Resource slack

Last updated

Resource slack, in the business and management literature, is the level of availability of a resource. Resource slack can be considered as the opposite of resource scarcity or resource constraints.

The availability of resources can therefore be defined in terms of resource slack versus constraints, as two ends of a continuum. [1] Resource slack then refers to the relative abundance of the resource, and resource constraints refer to its limited availability. However, the effects of both resource slack and resource constraints are ambiguous, as both can have both negative and positive consequences. Both new and established firms need resources for their survival, [2] growth [3] and sustainable competitive advantage. [4] On the other hand, severe resource constraints hinder the growth of firms and lower the probability of their survival. [5] [6] However, resource constraints have also been observed to foster creativity [7] [8] and force firms to deal with problems promptly. [9] Moreover, slack resources tend to improve firms’ financial performance, [10] serve to buffer environmental shocks and allow for more discretion and flexibility in responding to competitors. [11] However, large amounts of resources could also hinder the entrepreneurial process by impairing the firm's ability to identify new business opportunities. [12] [13]

These contradictory potential outcomes of resource slack/constraints on creativity and performance have been explained in terms of an inverse U-shaped relationship and context-dependent effects, [14] [15] as well as the underlying dynamics of resource constraints and slack. [16] The latter dynamic perspective implies that, for example, entrepreneurs perceive resource constraints/slack as transient positions relative to their start-up's own resource demands at any given moment. [1]

See also

Related Research Articles

Organizational learning is the process of creating, retaining, and transferring knowledge within an organization. An organization improves over time as it gains experience. From this experience, it is able to create knowledge. This knowledge is broad, covering any topic that could better an organization. Examples may include ways to increase production efficiency or to develop beneficial investor relations. Knowledge is created at four different units: individual, group, organizational, and inter organizational.

In business, a competitive advantage is an attribute that allows an organization to outperform its competitors.

Marketing strategy is an organization's promotional efforts to allocate its resources across a wide range of platforms, channels to increase its sales and achieve sustainable competitive advantage within its corresponding market.

The resource curse, also known as the paradox of plenty or the poverty paradox, is the phenomenon of countries with an abundance of natural resources having less economic growth, less democracy, or worse development outcomes than countries with fewer natural resources. There are many theories and much academic debate about the reasons for and exceptions to the adverse outcomes. Most experts believe the resource curse is not universal or inevitable but affects certain types of countries or regions under certain conditions.

The resource-based view (RBV) is a managerial framework used to determine the strategic resources a firm can exploit to achieve sustainable competitive advantage.

The knowledge-based theory of the firm, or knowledge-based view (KBV), considers knowledge as an essentially important, scarce, and valuable resource in a firm. According to the knowledge-based theory of the firm, the possession of knowledge-based resources, known as intellectual capital, is essential in dynamic business environments. These resources contribute to lower costs, foster innovation and creativity, improve efficiencies, and deliver customer benefits. Collectively, they are considered key drivers of overall organizational performance. The proponents of the theory argue, that because knowledge-based resources are usually complex and difficult to imitate, different sources of knowledge and intellectual capital can be seen as the main sources for a sustainable competitive advantage.

In organizational theory, dynamic capability is the capability of an organization to purposefully adapt an organization's resource base. The concept was defined by David Teece, Gary Pisano and Amy Shuen, in their 1997 paper Dynamic Capabilities and Strategic Management, as the firm’s ability to engage in adapting, integrating, and reconfiguring internal and external organizational skills, resources, and functional competences to match the requirements of a changing environment.

The organizational life cycle is the life cycle of an organization from its creation to its termination. It also refers to the expected sequence of advancements experienced by an organization, as opposed to a randomized occurrence of events. The relevance of a biological life cycle relating to the growth of an organization, was discovered by organizational researchers many years ago. This was apparent as organizations had a distinct conception, periods of expansion and eventually, termination.

Knowledge sharing is an activity through which knowledge is exchanged among people, friends, peers, families, communities, or within or between organizations. It bridges the individual and organizational knowledge, improving the absorptive and innovation capacity and thus leading to sustained competitive advantage of companies as well as individuals. Knowledge sharing is part of the knowledge management process.

Entrepreneurship is the creation or extraction of economic value in ways that generally entail beyond the minimal amount of risk, and potentially involving values besides simply economic ones.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Soumodip Sarkar</span> Economist and Management Scholar

Soumodip Sarkar is an economist and management scholar.

Gerard "Gerry" George is currently Professor at the McDonough School of Business at Georgetown University. Previously, he was Dean and Lee Kong Chian Chair Professor of Innovation and Entrepreneurship at the Lee Kong Chian School of Business at Singapore Management University.

A Corporate Social Entrepreneur (CSE) is someone who attempts to advance a social agenda in addition to a formal job role as part of a corporation. It is possible for CSEs to work in organizational contexts that are favourable to corporate social responsibility but this is not always the case. CSEs focus on developing both social capital and economic capital, and their formal job role may not always align with corporate social responsibility. Furthermore, a person in a non-executive or managerial position can still be considered a CSE.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">A Behavioral Theory of the Firm</span> Book by Richard Cyert

The behavioral theory of the firm first appeared in the 1963 book A Behavioral Theory of the Firm by Richard M. Cyert and James G. March. The work on the behavioral theory started in 1952 when March, a political scientist, joined Carnegie Mellon University, where Cyert was an economist.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Female entrepreneurs</span> Women who organize and manage an enterprise

Female entrepreneurs are women who organize and manage an enterprise, especially a business. Female entrepreneurship has steadily increased in the United States during the 20th and 21st century, with female owned businesses increasing at a rate of 5% since 1997. This increase gave rise to wealthy self-made females such as Coco Chanel, Diane Hendricks, Meg Whitman, and Oprah Winfrey.

Psychological safety is the belief that one will not be punished or humiliated for speaking up with ideas, questions, concerns, or mistakes. In teams, it refers to team members believing that they can take risks without being shamed by other team members. In psychologically safe teams, team members feel accepted and respected. It is also the most studied enabling condition in group dynamics and team learning research.

Entrepreneurial orientation (EO) is a firm-level strategic orientation which captures an organization's strategy-making practices, managerial philosophies, and firm behaviors that are entrepreneurial in nature. Entrepreneurial orientation has become one of the most established and researched constructs in the entrepreneurship literature. A general commonality among past conceptualizations of EO is the inclusion of innovativeness, proactiveness, and risk-taking as core defining aspects or dimensions of the orientation. EO has been shown to be a strong predictor of firm performance with a meta-analysis of past research indicating a correlation in magnitude roughly equivalent to the prescription of taking sleeping pills and getting better sleep. Still, some research has argued that EO does not enhance the performance for all firms. Instead, EO can be argued not to be a simple performance enhancing attribute but rather enhancing if it is applied under the right circumstances of the firm. In some cases, EO can even be disadvantageous for firms, if the situation of the firm does not fit with applying EO. Different situations can be the environment that the firm is situated within or internal situations such as structure and strategy.

The composition-based view (CBV) was recently developed by Luo and Child (2015). It is a new theory that explicates the growth of firms without the benefit of resource advantages, proprietary technology, or market power. The CBV complements some existing theories such as resource-based view (RBV), resource management view, and dynamic capability – to create novel insights into the survival of firms that do not possess such strategic assets as original technologies and brands. It emphasizes how ordinary firms with ordinary resources may generate extraordinary results through their creative use of open resources and unique integrating capabilities, resulting in an enhanced speed and a high price-value ratio that are well suited to large numbers of low- to mid-end mass market consumers. The CBV has been commented as “a new view with significant application” for emerging market firms and for small and medium sized enterprises in many countries. The view cautions though that composition-generated advantages are temporary in nature and that composition itself mandates special skills in distinctively identifying, leveraging, and combining open or existing resources inside and outside the firm.

Organizational adaptation is a concept in organization theory and strategic management that is used to describe the relationship between an organization and its environment. The conceptual roots of organizational adaptation borrows ideas from organizational ecology, evolutionary economics, industrial and organizational psychology, and sociology. A systematic review of 50 years worth of literature defined organizational adaptation as "intentional decision-making undertaken by organizational members, leading to observable actions that aim to reduce the distance between an organization and its economic and institutional environments".

Jin Nam Choi is a Korean organizational psychologist, researcher, author, and academic. He is a professor of Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management at the Graduate School of Business of Seoul National University.

References

  1. 1 2 Dolmans, S.A.M.; Reymen, I.M.M.J.; van Burg, E.; Romme, A.G.L. (2014). "Dynamics of resource slack and constraints: Resource positions in action" (PDF). Organization Studies. 35 (4): 511–549. doi:10.1177/0170840613517598. hdl:1871/43400.
  2. ↑ Pfeffer, J. & G. R. Salancik (2003), The external control of organizations: A resource dependence perspective. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
  3. ↑ Penrose, E. (1959), The theory of the growth of the firm. New York, NY: Wiley.
  4. ↑ Barney, J.B. (1991). "Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage". Journal of Management. 17 (1): 99–120. doi:10.1177/014920639101700108.
  5. ↑ Becchetti, L.; Trovato, G. (2002). "The determinants of growth for small and medium sized firms: The role of the availability of external finance". Small Business Economics. 19 (4): 291–306. doi:10.1023/A:1019678429111.
  6. ↑ Musso, P.; Schiavo, S. (2008). "The impact of financial constraints on firm survival and growth". Journal of Evolutionary Economics. 18 (2): 135–149. CiteSeerX   10.1.1.635.4317 . doi:10.1007/s00191-007-0087-z.
  7. ↑ Hoegl, M.; Gibbert, M.; Mazursky, D. (2008). "Financial constraints in innovation projects: When is less more?". Research Policy. 37 (8): 1382–1391. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2008.04.018.
  8. ↑ Moreau, C.P.; Dahl, D.W. (2005). "Designing the solution: The impact of constraints on consumers' creativity". Journal of Consumer Research. 32 (1): 13–22. doi:10.1086/429597. S2CID   2152095.
  9. ↑ Bhide, A (1992). "Bootstrap finance: the art of start-ups". Harvard Business Review. 70 (6): 109–117.
  10. ↑ Daniel, F.; Lohrke, F.T.; Fornaciari, C.J.; Turner, R.A. (2004). "Slack resources and firm performance: a meta-analysis". Journal of Business Research. 57 (6): 565–574. doi:10.1016/S0148-2963(02)00439-3.
  11. ↑ George, G (2005). "Slack resources and the performance of privately held firms". Academy of Management Journal. 48 (4): 661–676. doi:10.5465/amj.2005.17843944.
  12. ↑ Mosakowski, E. (2002), Overcoming resource disadvantages in entrepreneurial firms: When less is more. In: M.A. Hitt, R.D. Ireland, S.M. Camp & D.L. Saxton (eds.), Strategic entrepreneurship: Creating a new mindset. Oxford, UK: Wiley-Blackwell.
  13. ↑ Natividad, Gabriel (2012). "Financial Slack, Strategy, and Competition in Movie Distribution". Organization Science. 24 (3): 846–864. doi:10.1287/orsc.1120.0765.
  14. ↑ Bradley, S.W.; Wiklund, J.; Shepherd, D.A. (2011). "Swinging a double-edged sword: The effect of slack on entrepreneurial management and growth". Journal of Business Venturing. 26 (5): 537–554. doi:10.1016/j.jbusvent.2010.03.002.
  15. ↑ Hvide, H.K.; Møen, J. (2010). "Lean and hungry or fat and content? Entrepreneurs' wealth and start-up performance". Management Science. 56 (8): 1242–1258. doi:10.1287/mnsc.1100.1177. S2CID   219346172.
  16. ↑ Nohria, N.; Gulati, R. (1996). "Is slack good or bad for innovation?". Academy of Management Journal. 39 (5): 1245–1264. doi:10.2307/256998. JSTOR   256998.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.