Competence-based Growth Strategy and Risk-Return Relationship: Theory and Empirical Evidence

如何建構正確的成長策略，一直是策略管 理研究上的核心議題，過去的研究多著眼於以 產品與市場的角度，規劃企業的成長方向，雖 然，產品/市場的角度有其研究上的方便性，但 卻低估了構成產品與市場選擇的資源能力，對 於企業掌握適當的成長過程與選擇的重要性。 本研究首先依據Penrose(1959)的成長理 論，以及資源能力基礎理論，確立企業欲追求 成長，必須在既有的資源能力結構上，尋求適 當的『能力延伸』與『能力更新』策略做法， 其中能力的延伸係指追求資源能力在『量』上 面的成長、或謂對於『靜態綜效』的創造，而 能力的更新則指透由內外部不同的學習途 徑，以建構企業新的資源能力內涵，亦即尋求 資源能力在『質』上面的改變、或謂創造『動 態綜效』；這兩種基本的資源能力策略的適當 運用，構成企業建構成功的成長策略的核心內涵。其次，本研究認為不同的資源能力策略， 對企業的風險與報酬將會顯現不同的影響，能 力延伸策略由於是以現有的能力為基礎，進行 運用範圍的擴張，只要在合理的互補性資源配 合下，應該較能力更新策略上有較低的風險， 然而，能力更新策略由於是著眼於創造新的能 力內涵，應該較單純的能力延伸策略會有較高 的長期報酬，因此，企業若能適當的交互運用 能力延伸與能力更新策略，有可能建構高報 酬、低風險的經營成效與企業成長。 為進一步驗證此一理論假說，本研究以國 內上市上櫃的160 家電子資訊業廠商在1996 到1999 年的公開營運資料為範疇，有系統的 檢視廠商的資源能力策略、及其與風險報酬之 關係，並進行計量的分析。本研究的初步發 現，相當程度支持所提出的理論假說，此一結 果當可對於企業成長策略規劃、尤其是專業製 造廠商，提供規範性的建議。How to pursue an effective growth strategy has been one of the central inquiries in the field of strategic management research. Most of the previous insights concerning growth strategy focus on a firm’s strategic choices among products and/or markets. While such a conceptualization provides convenience for researchers to conduct empirical investigations, it may underestimate the influence of competence profiles of the company that support its development of products and penetration of markets. The emergence of resource-based view of the firm in the 1980s and 2 that of competence-based management in the 1990s constitute a fruitful opportunity to explore the causes and effects of different growth strategies based on the heterogeneity of a firm’s competence profile. Along this line of inquiry, the purpose of the current research initiative is to explore the linkages between growth strategy and risk-return relationships from the perspective of competence-based management. We identify two critical elements of competence management for a firm in pursuing its growth. One is competence-leveraging effort made by the company, which refers to stretch the existing stock of competence for further value-creating applications. The other one is competence-upgrading effort made by the company, which indicates the exploration of qualitatively new assets or capabilities for the organization. Since competence-leveraging efforts do not qualitatively change the existing competence profile but just replicate or reuse the existing stock of competence, they should result in a relatively lower level of business risk. On the other hand, competence-upgrading initiatives should result in a higher level of business risk, but may lead to a higher level of business return due to its investments in the exploration of qualitatively new set of competence. We further argue that, to achieve dynamic corporate coherence, a successful firm has to establish a business model containing both processes. Based on this conceptualization, the present research project provides an investigation on the linkages between competence-based strategy and a firm’s profitability and business risk. Our empirical setting is constructed by a panel data set containing operating and financial information of 160 Taiwanese contract manufacturers over 1996-1999, our analytical results show that the constant upgrading of a firm’s product design and manufacturing process competencies proves to be essential for value-creation. In addition, establishing effective inventory control while being able to deliver time-to-market manufacturing services is vital to their survival and economic success. Moreover, depending upon the types of products they offer, managing a balanced supply structure to support the needs of competence leveraging constitutes an important piece in the jig-saw puzzle of the formation of dynamic capabilities. On the risk side, firms engaging in both competence-upgrading and competence-leveraging activities experienced a higher level of average profitability and a lower level of business risk. For those firms emphasizing on competence-upgrading activities, a higher level of business risk is found. For those firms emphasizing on competence-leveraging activities, a lower level of profitability is found. Overall, our results suggest that by combining the efforts of upgrading competence with activities for leveraging existing competence a firm can pursue its optimal growth. Implications for formulating growth strategy based on competence framework are discussed