, 1986a, 1986b, 1988) and in Hayes, Wheelwright, and Clark (1988): Becau this approach emphasizes the development of management capabilities, and difficult-to-imi
tate combinations of organizational, functional and technological skills, it integrates and draws upon rearch in such areas as the management of R&D, product and process development, technology transfer, intellectual property, manufacturing, human resources, and organizational learning. Becau the fields are often viewed as outside the traditional boundaries of strategy, much of this rearch has not been incorporated into existing economic approaches to strategy issues. As a result, dynamic capabilities can be en as an emerging and potentially integrative approach to understanding the newer sources of competitive advantage.
We suggest that the dynamic capabilities approach is promising both in terms of future rearch potential and as an aid to management endeavoring to gain competitive advantage in increasingly demanding environments. To illustrate the esntial elements of the dynamic capabilities approach, the ctions that follow compare and contrast this approach to other models of strategy. Each ction highlights the strategic insights provided by each approach as well as the different competitive circumstances in which it might be most appropriate. Needless to say, the approaches are in many ways complementary and a full understanding of firm-level, competitive
advantage requires an appreciation of all four approaches and more.
本文开发的效率为基础的方法的另一个组成部分。简陋的努力都是为了确定企业特定的能力，可以尺寸的优势来源，并解释如何组合的能力和资源可以开发，部署和保护。我们称此为“动态能力”的做法，为了强调利用现有的内部和外部公司的具体能力，以应对不断变化的环境。元素的方法，可以发现在熊彼特（1942），彭罗斯（1959），纳尔逊和温特（1982），普拉哈拉德和哈默尔（1990），蒂斯（1976，1986A，1986b，1988）和海耶斯，车匠，和克拉克（1988）：因为这种做法强调了管理能力的发展，并难以-到-模仿的组织功能和技术技能的组合，它整合并绘制后，在研发管理，产品和工艺开发，技术等领域的研究转让，知识产权，制造，人力资源，组织学习。因为这些领域往往被视为传统的战略边界外，本研究还没有被纳入到现有的经济战略问题的方法。因此，动态能力，可以被看作是一个新兴市场和潜在的综合性的方法来理解新的竞争优势来源。
我们认为，动态能力的方法是看好双方未来的研究潜力和管理，努力在日益苛刻的环境中获得竞争优势的援助。为了说明动态能力方法的基本要素，下面的章节中比较和对比其他车型战略方针。每节突出了每种方法，以及不同的竞争环境下，它可能是最合适的战略洞察力。不用说，这些方法在许多方面互补性和充分的了解企业层面，竞争优势，需要所有四个方法和更多的升值。
MODELS OF STRATEGY EMPHASIZING THE EXPLOITATION OF MARKET POWER Competitive forces
The dominant paradigm in strategy at least during the 1980s was the competitive forces approach. Pioneered by Porter (1980), the competitive forces approach views the esnce of competitive strategy formulation as ‗relating a company to its environment ... [T]he key aspect of the firm‘s environment is the industry or industries in which it competes.‘ Industry structur e strongly influences 台式机主板
the competitive rules of the game as well as the strategies potentially available to firms.
In the competitive forces model, five industry-level forces—entry barriers, threat of substitution, bargaining power of buyers, bargaining power of suppliers, and rivalry among industry incumbents—determine the inherent profit potential of an industry or sub-gment of an industry. The approach can be ud to help the firm find a position in an industry from which it can best defend itlf against competitive forces or influence them in its favor (Porter, 1980: 4).
This ‗five-forces‘ framework provides a systematic way of thinking about how competitive forces work at the industry level and how the forces determine the profitability of different industries and industry gments. The competitive forces framework also contains a number of underlying assumptions about the sources of competition and the nature of the strategy process. To facilitate comparisons with other approaches, we highlight veral distinctive characteristics of the framework.
Economic rents in the competitive forces framework are monopoly rents (Teece, 1984). Firms in an industry earn rents when they are somehow able to impede the competitive forces (in either factor markets or product markets) which tend to drive economic returns to zero. Available strategies are described in Porter (1980). Competitive strategies are often aimed at altering the firm‘s position in the industry vis-a-vis competitors and suppliers. Industry structure plays a central role in determining and limiting strategic action.
Some industries or subctors of industries become more ‗attractive‘ becau they have structural impediments to competitive forces (e,g: entry barriers) that allow firms better opportunities for creating sustainable competitive advantages. Rents are created largely at the
industry or subctor level rather than at the firm level. While there is some recognition given to firm-specific asts, differences among firms relate primarily to scale. This approach to strategy reflects its incubation inside the field of industrial organization and in particular the industrial structure school of Mason and Bain(Teece, 1984).
模型开发的战略强调市场力量
竞争力
在战略上，至少在上世纪80年代的主导范式是竞争力的方法。波特（1980），首创竞争力的方法看待一家公司有关其环境制定竞争战略的精髓...... [T]他公司的环境的关键环节是它竞争的行业或产业。产业结构强烈地影响着竞争的游戏规则，以及可能提供给企业的战略。
在竞争力模型，五个行业级部队进入壁垒，替代威胁，买方议价能力，供应商的议价能力，行业之间的竞争现任确定一个行业或一个行业的细分市场固有的潜在利润。该方法可以用来帮助公司在一个行业中找到一个位置，它最能捍卫本身对竞争力影响他们对其有利（波特，1980：4）。
这“五力”框架提供了一个系统的竞争力如何，在行业层面的工作，这些力量如何确定不同行业和细分行业的盈利能力的思考方式。竞争力框架还包含了一些竞争的来源和性质的战略过程中的基本假设。为了便于与其他方法比较，我们强调几个特色鲜明的框架。
竞争力框架中的经济租金的垄断租金（蒂斯，1984）。在一个行业的企业赚取租金时，他们已经在某种程度上能够阻碍竞争力（无论是要素市场或产品市场商品买卖合同
）倾向于推动经济回报为零。波特（1980年）中描述可用的策略。竞争策略往往是为了改变公司的面对面的人在行业竞争对手和供应商的地位。工业结构中起着核心的作用，在确定和限制战略行动。
一些行业或子行业变得更加“有吸引力”，因为他们有竞争力（E，G：准入门槛），建立可持续的竞争优势，使企业更好的发展机会的结构性障碍。租金主要是在行业或界别分组的水平，而不是在企业层
面建立。虽然有一些公司特定资产的识别，企业之间的差异主要涉及规模。这种策略的方法来反映其孵化产业组织领域内，特别是产业结构学校梅森和贝恩（蒂斯，1984）。
Strategic conflict
The publication of Carl Sh apiro‘s 1989 article,confidently titled ‗The Theory of Business Strategy,‘ anno城南旧事读后感400字
unced the emergence of a new approach to business strategy, if not strategic management. This approach utilizes the tools of game theory to analyze the nature of competitive interaction between rival firms. The main thrust of work in this tradition is to reveal how a firm can influence the behavior and actions of rival firms and thus the market environment. Examples of such moves are investment in capacity (Dixit, 1980), R&D (Gilbert and Newberry, 1982), and advertising (Schmalene,1983). To be effective, the strategic moves require irreversible commitments. The moves in question will have no effect if they can be costlessly undone. A key idea is that by manipulating the market environment, a firm may be able to increa its profits.
This literature, together with the contestability literature (Baumol, Panzar, and Willig, 1982), has led to a greater appreciation of the role of sunk costs, as oppod to fixed costs, in determining competitive outcomes. Strategic moves can also be designed to influence rivals‘ behavior through si
gnaling. S屈原列传特殊句式
trategic signaling has been examined in a number of contexts, including predatory pricing (Kreps and Wilson, 1982a, 1982b) and limit pricing (Milgrom and Roberts, 1982a, 1982b). More recent treatments have emphasized the role of commitment and reputation (e.g., Ghemawat, 1991) and the benefits of firms simultaneously pursuing competition and cooperation
