Essa não é a nossa versão.
A nossa experiência, o nosso contacto com as empresas, aponta para uma outra versão, cada sector económico é uma realidade altamente heterogénea.
.
Entretanto, descubro este artigo de 2009 "Analyzing Firm Performance Heterogeneity: The relative Effect of Business Definition" e percebo, embora ache tão estranho, como é que a tríade tem um modelo mental de acordo com a versão do bloco homogéneo.
.
Se as publicações científicas ainda andam a discutir a hipótese heterogénea... claro que os membros da tríade foram formatados e enformados, durante a sua formação, no modelo da homogeneidade:
"The results indicate that firm effects explain most of the variance in four performance variables but that the impact of business definition on performance could be underestimated. It turns out, according to our findings, that business membership (and thus differences in business definition) explains about 8 percent of the variance in performance between firms within the examined industry.
Consequently, managers should carefully monitor and examine the business domain they are in as it directly related with the firm’s level of performance.
...
Our analysis of the business definition-performance link indicates that business definition choices do have performance implications but that the relative impact of industry, firm and business domain effects on performance has received scant empirical study and is still unclear.
...
This study is, however, the first study to further analyze the performance heterogeneity within an industry by considering the effect of business membership and thus the effect of business domain choices. Indeed, there may be more than one business domain within an industry: different product offerings (the supply side) can be combined with different market segments (the demand side) with a different geographical reach.
...
One of the major discussions in strategy concerns the determinants of firm performance. Academics from various backgrounds have focused on explaining firm performance and on identifying the sources of inter-firm performance differences. Researchers in the industrial-organization tradition, for example, have argued that industry structure is a central determinant of firm performance and contend that the structural features of an industry effect the competitive position of all business units in that specific industry. However, the inability of the industrial-organization tradition to provide a rigorous explanation for intra-industry heterogeneity in performance has stimulated strategy researchers to focus on the firm itself. As a result, firms were no longer viewed as identical “black boxes” in a given market structure but as dynamic collections of specific capabilities influenced by differing organizational structures and specific strategic decisions.
…
One of these vital strategic decisions, assumed to impact organizational performance, is the (implicit or explicit) selected business definition. Especially in the case of small and medium sized enterprises (SME’s) an adequate business definition seems to be of vital importance as the traditional explanation for their success is that SME’s choose their battles carefully.
…
The study results indicate that the examined industry consists of two distinct business domains whereby business domain membership explains about 8% of the variance in performance. The findings should urge managers to carefully (re)consider where (in terms of businesses) they are competing within the industry. Managers should pay (more) attention on business definition dimensions as business definition choices have operational consequences that affect the performance bottom-line."
Sem comentários:
Enviar um comentário