IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jbrese/v69y2016i10p4121-4131.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Effective configurations of value creation and capture capabilities: Extending Treacy and Wiersema's value disciplines

Author

Listed:
  • Zacharias, Nicolas A.
  • Nijssen, Edwin J.
  • Stock, Ruth Maria

Abstract

This article theoretically elaborates and empirically investigates the alignment of the value creation and capture capabilities of Treacy and Wiersema's (1993, 1995) typology of three strategies for superior customer value (product leadership, operational excellence, and customer intimacy). Drawing on configuration theory, the current study develops three propositions that predict how each strategy in Treacy and Wiersema's typology corresponds to a particular mix of value creation and capture capabilities, which lead to competitive advantage and success in the marketplace. Using fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis, data from a multi-industry sample of 110 R&D managers and 242 customers serve to empirically identify the operating models of the three conceptually derived strategies and their customer value performance. The results confirm the three strategies and indicate that each exhibits a unique combination of value creation capabilities and a carefully aligned set of value capture capabilities. Although the three strategies demand clear trade-offs in the value creation domain, those trade-offs do not exist for value capture.

Suggested Citation

  • Zacharias, Nicolas A. & Nijssen, Edwin J. & Stock, Ruth Maria, 2016. "Effective configurations of value creation and capture capabilities: Extending Treacy and Wiersema's value disciplines," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(10), pages 4121-4131.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jbrese:v:69:y:2016:i:10:p:4121-4131
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.03.039
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0148296316300595
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.03.039?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Verworn, Birgit, 2009. "A structural equation model of the impact of the "fuzzy front end" on the success of new product development," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(10), pages 1571-1581, December.
    2. Roberto Garcia-Castro & Claude Francoeur, 2016. "When more is not better: Complementarities, costs and contingencies in stakeholder management," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(2), pages 406-424, February.
    3. Ragin, Charles C., 2000. "Fuzzy-Set Social Science," University of Chicago Press Economics Books, University of Chicago Press, edition 1, number 9780226702773, December.
    4. Stewart Thornhill & Roderick E. White, 2007. "Strategic purity: A multi‐industry evaluation of pure vs. hybrid business strategies," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(5), pages 553-561, May.
    5. Hannan, Michael T & Burton, M Diane & Baron, James N, 1996. "Inertia and Change in the Early Years: Employment Relations in Young, High Technology Firms," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 5(2), pages 503-536.
    6. Stanley F. Slater & Eric M. Olson, 2000. "Strategy type and performance: the influence of sales force management," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(8), pages 813-829, August.
    7. Ragin, Charles C., 2006. "Set Relations in Social Research: Evaluating Their Consistency and Coverage," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 14(3), pages 291-310, July.
    8. Gautam Ray & Jay B. Barney & Waleed A. Muhanna, 2004. "Capabilities, business processes, and competitive advantage: choosing the dependent variable in empirical tests of the resource‐based view," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(1), pages 23-37, January.
    9. James G. March, 1991. "Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 71-87, February.
    10. Homburg, Christian & Stock, Ruth, 2004. "The Link Between Sales People’s Job Satisfaction and Customer Satisfaction in a Business-to-Business Context: A Dyadic Analysis," Publications of Darmstadt Technical University, Institute for Business Studies (BWL) 35550, Darmstadt Technical University, Department of Business Administration, Economics and Law, Institute for Business Studies (BWL).
    11. Zi-Lin He & Poh-Kam Wong, 2004. "Exploration vs. Exploitation: An Empirical Test of the Ambidexterity Hypothesis," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(4), pages 481-494, August.
    12. Wu, Pei-Ling & Yeh, Shih-Shuo & Huan, Tzung-Cheng (.T.C.). & Woodside, Arch G., 2014. "Applying complexity theory to deepen service dominant logic: Configural analysis of customer experience-and-outcome assessments of professional services for personal transformations," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 67(8), pages 1647-1670.
    13. Becker, Markus C. & Lillemark, Morten, 2006. "Marketing/R&D integration in the pharmaceutical industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 105-120, February.
    14. Homburg, Christian & Stock, Ruth, 2004. "The Link between Sales People’s Job Satisfaction and Customer Satisfaction in a Business-to-Business Context: A Dyadic Analysis," Publications of Darmstadt Technical University, Institute for Business Studies (BWL) 60486, Darmstadt Technical University, Department of Business Administration, Economics and Law, Institute for Business Studies (BWL).
    15. Constantine Andriopoulos & Marianne W. Lewis, 2009. "Exploitation-Exploration Tensions and Organizational Ambidexterity: Managing Paradoxes of Innovation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(4), pages 696-717, August.
    16. Wolfgang Ulaga & Werner Reinartz, 2011. "Hybrid Offerings: How Manufacturing Firms Combine Goods and Services Successfully," Post-Print hal-00642039, HAL.
    17. repec:ucp:bkecon:9780226702766 is not listed on IDEAS
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Alin Stancu & Alina Filip & Mihai Ioan Roșca & Daniela Ioniță & Raluca Căplescu & Andrei Cânda & Laura Daniela Roșca, 2020. "Value Creation Attributes—Clustering Strategic Options for Romanian SMEs," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-18, August.
    2. Nijssen, Edwin J. & Ordanini, Andrea, 2020. "How important is alignment of social media use and R&D–Marketing cooperation for innovation success?," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 1-12.
    3. O'Dwyer, Michele & Gilmore, Audrey, 2018. "Value and alliance capability and the formation of strategic alliances in SMEs: The impact of customer orientation and resource optimisation," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 58-68.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Gomes, Paulo J. & Silva, Graça Miranda & Sarkis, Joseph, 2020. "Exploring the relationship between quality ambidexterity and sustainable production," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 224(C).
    2. Lin, H.E., 2010. "Effects of strategy, context and antecedents and capabilities on the outcomes of ambidexterity : A multiple country case study of the US, China and Taiwan," Other publications TiSEM c0eab7d6-d6c7-4b55-9822-1, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    3. Lulu Liu & Fengbin Wang & Xiukun Li, 2019. "Comparing the configured causal antecedents of exploration and exploitation: a fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis," Frontiers of Business Research in China, Springer, vol. 13(1), pages 1-25, December.
    4. Mammassis, Constantinos S. & Kostopoulos, Konstantinos C., 2019. "CEO goal orientations, environmental dynamism and organizational ambidexterity: An investigation in SMEs," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 37(5), pages 577-588.
    5. Hu, Jing & Wang, Yilin & Liu, Shengnan & Song, Mingshun, 2023. "Mechanism of latecomer enterprises’ technological catch-up in technical standards alliances – An ambidextrous innovation perspective," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    6. Al-Atwi, Amer Ali & Amankwah-Amoah, Joseph & Khan, Zaheer, 2021. "Micro-foundations of organizational design and sustainability: The mediating role of learning ambidexterity," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 30(1).
    7. Ferguson, Graham & Megehee, Carol M. & Woodside, Arch G., 2017. "Culture, religiosity, and economic configural models explaining tipping-behavior prevalence across nations," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 218-233.
    8. Koryak, Oksana & Lockett, Andy & Hayton, James & Nicolaou, Nicos & Mole, Kevin, 2018. "Disentangling the antecedents of ambidexterity: Exploration and exploitation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 413-427.
    9. Sonja Sperber & Christian Linder, 2018. "The impact of top management teams on firm innovativeness: a configurational analysis of demographic characteristics, leadership style and team power distribution," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 12(1), pages 285-316, January.
    10. Linda Argote & Sunkee Lee & Jisoo Park, 2021. "Organizational Learning Processes and Outcomes: Major Findings and Future Research Directions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(9), pages 5399-5429, September.
    11. Hansen, Eric & Nybakk, Erlend & Panwar, Rajat, 2015. "Pure versus hybrid competitive strategies in the forest sector: Performance implications," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 51-57.
    12. Songsong Cheng & Qunpeng Fan & Yang Song, 2023. "Performance Gap and Innovation Ambidexterity: A Moderated Mediation Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(5), pages 1-22, February.
    13. Labarthe, Pierre & Coléno, François & Enjalbert, Jérôme & Fugeray-Scarbel, Aline & Hannachi, Mourad & Lemarié, Stéphane, 2021. "Exploration, exploitation and environmental innovation in agriculture. The case of variety mixture in France and Denmark," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 172(C).
    14. Marie Romuald Pouka Pouka & Viviane Ondoua Biwolé, 2024. "Does causal analysis improve the understanding of entrepreneurial support for SME performance?," Journal of Global Entrepreneurship Research, Springer;UNESCO Chair in Entrepreneurship, vol. 14(1), pages 1-15, December.
    15. Karl Aschenbrücker & Tobias Kretschmer, 2022. "Performance-based incentives and innovative activity in small firms: evidence from German manufacturing," Journal of Organization Design, Springer;Organizational Design Community, vol. 11(2), pages 47-64, June.
    16. Erwin Danneels & Rajesh Sethi, 2011. "New Product Exploration Under Environmental Turbulence," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(4), pages 1026-1039, August.
    17. Bai, Xuan & Wang, Qingtao & Sheng, Shibin & Li, Julie Juan, 2021. "Cross-level interpersonal ties and IJV innovation: Evidence from China," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 618-630.
    18. Glenn B. Voss & Zannie Giraud Voss, 2013. "Strategic Ambidexterity in Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises: Implementing Exploration and Exploitation in Product and Market Domains," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(5), pages 1459-1477, October.
    19. Lee, In Hyeock & Lévesque, Moren, 2023. "Do resource-constrained early-stage firms balance their internal resources across business activities? If so, should they?," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 159(C).
    20. Jing A. Zhang & Xiling Cui, 2017. "In Search Of The Effects Of Business And Political Ties On Innovation Ambidexterity," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 21(02), pages 1-27, February.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jbrese:v:69:y:2016:i:10:p:4121-4131. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jbusres .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.