Page 72 - Anales RADE vol I n 1
P. 72
Their theoretical perspective underscores the importance for business of
managing not only tangible assets but intangibles as well. However, the
importance of managing diverse sets of assets within the firm was also captured in
many seminal papers of the 50´s, 60´s, and 70´s. Penrose (1958) writes on the
nature of physical and human resources within companies. Ansoff (1958) argues
that capabilities and comparative advantage of businesses resides in their physical
assets such as property, plant and equipment but also in their organizational and
management skills. Andrews (1971) establishes a direct link between those types
of organizational capabilities and the achievement of corporate objectives.
The structured management of intangible resources such as know-how and
commercial relationships was presented by Wenerfelt (1984, 1995) using the term
“Recourse-Based View” or “Resource-Based Theory”. Other theoretical
contributions such as the concept of “dynamic capabilities” (Teece et. Al., 1997)
and their implications in the development of corporate strategy (Grant, 1991,
1997) continued to shape this theoretical approach. However, it was Prahalad and
Hamel (1991) who introduced these ideas in the business world through the
notion of “core competencies”, the importance for companies of focusing their
efforts in those areas where they have a distinctive advantage, a view much in line
with Grant.
Concurrently and particularly over the last decade a new paradigm based
on knowledge and information has emerged both within micro and
macroeconomics. Within the context of business, ideas such as corporate strategy,
customer satisfaction, product development and the know-how involved in each
have come to be viewed as factors equally or more important that traditional
tangible assets (capital and labour). Likewise, within economics, there is a
recognition that growth and development is based a driven by new factors such as
technology and innovation. This approach has finally given rise to the study,
conceptualization and definition of new models which better explain these
dynamics and which give significant importance to the production process and the
spread and implementation of know-how as set forth by Foray and Lundvall
(1996). This has led to the widespread use of the term “Knowledge Based Society”
which refers metaphorically to the convergence of these new situations which
characterize the current environment (Cowan, et al., 2000).
Knowledge is precisely at the core of the framework developed by Nonaka
and Takeushi (1995) who posit a theory of management based on knowledge and
information. The authors start from the epistemology of knowledge and show its
implications in the way processes are designed and how the firm’s resources are
configured.
Knowledge needs to be managed using different philosophical concepts
(empirical and rational) with the objective of optimizing its transformation from
tacit to explicit and creating new knowledge within the firm (Nonaka and
Takeushi, 1995). Various other contributions such as Dru (1997), Moore (1996)
and Quinn (1996) add to this perspective, which is now known as “Learning
Organization”.
In summary, both the perspective of Resources and Capabilities as well as
Learning Organization emphasize the growing importance of intangible resources
and knowledge within business competitiveness, thereby providing theoretical
Leandro Cañibano Calvo 72
managing not only tangible assets but intangibles as well. However, the
importance of managing diverse sets of assets within the firm was also captured in
many seminal papers of the 50´s, 60´s, and 70´s. Penrose (1958) writes on the
nature of physical and human resources within companies. Ansoff (1958) argues
that capabilities and comparative advantage of businesses resides in their physical
assets such as property, plant and equipment but also in their organizational and
management skills. Andrews (1971) establishes a direct link between those types
of organizational capabilities and the achievement of corporate objectives.
The structured management of intangible resources such as know-how and
commercial relationships was presented by Wenerfelt (1984, 1995) using the term
“Recourse-Based View” or “Resource-Based Theory”. Other theoretical
contributions such as the concept of “dynamic capabilities” (Teece et. Al., 1997)
and their implications in the development of corporate strategy (Grant, 1991,
1997) continued to shape this theoretical approach. However, it was Prahalad and
Hamel (1991) who introduced these ideas in the business world through the
notion of “core competencies”, the importance for companies of focusing their
efforts in those areas where they have a distinctive advantage, a view much in line
with Grant.
Concurrently and particularly over the last decade a new paradigm based
on knowledge and information has emerged both within micro and
macroeconomics. Within the context of business, ideas such as corporate strategy,
customer satisfaction, product development and the know-how involved in each
have come to be viewed as factors equally or more important that traditional
tangible assets (capital and labour). Likewise, within economics, there is a
recognition that growth and development is based a driven by new factors such as
technology and innovation. This approach has finally given rise to the study,
conceptualization and definition of new models which better explain these
dynamics and which give significant importance to the production process and the
spread and implementation of know-how as set forth by Foray and Lundvall
(1996). This has led to the widespread use of the term “Knowledge Based Society”
which refers metaphorically to the convergence of these new situations which
characterize the current environment (Cowan, et al., 2000).
Knowledge is precisely at the core of the framework developed by Nonaka
and Takeushi (1995) who posit a theory of management based on knowledge and
information. The authors start from the epistemology of knowledge and show its
implications in the way processes are designed and how the firm’s resources are
configured.
Knowledge needs to be managed using different philosophical concepts
(empirical and rational) with the objective of optimizing its transformation from
tacit to explicit and creating new knowledge within the firm (Nonaka and
Takeushi, 1995). Various other contributions such as Dru (1997), Moore (1996)
and Quinn (1996) add to this perspective, which is now known as “Learning
Organization”.
In summary, both the perspective of Resources and Capabilities as well as
Learning Organization emphasize the growing importance of intangible resources
and knowledge within business competitiveness, thereby providing theoretical
Leandro Cañibano Calvo 72
