以資源基礎觀點及動態能耐觀點檢視不同情境下廠商獲取競爭優勢的策略

Examining Firms' Strategies for Competitive Advantages through Resource-based View and Dynamic Capability View under Different Environments

策略管理的核心問題是廠商如何達成並保持競爭優勢。資源基礎觀點源自李嘉圖觀點，認為廠商擁有特殊資源可以獲取競爭優勢；動態能耐觀點耐植基於熊彼得觀點，認為廠商能夠快速回應環境變化以重組特殊資源的能耐才具有競爭優勢。資源基礎與動態能耐觀點常被形容是「姊妹」，有時被認為是相互競爭，有時又被認為是互補；在策略理論的應用中，釐清兩者的環境適用條件及理解兩者間的關係是一個重要的議題。本研究把環境情境區分為技術創新性（能耐強化式v.s.能耐毀滅式）與市場變化性（靜態市場v.s.動態市場），採用多重個案研究設計，以資源基礎觀點及動態能耐觀點檢視在不同環境下，廠商獲取競爭優的策略。本研究發現：廠商進入能耐強化式的技術創新領域及靜態市場時，是偏向以動態能耐觀點的策略來發展其競爭優勢，並進一步演繹出有兩種不同類型動態能耐策略。並得出資源基礎與動態能耐此兩觀點間是為互補之結論。

The fundamental question in the field of strategic management is how firms achieve and sustain competitive advantage. Rooted on Ricardian perspective, resource-based view advocates firms to accumulate heterogeneous resources for competitive advantages. Rooted on Schumpeterian perspective, dynamic-capability view suggests firms to redeploy unique resources and competences to quickly respond to environmental change for competitive advantages. While the resource based view and the dynamic capability approach are often portrayed as sister theories, they sometimes cited as a competing theory or as complementarytheory with respect to the others. For application of strategic management, the important issues are to clarify the applied environment and the interaction of each other. Therefore, this article divides environment into technological innovation (competenceenhanced vs. competence-destroyed) and market changes (static market vs dynamic market). Through conducting multiple case-studies, this article analyzes firms' strategic behavior to obtain competitive advantage in different environmental contexts. This research finds that when entering the context of competence-enhancing innovation and static market, firm prefers to resource-based view for developing competitive advantages; when entering the context of changed technology or market, firm prefers to dynamic-capability view for developing competitive advantages. This research further induces two different types of dynamic-capability strategy and concludes that two strategic views complement each other.