VRIO

Last updated

VRIO is a business analysis framework that forms part of a firm's larger strategic scheme, proposed by Jay Barney in 1991. The basic strategic process of any firm begins with a vision statement, and continues on through objectives, internal & external analysis, strategic choices (both business-level and corporate-level), and strategic implementation.

Contents

VRIO falls into the internal analysis step of these procedures, but is used as a framework in evaluating just about all resources and capabilities of a firm, regardless of what phase of the strategic model it falls under.

VRIO is an initialism for the four question framework asked about a resource or capability to determine its competitive potential: the question of Value, the question of Rarity, the question of Imitability (Ease/Difficulty to Imitate), and the question of Organization (ability to exploit the resource or capability).

Question of value

The basic question asked by the V in the VRIO framework for internal analysis is “Is this resource or capability valuable to the firm?” In this case, the definition of value is whether or not the resource or capability works to exploit an opportunity or mitigate a threat in the marketplace. If it does do one of those two things, it can be considered a strength of the company. However, if it does not work to exploit an opportunity or mitigate a threat, it is a weakness. Occasionally, some resources or capabilities could be considered strengths in one industry and weaknesses in a different one. [2] Six common examples of opportunities firms could attempt to exploit are:

Furthermore, five threats that a resource or capability could mitigate are:

Generally, this exploitation of opportunity or mitigation of threat will result in one of two more outcomes: an increase in revenues or a decrease in costs (or both).

A great way to identify possibly valuable resources or capabilities is by looking into the company's value chain. In the value chain, a business develops its products and services step-by-step, with each function along the way adding some sort of value to the product or service. The choices a firm makes regarding its value chain (including how to operate, and which steps to operate in) is closely tied to the firms resources and capabilities, therefore making it a valuable tool in identifying value in resources and capabilities. If some asset that the company has allows it to operate more effectively in a certain portion of the value chain, chances are that resource will be considered valuable by the VRIO framework.

Question of rarity

Having rarity in a firm can lead to competitive advantage. Rarity is when a firm has a valuable resource or capability that is absolutely unique among a set of current and potential competitors. How to determine if the company's resource is rare and creates competitive advantage? A firm's resources and capabilities must be both short in supply and persist over time to be a source of sustained competitive advantage. If both elements (short supply and persistence over time) aren't met, then the resources and capabilities a firm has can't be a sustained competitive advantage. If a resource is not rare, then perfect competition dynamics are likely to be observed. Example of Rarity – A janitor who defines his/her job as helping the firm make and sell better products instead of just referring to their job as simply cleaning up facilities is quite unusual. Most individuals would agree that this firm has a source of competitive advantage over other firms in their industry because their objectives and strategies are transparent throughout the entire firm; unlike many other firms where only top tier management is the only group that believes in their objectives and strategies (Barney & Hesterly, 2011). this raity lead to fight in the competition.

Question of imitability

The primary question of “imitability” asked in the VRIO framework in internal analysis is that “ Do firms without a resource or capability face a cost disadvantage in obtaining or developing it compared to firms that already possess it?” Firms with valuable and rare resources, which are hard to imitate by other firms, can gain the first-mover advantages in the market and can hence gain competitive advantage.

A firm can either exploit an external opportunity or neutralize an external threat by using its rare and valuable resources. In this case, the firm can gain competitive advantage. When the firm's competitors discover this competitive advantage, they may respond in two ways. First, they can choose to ignore the profit gaining by the competitive advantage and continue to operate in their old ways. Second, they can choose to analyze and duplicate the competitive strategy of its rival. If there is no cost or little cost in obtaining this rare and valuable resource, the fellow firms can imitate the competitive advantage in order to gain competitive parity (firms that create the same economic value as their rivals experience competitive parity). However, sometimes it is hard for other firms to get access to the resources and imitate the innovative company's strategy. As a result, the innovative companies that implement its strategies based on costly-to-imitate and valuable resources can gain long-term competitive advantage, which ensures a company's sustained success (Hill & Jones, 1998). Hence, to sustain the competitive advantage, it is not sufficient for a firm's resources and capabilities to be valuable and rare – they should also be mostly inimitable.

Forms of imitation

In most cases, imitation appears in two ways, direct duplication or substitution. After observing other firms’ competitive advantage, a firm can directly imitate the resource possessed by the innovative firm. If the cost to imitate is high, the competitive advantage will be sustained. If not, the competitive advantage will be temporary. Otherwise, an imitating firm can attempt to use a substitute in order to gain similar competitive advantage of the innovative firm.

Cost of imitation

Cost of imitation is usually high in order to gain a competitive advantage due to the following reasons:

Question of organization

Once the analyst has realized the value, rarity and imitability of the company's resources and capabilities, the next step is to organize the company in a way to exploit these resources. If done successfully, the company can enjoy a period of sustained competitive advantage. There are many components to this question of organization. They include, but are not limited to, the company's formal reporting structure, management control systems and compensation policies. Formal reporting structures are simply a description of who in the firm reports to whom. Management control systems include both formal and informal means to make sure that managers’ decisions align with a firm's strategies. Formal control systems can consist of budgeting and reporting activities that keep top management informed of decisions made by employee's lower down in the firm. Informal controls can include a company's culture and encouraging employees to monitor each other. Firms incentivize their employees to behave a desired way through compensation policies. These policies can include bonuses, stocks or salary increases but can also include non-monetary incentives such as additional vacation days or a larger office. These components of organization are known as complementary capabilities and resources because alone they do not provide much value. However, in combination with a firm's other resources and capabilities, it can result in sustained competitive advantage. Without the correct organization, even firms with valuable, rare and costly to imitate resources and capabilities can suffer competitive disadvantage (Barney & Hesterly, 2011).

Valuable?Rare?Costly
to imitate?
Exploited by
the organization?
Competitive implication
NoCompetitive disadvantage
YesNoCompetitive parity
YesYesNoTemporary
competitive advantage
YesYesYesNoUnexploited
competitive advantage
YesYesYesYesSustained
competitive advantage

See also

Related Research Articles

In the field of management, strategic management involves the formulation and implementation of the major goals and initiatives taken by an organization's managers on behalf of stakeholders, based on consideration of resources and an assessment of the internal and external environments in which the organization operates. Strategic management provides overall direction to an enterprise and involves specifying the organization's objectives, developing policies and plans to achieve those objectives, and then allocating resources to implement the plans. Academics and practicing managers have developed numerous models and frameworks to assist in strategic decision-making in the context of complex environments and competitive dynamics. Strategic management is not static in nature; the models can include a feedback loop to monitor execution and to inform the next round of planning.

Marketing management is the organizational discipline which focuses on the practical application of marketing orientation, techniques and methods inside enterprises and organizations and on the management of a firm's marketing resources and activities.

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

A core competency is a concept in management theory introduced by C. K. Prahalad and Gary Hamel. It can be defined as "a harmonized combination of multiple resources and skills that distinguish a firm in the marketplace" and therefore are the foundation of companies' competitiveness.

Competitive analysis in marketing and strategic management is an assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of current and potential competitors. This analysis provides both an offensive and defensive strategic context to identify opportunities and threats. Profiling combines all of the relevant sources of competitor analysis into one framework in the support of efficient and effective strategy formulation, implementation, monitoring and adjustment.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Porter's five forces analysis</span> Framework to analyse level of competition within an industry

Porter's Five Forces Framework is a method of analysing the operating environment of a competition of a business. It draws from industrial organization (IO) economics to derive five forces that determine the competitive intensity and, therefore, the attractiveness of an industry in terms of its profitability. An "unattractive" industry is one in which the effect of these five forces reduces overall profitability. The most unattractive industry would be one approaching "pure competition", in which available profits for all firms are driven to normal profit levels. The five-forces perspective is associated with its originator, Michael E. Porter of Harvard University. This framework was first published in Harvard Business Review in 1979.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">SWOT analysis</span> Business planning and analysis technique

SWOT analysis is a strategic planning and strategic management technique used to help a person or organization identify Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats related to business competition or project planning. It is sometimes called situational assessment or situational analysis. Additional acronyms using the same components include TOWS and WOTS-UP.

The word ‘dynamics’ appears frequently in discussions and writing about strategy, and is used in two distinct, though equally important senses.

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.

A value chain is a progression of activities that a firm operating in a specific industry performs in order to deliver a valuable product to the end customer. The concept comes through business management and was first described by Michael Porter in his 1985 best-seller, Competitive Advantage: Creating and Sustaining Superior Performance.

The idea of the value chain is based on the process view of organizations, the idea of seeing a manufacturing organization as a system, made up of subsystems each with inputs, transformation processes and outputs. Inputs, transformation processes, and outputs involve the acquisition and consumption of resources – money, labour, materials, equipment, buildings, land, administration and management. How value chain activities are carried out determines costs and affects profits.

Technology strategy is the overall plan which consists of objectives, principles and tactics relating to use of technologies within a particular organization. Such strategies primarily focus on the technologies themselves and in some cases the people who directly manage those technologies. The strategy can be implied from the organization's behaviors towards technology decisions, and may be written down in a document. The strategy includes the formal vision that guide the acquisition, allocation, and management of IT resources so it can help fulfill the organizational objectives.

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.

Within international business, the diamond model, also known as Porter's Diamond or the Porter Diamond Theory of National Advantage, describes a nation's competitive advantage in the international market. In this model, four attributes are taken into consideration: factor conditions, demand conditions, related and supporting industries, and firm strategy, structure, and rivalry. According to Michael Porter, the model's creator, "These determinants create the national environment in which companies are born and learn how to compete."

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.

Competence-based strategic management is a way of thinking about how organizations gain high performance for a significant period of time. Established as a theory in the early 1990s, competence-based strategic management theory explains how organizations can develop sustainable competitive advantage in a systematic and structural way. The theory of competence-based strategic management is an integrative strategy theory that incorporates economic, organizational and behavioural concerns in a framework that is dynamic, systemic, cognitive and holistic. This theory defines competence as: the ability to sustain the coordinated deployment of resources in ways that helps an organization achieve its goals .> Competence-based management can be found in areas other than strategic management, namely in human resource management.

Capability management is the approach to the management of an organization, typically a business organization or firm, based on the "theory of the firm" as a collection of capabilities that may be exercised to earn revenues in the marketplace and compete with other firms in the industry. Capability management seeks to manage the stock of capabilities within the firm to ensure its position in the industry and its ongoing profitability and survival.

In management, the relational view by Jeffrey H. Dyer and Harbir Singh is a theory for considering networks and dyads of firms as the unit of analysis to explain relational rents, i.e., superior individual firm performance generated within that network/dyad. This view has later been extended by Lavie (2006).

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Jay Barney</span> American professor (born 1954)

Jay B. Barney is an American professor in strategic management at the University of Utah.

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.

References

  1. "VRIO Framework Explained – SM Insight". 7 October 2021.
  2. Strategic Management Journal, 5, pp.171–180. Barney, J.B. (1991)
  3. Barney & Hesterly, 2011