A Problem Waits: Is it True that Resource-Based Theory (RBT) is an Empty Tautology?

Main Article Content

Indri Dwi Apriliyanti

Abstract

Resource-based theory (RBT) has gained its maturity as a theory, and it has heavily shaped the path of research in the organization and management field. However, RBT has been criticized due to its quality and deemed to be a theory that is tautological. This study explores the evolution of resource-based theory (RBT) using the Thomas Kuhn cycle. Employing a critical literature review approach, this study identifies all articles related to RBT in the organization and management field from 1959 to 2021 and finds 141 articles. The findings have demonstrated that RBT has evolved, and it has become a better ‘puzzle solver’ as it provides a more comprehensive theoretical lens to analyze broader phenomenon of organization, particularly concerning its competitive advantage. Nonetheless, the study also sheds some light on the potential weaknesses of RBT. Inclusiveness of RBT is suggested to be a sign of tautology as the theory has a very broad definition of resources hence can embrace all phenomena in the field of organization’s strategic management. In addition to that, scholars find difficulty to define or operationalize several key concepts in RBT leading to obstruction in its ability to be tested empirically. And the vagueness of concepts creates a tautology problem in RBT that the theory cannot be verified or falsified. Thomas Kuhn suggests that theories can be developed, thus, despite its current weakness, RBT can still be improved by increasing accuracy of its key concepts. From the analysis, this study develops a theoretical recommendation regarding the use of RBT theory particularly in public administration research.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Article Details

How to Cite
APRILIYANTI, Indri Dwi. A Problem Waits: Is it True that Resource-Based Theory (RBT) is an Empty Tautology?. Policy & Governance Review, [S.l.], v. 6, n. 2, p. 107-122, mar. 2022. ISSN 2580-4820. Available at: <https://journal.iapa.or.id/pgr/article/view/543>. Date accessed: 18 may 2022. doi: https://doi.org/10.30589/pgr.v6i2.543.
Section
Articles

References

Armstrong, C. E., & Shimizu, K. (2007). A review of approaches to empirical research on the resource-based view of the firm†. Journal of Management, 33(6), 959-986. https://doi. org/10.1177/0149206307307645

Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive ad vantage. Journal of Management, 17(1),99-120. https://doi. org/10.1177/014920639101700108

Barney, J. (2000). The Penrosian myth: The unimportance of Edith Penrose’s work in early developments of the resource-based view. Academy of Management. Toronto.

Barney, J. B. (1986). Organizational culture: Can it be a source of sustained competitive advantage?. Academy of manag ement review, 11(3), 656-665.

Barney, J. B . (2001). Is t he resou rce-b a sed “view” a useful perspective for strategic management research? Yes. Academy of management review, 26(1), 41-56.

Barney, J. B., Ketchen J r, D. J., & Wr ight , M. (2011). The fu t ure of resou rce-based theory: revitalization or decline?. Journal of management, 37(5), 1299-1315. https:// doi.org/ 10.1177/0149206310391805

Bhandari, K. R., Rana, S., Paul, J., & Salo, J. (2020). Relative exploration and firm performance: Why resour ce-theory alone is not sufficient?. Journal of Business Research, 118, 363-377.

Braganza, A., Brooks, L., Nepelski, D., Ali, M., & Moro, R. (2017). Resource management in big data initiatives: Processes and dynamic capabilities. Journal of Business Research, 70, 328-337. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. jbusres.2016.08.006

Cockburn, I. M., Henderson, R. M., & Stern, S. (2000). Untangling the Origins of Competitive Advantage. Strategic Management Journal, 21(10/11), 1123–1145. http://www.jstor. org/stable/3094430.

Cohen, W. M., & Levinthal, D. A. (1989). Innovation and learning: the two faces of R & D. The economic journal, 99(September 1989), 569-596.

Cohen, W. M., & Levinthal, D. A. (1990). Absorptive Capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1), 128–152. https://doi. org/10.2307/2393553.

Combs, J. G., & Ketchen, D. J. (1999). Explaining Interfirm Cooperation and Performance: Toward a Reconciliation of Predictions from the Resource-Based View and Organizational Economics. Strategic Management Journal, 20(9), 867–888. http://www.jstor.org/stable/3094210.

Conner, K. R. (1991). A historical comparison of resour ce-based theory and five schools of thought with in industrial organization economics: do we have a new theory of the firm?. Journal of Management, 17(1), 121-154. https://doi.org/10.1177/014920639101700109.

Crook, T.R., Ketchen, D.J., Jr., Combs, J.G. & Todd, S. Y. (2008). Strategic resources and performance: a meta-analysis. Strategic Management Journal, 29(11),1141-1154. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.703

Darroch, J. (2005). Knowledge management, innovation and firm performance. Journal of Knowledge Management, 9(3), 101-115.

Dierickx, I., & Cool, K. (1989). Asset stock accumulation and sustainability of competitive advantage. Management Science, 35(12), 1504–1511. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2632235.

Fiol , C. M . (1991). M a naging culture as a competitive resource: An identity-based view of sustainable competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 191-211.

Foss, N. J. (2011). Invited editorial: Why micro- foundations for resource-based theory are needed and what they may look like. Journal of Management, 37(5), 1413-1428.

Gavetti, G. (2005). Cognition and hierarchy: Rethinking the micro foundations of capabilities’ development. Organization Science, 16(6), 599-617.

Grant, R. M. (1996). Toward a knowledge-based theory of the firm. Strategic management journal, 17(S2), 109-122.

Hart, S. L. (1995). A natural-resource-based view of the firm. Academy of management review, 20(4), 986-1014.

Kogut, B., & Zander, U. (1992). Knowledge of the firm, combinative capabilities, and the replication of technology. Organization Science, 3(3), 383–397. http://www.jstor. org/stable/2635279

Kor, Y. Y., & Mahoney, J. T. (2004). Edith Penrose's (1959) contributions to the resource-based view of strategic management. Journal of Management studies 41(1), 183-191.

Kraaijenbrink, J., Spender, J.-C., & Groen, A. J. (2010). The resource-based view: a review and assessment of its critiques. Journal of Management, 36(1), 349-372. https://doi. org/10.1177/0149206309350775

Kuhn, T. S. (1962). The historical structure of scientific discovery. Science, 136 (3518) 760-764.

Kuhn, T. S. (2012). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Lindenberg, S., & Foss, N. J. (2011). Managing joint production motivation: The role of goal framing and governance mechanisms. Academy of management review, 36(3), 500-525. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMR.2011.61031808

Lippman, S. A., & Rumelt, R. P. (1982). Uncertain imitability: An analysis of interfirm differences in efficiency under competition. The Bell Journal of Economics, 13(2), 418-438.

Nelson, R. R. (1991). Why do firms differ, and how does it matter. Strategic Management Journal, 12, 61-74.

Oliver, C . (19 97). Sus tainable competitive ad v antage: Combining institutional and resour ce-based views. Strategic Management Journal, 18(9), 697-713.

Penrose, E. (1959). The theory of the growth of the firm. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Porter, M. E. (1980). Competitive Strategy. New York: Free Press.

Priem, R. L. & Butler, J. E. (2001). Tautology in the resource-based view and the implications of externally determined resource value: Further comments. Academy of management review, 26(1), 57-66.

Rugman, A. M., & Verbeke, A. (2002). Edith Penrose's contribution to the resource-based view of strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 23(8), 769-780.

Rumelt, R. P. (1984). Toward a strategic theory of the firm. Competitive Strategic Management, 26, 556-570.

Sautet, F. (2000). An entrepreneurial theory of the firm. New York, NY: Routledge.

Shan, S., Luo, Y., Zhou, Y., & Wei, Y. (2019). Big data analysis adaptation and enterprises’ competitive advantages: the perspective of dynamic capability and resource-based theories. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 31(4), 406-420.

Shapere, D. (1964). The structure of scientific revolutions. Philosophical Review, LXXIII, 383-94.

Quaye, D., & M ensa h, I . (2019). M a r ket ing innovation and sustainable competitive advantage of manufacturing SMEs in Ghana. Management Decision.

Teece, D. J. (1982). Towards an economic theory of the multiproduct firm. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization 3(1), 39-63.

Teece, D. J. (2007). Explicating dynamic capabilities: the nature and micro foundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance. Strategic management journal, 28(13), 1319-1350.

Teece, D. J., Pisano, G., Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 18(7),509-533.

Wernerfelt, B. (1984). A resource-based view of the firm. Strategic management journal, 5(2), 171-180.

Wright, P. M., Dunford, B. B., & Snell, S. A(2001). Human resources and the resource based view of the firm. Journal of Management, 27(6), 701-721. https://doi. org/10.1177/014920630102700607

Zahra, S. A., & George, G. (2002). Absorptive capacity: A review, reconceptualization, and extension. Academy of management review, 27(2), 185-203.

Zhang, Y., Hou, Z., Yang, F., Yang, M. M., & Wang, Z. (2021). Discovering the evolution of resource-based theory: Science mapping based on bibliometric analysis. Journal of Business Research, 137, 500-516.

Zhao, Y., & Fan, B. (2018). Exploring open government data capacity of government agency: Based on the resource-based theory. Government Informat ion Quarterly, 35(1), 1-12.