United International University

School of Business and Economics

Strategic Management
MBA & MIHRM Programs
Group Project/Report
Summer 2020

Topic : Exploring the Strategic Role of Resource Based View

in Ensuring Organization’s Success.

Course Name : Strategic Management

Course code : MGT607
Summer : 2020
Section :A
SUBMITTED TO : Prof. Abu Saleh Md. Sohel-Uz-Zaman
School of Business and Economics
United International University
Date of Submission : 04-Sep-2020

SUBMITTED BY:

Name ID
Muzahidul Islam 113191003
Md. Habibur Rahman 113191005
Iqbal Parvez 112191032
S. M. Arafat 112191002

Letter of Transmittal
September 04, 2020
Prof. Abu Saleh Md. Sohel-Uz-Zaman
School of Business and Economics
United International University

Subject: Exploring the Strategic Role of Resource Based View in Ensuring

Organizational Success.

Dear Sir,

With due respect, we would like to take the opportunity to thank you for your
guidance and support you have provided us during the course of this report. Without
your support and guidance, the report would have been impossible to complete.

To prepare this report we have collected what we believe to be the most relevant
information to make our report as analytical and reliable as possible. We have
concentrated our best effort to achieve the objectives of the report and hope that our
endeavor will serve the purpose. The knowledge and experience gathered during our
report preparation will immeasurably help in our future professional life.

We would really be grateful if you enlighten us with your thoughts and views
regarding the report. In addition, if you wish to enquire about an aspect of our report,
we would gladly answer your queries.

Thank you again for your support and guidance.

Yours Sincerely,

On behalf of the group member

Acknowledgement

Firstly, we are thankful Almighty who gave us strength and made us able to complete
this report. At the time thanks to all, people who helps us a lot. Without these helps,
Page | 2
we have probably not finished our report on time, so we would like to express our
thanks to all of you.

Secondly, we would like to express our gratitude to our honorable course instructor
Prof. Abu Saleh Md. Sohel-Uz-Zaman for his valuable advice, encouragement,
guidance and supervision and for his support in completing our project. Thanks to him
for supporting us and giving us the proper direction.

And we are also thankful to those who were both directly and indirectly related to the
report work, provided us with crucial information that help us to complete this report.
Heartfelt appreciation is expressed to the following officials for their valuable time
and cooperation. We would like to express our profound towards our parents for their
co-operation and encouragement, which helped to, helped us to complete this project.

Finally, we would like to give a special thanks to the United International University
for this course by which we can learn a lot of thing about strategic management and
by making this type of report; we are able to enrich our knowledge about business.

Executive Summary

Resource of the organization can give the sustainable competitive advantage. All the
resources may not extend sustainable advantage, there are some good and value added
resources which generate sustainable competitive advantage. The RBV stresses the

Page | 3
importance of the individual resources of the organization in delivering the
competitive advantage and value added of the organization. Identifying which
resources and capabilities deliver sustainable competitive advantage. The resources of
an organization are those assets that deliver value added in the organization. The
capabilities of an organization are those management skills, routines and leadership
that deploy, share and generate value from the resources of the organization. A
company must invest in all those resources which are very much value adding for the
organization.

Resource based view (RBV) emphases on not-easy-to imitate features of organization

as sources of competitive advantage. Resources which is cannot be easily transferred
or purchased, and require a prolonged learning process are more likely to be unique to
the organization, therefore, it is difficult to copy by competitors.

RBV focuses on internal resources and capabilities of the organizations, so that an

organization can achieve the sustainable advantage among the competitor in the
market, here resources can consider as input of the organizations that enables to
perform its various activities.

Table of Contents
Introduction..............................................................................................................................7
Research Objective (s)..............................................................................................................8
Research Methodology.............................................................................................................9
Literature Review (Theoretical discussions)...........................................................................10

Page | 4
Sustainable competitive advantage and the RBV...............................................................12
The seven elements of resource-based sustainable competitive advantage......................13
1) Prior or acquired resources (full control over the resources):....................................13
2) Innovative Capability:.................................................................................................14
3) Being truly competitive:..............................................................................................14
4) Substitutability:...........................................................................................................14
5) Appropriability:...........................................................................................................14
6) Durability:...................................................................................................................14
7) Imitability:...................................................................................................................14
The VRIO framework..........................................................................................................15
Valuable:.........................................................................................................................15
Rare:...............................................................................................................................15
Inimitable:.......................................................................................................................15
Organizing capability:.....................................................................................................15
Some sources of competitive advantage:...........................................................................16
Differentiation:...............................................................................................................16
Low cost:.........................................................................................................................16
Niche Marketing:............................................................................................................16
High performance or technology:...................................................................................16
Quality:...........................................................................................................................16
Service:...........................................................................................................................16
Vertical Integration:........................................................................................................17
Synergy:..........................................................................................................................17
Culture, Leadership and Style of an Organization:..........................................................17
Basic resource analysis:......................................................................................................17
Tangible Resources:........................................................................................................17
Intangible resources:......................................................................................................17
Organizational capability:...............................................................................................17
The three distinctive capabilities: architecture, reputation and innovation:......................17
Architecture:...................................................................................................................17
Reputation:.....................................................................................................................17
Innovation:......................................................................................................................18
Core Competencies:............................................................................................................18
Customer value:..............................................................................................................18
Competitor differentiation:.............................................................................................18
Extendable:.....................................................................................................................18

Page | 5
Findings and Analysis..............................................................................................................18
Conclusion..............................................................................................................................22
Appendices.............................................................................................................................23
Questionnaire:....................................................................................................................23
Work plan:..........................................................................................................................24
Contribution Statement:.....................................................................................................24
References..............................................................................................................................24

Introduction

Organization’s resources are the particular focus of resource-based view strategy.

RBV strategy explore the role of key resources and capabilities an organization

Page | 6
controls in creating competitive advantage and superior performance. The resources
and capabilities determine how efficiently and effectively organizations perform their
activities (Pankaj, 2009). The most important goal of strategy research is to establish
why certain organizations are more effective and efficient in the way they handle their
business when compared to others, in addition to understanding the mechanisms
leading them to achieve a sustainable competitive advantage. The Resource-based
View (RBV) is a strategic management theory that is widely used in project
management, it examines how resources can drive competitive advantage.
Competitive advantage is the ability to create more value than rivals, and therefore
generate higher returns on investment. Sustainable competitive advantage requires
enduring benefits through capabilities that are not easily imitated (Killen et al., 2012).
The RBV is built on the concept that resources and capabilities are not heterogeneous
across other organizations, and through the utilization of this concept the success rate
variations between organizations can be explained. Kraaijenbrink et al (2010) quoted
the argument of Barney (1991a, 1994, 2002) that “if a firm is to achieve a state of
sustained competitive advantage, it must acquire and control valuable, rare,
inimitable, and Organizing capability (VRIO) resources and capabilities. “The
indicators of an organization’s overall performance lie on the specific nature of their
resources and accumulated competencies. Achievement of sustainable competitive
advantage constitutes the main focus of strategic management theory (Venesa and
Xavier, 2013). PM resources and capabilities that have been customized to a specific
environment and developed over time are not easily imitated. Such capabilities are
constantly associated with better performance, leading to viewing PM as strategic
organizational capabilities that can provide enduring benefits. Examples of tangible
PM resources include methodologies and practices (know what), while intangible
resources include implicit knowledge sharing process and facilitation (know how).
Following the Resource-based View of the firm concept, the intangible resources are
more likely to satisfy the requirement of being rare and inimitable (Killen et al.,
2012). The RBV has become one of the most influential strategic management
theories cited in strategic management literature due to its immediate face validity,
appealing core message, and ease to grasp and teach (Kraaijenbrink et al, 2010).
However, these advantages don’t come without criticism. Those who are against the
application of the RBV are criticizing areas that are mainly related to the state of the
definitions that RBV is based on, the conceptual and empirical methodology, and so-

Page | 7
called deficiencies of the concept. The opponents want to temper what they refer to as
an obsessive attitude for the RBV, while the those who support this strategy feel the
advantages outweigh the disadvantages and that with minor modifications to the
theory, it will uphold its historical advantage over other theories and continue to
contribute to the advancement of research in other disciplines such as project
management (Truijens, 2003). However, the wealth of advantages of the RBV
concept to researchers and practitioners cannot be ignored simply because the concept
is not perfect or cannot easily be generalized. The Resource-based view has
contributed not only to the development of new extensions of the RBV theory but also
to the success of other theories when integrated with them, such as agency and
transaction cost theories.

Lado et al. (2006) argued that: “Scholars have refined and extended the RBV’s core
tenets to explain how dynamic capabilities (Dyer &Singh, 1998; Teece, Pisano, &
Shuen, 1997) and processes of knowledge development and use (Grant, 1996;
Nonaka, 1994; Spender, 1996) generate sustainable strategic advantage. Further,
synergies of scholarship have accrued from integration of RBV insights with ideas
derived from organizational economics (Mahoney & Pandian, 1992), population
ecology theory (Barnett, Greve, & Park, 1994), institutionalization theory (Oliver,
1997), and organizational learning theory (Lei, Hitt, & Bettis, 1996), among others.”

Research Objective (s)

The objective of this research is to advance the understanding of resource-based

theory and how its organization’s success by integration within project management
practice, with the intention of aiding researchers and mangers in recognizing its
challenges and benefits. This research will emphasize on providing overviews of the
benefits and drawbacks of the Resource-based View, and explain them. Finally, the
findings will furnish the basis for relevant future research that will focus on
improving areas of interest to PM and strategy scholars who wish to extend the
RBV’s theoretical background. Recommendations for future work will be provided
towards the end of this paper. Specifically, this paper intends to:

• Highlight the link between RBV and Organizations Success.

Page | 8
• Scrutinize the areas of criticism and discuss their implications on organizations and
on research.

• Highlight the importance of the RBV to the competitive advantage of PM

organizational resources, supported by empirical and conceptual findings drawn from
peer-reviewed journals.

• Suggest future research to enhance the continued application of the RBV.

Research Methodology

To understand the sources of competitive advantage firms are using many types of
tools to analyze their external (Porter Five Forces model and PEST analysis) and
internal Value Chain analysis, VRIO analysis is one of those tools which analyze the
internal resources of the firm. This method was originally designed by J. B. Barney.
(1991, where Barney defined four characteristics that the resources of the organization
must have in order to be a source of sustainable competitive advantage. According to
Barney, the resources must be valuable, rare, imperfectly imitable and non-
substitutable. His original framework name was VRIN.
In 1995 Barney implemented VRIO system, which was VRIN's development, in his
later work 'Looking Inside for Competitive Advantage.' VRIO analysis has four
questions that ask whether a resource is: important, rare, expensive to replicate, and is
an organization structured to capture resource value?
A resource or capability that meets all four criteria will offer sustainable competitive
advantage.
So We have used VRIO model for our report. Because It is a tool in strategic
planning, used by firms to make effective business decisions. The analysis provides
information and the results will hopefully provide a competitive advantage. This
model is designed to take care of such big project. It creates a decision-making
framework for students to use in analyzing case and business situations.

Literature Review (Theoretical discussions)

The RBV is a managerial framework used to determine the strategic resources a firm
can exploit to achieve sustainable competitive advantage. RBV focuses managerial

Page | 9
attention on the firm’s internal resources, identify those assets, capabilities and
competencies and deliver superior competitive advantage. Project Management
research is advanced through the utilization of strategic management theories that in
turn contribute to the improvement and advancement of these theories by providing
empirical evidence. Killen et al. (2012) argue that “The linkages between strategy,
PM, and PPM are well established and have been explored in the literature for more
than two decades.” Project Management research is advanced through the utilization
of strategic management theories that in turn contribute to the improvement and
advancement of these theories by providing empirical evidence. Killen et al. (2012)
argue that “The linkages between strategy, PM, and PPM are well established and
have been explored in the literature for more than two decades.” While explaining the
study on the application of strategic theories such as RBV to Organizations success
Killen et al. (2012) argued that the application of RBV provided “methodological
rigor and increased explanatory power”, and further stated that the “successful
application of these strategic management theories to such a diverse set of
circumstances indicates that these theories may have wide potential to support further
research in PM and organizations success.” Most of the studies on strategic
competitiveness since the 1980s have highlighted the importance of the relationship
of the firm to its external environment rather than the internal practices leading to
such competitiveness. Currently an emphasis is placed on the internal attributes of a
firm as an advantage; the firm’s internal idiosyncrasies have been identified as critical
factors for its strategic advantage (Habbershon and Williams, 1999; Pablo et al.
2007). This approach is called the Resource-Based View of the firm. The RBV has
been used to explain the differences in the performance of firms that are not related to
economic or industry conditions. The origins of the theory can be traced back to the
work of David Ricardo in the 19th century (William et al., 2011). However,
Habbershon and Williams (1999) stated that some have believed that the RBV first
appeared in the work of Bernard (1938); and, others thought that it “started with the
contributions by Selznick (1957), Penrose (1959), Pfeffer and Salancik (1978),
Rumelt (1984), or Wernerfelt (1984)” (Habbershon and Williams, 1999). The work of
Edith Penrose in the 1950’s was highly regarded as a shift in the practice of the RBV
as she explored the linkage between firm resources and firm growth. In her work, she
emphasized that “firms should be conceptualized as an administrative framework
consisting of a bundle of resources, and thus, she concluded that the growth of a firm

Page | 10
is limited by this crucial aspect of a firm” (William et al., 2011). Penrose argued that a
firm’s internal and subsequent external growth through mergers, acquisitions, and
diversification, is due to the way in which the resources are exploited (Newbert,
2007).

The influence of the Resource-based View on the strategic management of

organizations has been very evident since the theory was enacted by the pioneering
work of Wernerfelt (1984) and Barney (1991). The development of the RBV is
connected to a few research areas such as strategy and organizational economics.
Though the operationalization of RBV varied in the way the theory explained but it
was successful in attracting attention to the capabilities and competencies at the firm
level. In organizational economics, the RBV incorporated agency theory and
transaction cost theory among other theories, and benefited from their extensions that
are related to practical outcomes. Agency theory highlights idiosyncratic resources
that have the potential to be sources of competitive advantage. Whereas, transaction
cost theory provides an improved understanding of the purposes and backgrounds of
different market structures for exchanging services with the external environment
(Habbershon and Williams, 1999)

The concept of the RBV asserts the heterogeneity of firms, “that it is the idiosyncratic,
immobile, inimitable, often the intangible bundle of resources residing in the firm
provides the firm an opportunity for competitive advantage and superior
performance” (Habbershon and Williams, 1999). The theory examines the relations
between the firm’s core features and procedures, and its execution. “The resource-
based view provides an explanation of the competitive state of diversity based on the
evidence that close competitors differ in aspect of their resources and capabilities in
significant and enduring ways” (Helfat & Peteraf, 2003). The Resource-based View
(RBV) stresses the importance of the individual resources of the organization in
delivering the competitive advantage and value added of the organization. The
resource-based view (RBV) sees resources as key to superior firm performance. In
strategic management value added refers so many things, such as a benefit, a profit, a
reputation, some outcome etc. These are known as benefit. So we can say, if a
resources can increase the productivity, we shall consider that resources adding value,
if we see a resources can improve the efficiency and make wastage rate low, that

Page | 11
resources also adding value to the organization, if a resources can make a product and
business both and system all innovative that set of resources are value adding, if any
resources gives reputation in the market that also value adding to the firm. So we can
say the resource must make a business:
 Efficient
 Productive
 Innovative
 Unique, etc.
According to Management, there are four type of resources, these are 1) Physical
Resources, 2) Human Resources, 3) Financial Resources & 4) Intellectual Property.

1) Physical or Capital Resources: This is part of the land, building, and machinery,
equipment of the organization which is known as capital resources or physical
resources.
2) Human Resources: Human resources is the set of the people who make up the
workforce of an organization.
3) Financial Resources: This is the resources from where an organization obtain
necessary fund they need to finance and make investment.
4) Intellectual Resources: This is kind of information resources, such as formula,
design, logo, patent, copy right etc.
RBV works with three type of resources such as Physical resources, Intellectual
resources and in some cases Human Resources. RBV does not work with Financial
Resources.

Sustainable competitive advantage and the RBV

Only the value-added resources can give the sustainable competitive advantage, here
advantage means sustained over time. Sustainable competitive advantage involves all
the action of the way that the organization competes in the market prices, product
range, manufacturing quality, service levels and so on.
Sustainable competitive advantages are also company’s assets, attributes, or abilities
that are difficult to duplicate or exceed; and provide a superior or favorable long term
position over competitors. So, If a resources can give some other benefit that can be
considered value adding resources, this value adding resources increase benefit and
give the sustainable competitive advantage. Example: Unilever’s advantages in the
Page | 12
industry come from its brand, its reputation for quality, its innovation and its network
with supply chain and customer.

The seven elements of resource-based sustainable competitive advantage

What will give us the impression? What are the good and value added resources?
How shall we find and how shall we chose those? Is there any formula, parameter,
technique? By which we can identify that resources are value adding, there are some
techniques will be discussed, here first we will discuss the seven elements model
technique. There are seven parameter or seven quality or proxy. If a resources or set
of resources became qualify against those seven parameter we can claim this is or
there are the good resources for further investment.

1) Prior or acquired resources (full control over the resources): Prior acquire
resources if buy through inheritance or become buying a business or buying a
resources where we can be the owner of the resources and if we have the full freedom
to use that resources then this is a good resources to invest. This issue arises, because
if go with lease financing or if buy a resources by taking loan from the bank or if buy
resources are very much sensitive to the environment in that case it can be own the
full control over the resources but may not get the full freedom to use it. So before
make any decision for investment, we have to think whether we get the full control
and freedom of the use of resources, if we get full control and full freedom to use the
resources that is good resources where we can invest and acquire.
2) Innovative Capability: We have to see, are the resources can make the business or
process or system innovative? Or the resources can make the product innovative? If

Page | 13
the resources can make the product, system, process and entire business very much
innovative definitely we can invest in that resources.
3) Being truly competitive: Resources must be very much relevant to the business.
The resources must be truly useful for the business, in true sense it is increasing the
productivity. It is increasing efficiency in the market. If the resources are truly
competitive, then we should invest to the resources.
4) Substitutability: If resources have substitutability in the market, then that
resources is not good for investment, because firms want to increase their efficiency
by purchasing resources, but competitor may buy the same resources and enhance
their competitiveness, and firm has no competitive benefit by using that resources. So
if the resources has the substitute in the market that resources is not value added. So
will not invest in that resources.
5) Appropriability: Resources must be relevant, matching and benefit for the
organization and organization should get true benefit and there is an assumption if an
organization get benefit from certain resources it is assume that all the stakeholder of
the company could enjoy that benefit. So it must be appropriate for the business.
6) Durability: Resources must be long lasting. The resources must has the longibility,
resources must be usable for a quite sustainable period.
7) Imitability: If the resources easily copyable in that case resources are not unique in
the market. So if a resources is difficult to imitable that resources gives competitive
advantage. Resources face difficulties to copy if it has following feature:

Tangible Uniqueness: Some form of specific differentiation, such as branding or a

specific geographic location or patent protection, will delay imitability.

Causal ambiguity: It may not be obvious to competitors what gives a resource it’s
competitive edge. There may be some complex organizational processes that have
taken years to develop that are difficult for outside companies to learn or acquire.

Investment deterrence: When the market has limited or unknown growth prospects
and it is difficult to make a small initial investment, a substantial investment by the
organization in the new strategy may well deter competitors from entering the market.
This is particularly true where large capital plant or major advertising campaigns are
essential to launch products and services.

Page | 14
The VRIO framework

This is a mechanism for testing competitive resources, this is kind of in depth analysis, to
the extent to which numerically, quantitively or financially resources are value adding or
not. VIRO model try to examine and verify this. There are four dimensions that make up
the framework, which create the acronym VRIO
o Valuable
o Rare
o Inimitable
o Organized
Valuable: Resources must be valuable so that it exploits environmental opportunities
or neutralize a competitive threat.
Rare: An organization’s resource needs to be rare. If the resource is available to
competitors then exploiting the resource will not generate competitive advantage and
economic performance will not be superior to rivals.
Inimitable: An organization’s resource needs to be costly to imitate. If it can be
easily Imitated then competitors will be able over time to take advantage of the profit
generated in the market place to duplicate the rare resource.
Organizing capability: An organization needs to be able to organize itself to exploit
its valuable, rare and inimitable resource. In a sense, this is a balancing factor in
relation to the three above.
The VRIO Framework – A mechanism for Testing Competitive Resources

This is the VRIO framework. This is a sequential decision making approach which
triggering by questioning each resources and asking if it is valuable or not.

Some sources of competitive advantage:

There are some other sources of advantage which increase the degree of sustainable
competitive advantage over the market.

Page | 15
Differentiation: This is the development of unique features or attributes in a product
or service that position it to appeal especially to a part of the total market. Branding is
an example of this source, with the help of tangible and intangible features a product
can be differentiate from other market player. Tangible features are name, logo,
shape, color, size etc and Intangible features are technological specification, easy to
use, better utility, comfort, usefulness, and inherent quality. If customer recognize that
features are value added then it gives competitive advantage.
Low cost: Low cost product helps organization to compete against other organization
in the market ether offer low price or same price as offer the competitor but more
service being added. So it’s an additional ability to minimize cost without change the
selling price, just reducing the product cost and enjoy the profit. So price sensitivity is
also gives sustainable advantage.
Niche Marketing: A company may select a small market segment and concentrate all
its efforts on achieving advantages in this segment. It focuses highest degree of
customization so price are higher and only few customer can buy it. It only focuses to
posh category of the customer. This is basically high end product. Niche marketing
policy is also generate kind of sustainable competitive advantage.
High performance or technology: Special levels of performance or service can be
developed that simply cannot be matched by other companies. It gives sophisticated
and superior service than other market player, example: Apple offer such a product
which is unique in terms of the technology and also ensure high performance, so it is
attractive in the eyes of the customer and make him market leader.
Quality: Some companies offer highest degree of quality that others are unable to
offer. For example, Sony TV provided good quality products (sound, picture, design
etc).
Service: Some companies offer better service than the competitor. For example
Emirates airlines give better service to passenger that were unmatched by others.

Vertical Integration: It is kind of two separate system come together known as

vertical integration. For example, Backward Linkage and forward linkage, Beximco
has spinning mills where they produce fabric and they also produce garments for
external global retailer ( such as H&M, Zara, Walmart), here they have backward
linkage from where they get fabric. They also have outlet called Yellow that is in the

Page | 16
form of forward linkage. So we can say the firms those has backward and forward
linkage it gives an additional advantage that other competitor cannot match.
Synergy: When is the actual result is more than the expected result then we can say
synergy is take place perfectly. Synergy is giving sustainable competitive advantage.
Culture, Leadership and Style of an Organization: This is the way an organization
leads, trains and supports its employees may be a source of advantage that others
cannot match and it creates the huge difference in terms of the competitive advantage.

Basic resource analysis:

According to strategic management there are three types of resources as follows:

Tangible Resources: the physical resources of the organization. For example, Land,
building, equipment, machinery etc.
Intangible resources: The many other resources that are important but are not
physically present. For Example: Copy right, patent, logo, brand, trademark etc.
Organizational capability: The skills, structures and leadership of the organization
that bind all its assets together and allow them to interact efficiently.

The three distinctive capabilities: architecture, reputation and innovation:

Different researchers have approached the issue of the resources that will deliver
Sustainable competitive advantage in different ways.
Architecture: This is the network of relationships and contracts both inside and
outside the firm. It is very important to oversee the industry, it helps to respond the
market change and exchange information with the relevant stakeholder both inside
and outside of the organization.
Reputation: Reputation is the strategic standing of the organization in the eyes of its
customers and other stakeholders. This allows an organization to communicate
favorable information about itself to its customers. It is particularly concerned with
long-term relationships and takes lengthy periods to build. Once gained, it provides a
real distinctiveness that rivals cannot match.
Innovation: Innovative capability is the special talent possessed by some
organizations for developing and exploiting innovative ideas. Some organizations find
it easier to innovate than others because of their structures, culture, procedures and

Page | 17
rewards. So innovation is very important to enhance the sustainable competitive
advantage.

Core Competencies:

Core competencies are a group of production skills and technologies that enable an
organization to provide a particular benefit to customers. Core competencies cover an
integration of skills, knowledge and technology. This combination can then lead to
competitive advantage, there are three effective and good core competencies as
follows:
Customer value: Competencies must make a real impact on how the customer
perceives the organization and its products or services.
Competitor differentiation: This must be competitively unique. If the whole
industry has the skill, then it is not core unless the organization’s skills in the area are
really special.
Extendable: Core skills need to be capable of providing the basis of products or
services that go beyond those currently available. The skill needs to be removed from
the particular product
group in which it currently rests. The organization needs to imagine how it might be
exploited in the whole area of its operations.

Findings and Analysis

Using VRIO the tool

Phase 1: Continue Identify valuable:
limited and costly resources to imitate There are two types of resource: tangible and
intangible. The physical items like property, buildings and equipment are tangible
assets. Companies can easily sell through them but tangible assets are rarely the
source of competitive advantage. Intangible assets such as brand value, trademarks,
intellectual property, on the other hand
Valuable Resources Finding: Considering the value chain and SWOT analyzes is a
simple way to define certain tools. Analysis of the supply chain determines the most
important activities which are the source of cost advantage or differentiation. Through
looking through the research, the useful tools or skills can be easily found.
Furthermore, SWOT analysis considers the company's strengths which are used to
leverage opportunities or protect against threats which is exactly what a valuable
resource does.

Page | 18
If you are still struggling to find useful tools, you can recognize them by asking the
questions:
• What practices minimize production costs without the perceived consumer value
decreasing?
• What practices improve the distinction and perceived consumer value of the product
or service?
• Did your organization receive an award, or was it accepted as the best in anything?
(Most creative, best employer, highest retention or best exporter of customers)
• Do you have access to raw materials that are scarce or hard to bring through the
distribution channels?
• Do you have unique ties to your suppliers? Such as tightly integrated system of
ordering and delivery driven by specific software?
• Do you have staff with special competencies and skills?
• Do you have a reputation for brand quality, creativity and customer service?
•Do you do perform any tasks better than your competitors do?
•Does your company hold any other strengths compared to rivals?
Rare Assets Finding:
• How many other companies in your industry possess a resource or can perform
capabilities in the same way?
• Can a resource be quickly acquired by competitors in the market?
• Will rivals in the near future access the resource or capability?
Finding costly to imitate resources:
• Can other organizations replicate a resource with ease?
• Can competitors create a replacement resource with ease?
• Can patents defend against it?
• Is it a socially dynamic resource or capability?
• Is it difficult to identify the specific processes, tasks or other factors which make up
the resource?

Phase 2: Find out if organization is organized to exploit these resources

• Does your company have an effective strategic management process in
organization?

Page | 19
 • Are there effective motivation and reward systems in place?
• Does your company’s culture reward innovative ideas?
• Is an organizational structure designed to use a resource?
• Are there excellent management and control systems?

Phase 3: Protect the resources

When finding a resource or capability that has all VRIO attributes, you can secure the
resource by any means possible. It's the root of your sustained competitive advantage,
after all. The first thing you can do is to make the top management aware of such
resource and recommend how to use it to minimize costs or distinguish the goods and
services. Then you think of ideas how to make it costly to imitate. If other companies
would not able to imitate a resource at reasonable prices, it will stay rare for much
longer.

Phase 4. Constantly review VRIO resources and capabilities

Over time, the importance of the resources shifts, and they must be continuously
checked to find out if they are as useful as they once were. Competitors are also
looking to gain the same competitive advantages so they will be able to duplicate the
tools, ensuring they will not be unique any more. . Then, new VRIO resources are
developed inside an organization and by identifying them you can protect you sources
of competitive advantage more easily.

Resources vs. Capabilities:

According to the RBV theory, resources are identified as the properties, skills, know-
how, capabilities and processes that enable companies to develop and execute
strategies for greater efficiency and effectiveness. Thus skills are a resource sort. They
relate in this sense to the ability of a business to use organizational resources to
execute particular tasks and achieve the desired outcome.

Core competencies are also mentioned in resource-based theory. Competency in a

business context describes a firm's ability to carry out its activities. Successful firms
can develop unique core competencies based on their resources and capabilities. Such
features are firm-specific and bring value to the end customer.

Various organizations hold various core competencies. Over time these attributes
evolve and define your mark. For example, Apple devices are notable for their
Page | 20
distinctive style. Walt Disney teaches the art of storytelling while Zappos is renowned
for the exceptional customer service it offers. As your business grows, you should
leverage your company's core competencies to raise brand awareness and stand out
from the competition.

RBV in Real Life:

The best way to grasp the resource-based principle is maybe to see how it works in
real life. Google, for example, has taken a revolutionary approach to the management
of human resources. To recruit and retain people who build creative products, the
organization depends on data driven HR insights.
In addition, no other firm uses workforce retention based on data to the same degree
as Google. His approach to the management of human resources is not only costly but
also hard to emulate. The organization also has a successful structure that helps it to
take advantage of certain capabilities. Here, Google resources are valuable, rare,
inimitable and organized to capture value, leading to a sustained competitive
advantage.

The RBV theory is applicable to every business. Health care organizations , for
example, should use this approach to better understand the effects of the recent
attempts to increase quality. A tech startup will adopt the VRIO system to see how its
products compare with those of its rivals and take the appropriate steps to optimize
the resources available.

Limitations of the RBV:

The resource-based view has its share of criticism, as do most theories used in
industry. Owing, for example, to the broad meanings of resources, it can be difficult
to evaluate the required level of analysis. In addition, some types of resources are
subjective, such as a reputation or knowledge of a business. Managers also need to
consider the fact that heterogeneity does not necessarily mean singularity.
Although it is true that the resources of a company are significant, they are not the
only factor behind growth and success of the business. It is also essential to regulatory
policies, strategic planning and other aspects. Another issue is that new technologies
and trends are emerging every day and may have a dramatic effect on your key
resources.
Researchers often note that a competitive advantage is not inherently created by
desirable resources. In some conditions, global economy and other external factors
can have a bigger impact.

Page | 21
For instance, even though the software program is worthwhile, uncommon and so on,
consumers may still want a less-advanced product that comes with a lower price tag
during economic downturns. In addition, your competitors might be able to deliver a
completely different product which yields similar efficiency results.
One may evaluate RBV's demerits or critiques as the 'right' strategic mechanism.
Priem and Butler (2001) argue the RBV analysis assumes the commodity demand is
stable and disregards the actual value of the capital. RBV is considered tautological,
as already stated. Based on Porter 's study of industry, Porter (1991) argues that the
RBV does not answer the issue of explaining the mechanism by which merit was
produced, and that activities should be a priority that is more important than capital.
Hoopes, Madsen and Walker (2003) have criticized RBV for failing to provide
concrete translations for the operating companies. In addition, the RBV approach
tends to be restricted with narrow implications, as management's strategic position is
perceived to be a mechanism rather than the operational functions of the firm's
resources (Clulow, Barry and Gerstman, 2007).
Companies seek to acquire time-consuming resources to mimic or replicate rivals
through dynamic interactions between resources with uncertainty. Dynamic skills,
however, serve as an extension of the RBV research to provide a deeper
understanding of how merits are obtained and preserved over time. Also, the RBV
ambiguity and duration enhances the development that increases the value of
resources and potential sustainability of competitive advantage.

Conclusion

The Resource-based View of the firm is a strategic management theory that is

extensively used by managers in project management. It allows them to allocate
sufficient resources according to alignment with the strategy, to recognize the value of
such resources and essential competences for the competitive advantage of the
organization, besides providing the managers with a snapshot of strength for
intervention, or for mergers and acquisition. This research is focused on the
importance of the RBV theory to PM research and practice and how it helps in the
success of the organization. Its importance was highlighted and the mechanism for its
implementation was introduced as well. Given the relevance of resource-based view
(RBV) strategy in creating competitive advantage and superior performance, it is
important that organizations start looking at their available resources strategically
with a view of aligning them to achieve their set goals and objectives. There is need to
work on capacity building, innovation, efficiency and effectiveness. The aim of this
research paper was to respond to the criticism surrounding the implementation of the
theory in general, and take a clear position in supporting the implementation of the

Page | 22
theory in project management research and practice. The areas of criticism:
definitional flaws, usefulness of the results of a research for a broader group of people
or situations, and construct validity were analyzed to show the importance of the
criticism, and to build solid grounds for the negation of the accusations of their
dysfunction. The criticism exposes areas for hypothetical consideration as it
challenges academics to revise their methodologies and enhances their work.

Appendices
Questionnaire:
The questionnaire is designed to identify how the resources is influential and
impactful for sustainable competitive advantage. A rating of 1 implies that the factor
is less impactful on the success, while a rating of 5 implies that the factor is high
impactful for competitive advantage.

No impact on the success High Impact on the

Questionnaire success
Does the brand give any
Sustainable competitive 1 2 3 4 5
advantage?
Does the reputation give
any Sustainable 1 2 3 4 5
competitive advantage?
Does Innovation Matter? 1 2 3 4 5
Does the network among
supply chain & customer 1 2 3 4 5
gives any value?
Does the control over the
resources necessary for 1 2 3 4 5
success?
Does resources have the
1 2 3 4 5
Substitutability?
Does resources have the
1 2 3 4 5
durability?
Does resources have the
1 2 3 4 5
Imitability?
Does the resources are
1 2 3 4 5
rare?
Does the organization
have the vertical 1 2 3 4 5
integration?
Does the resources 1 2 3 4 5
supported to provide High

Page | 23
 performance or
technology?
Does the Culture,
Leadership and Style of an
1 2 3 4 5
Organization matter for
success?
Does the equipment and
1 2 3 4 5
other assets matters?
Does the trademark give
1 2 3 4 5
any advantage?
Does the copyright
1 2 3 4 5
influence any value?
Does the financial capital
give any sustainable 1 2 3 4 5
advantage?

Work plan:
We are consisting of 4 members in the group, due to COVID-19 pandemic, we are not
able to work face to face, but we work virtually with the help of messenger,
WhatsApp and other available online platform. We have distributed our overall work
equally. We have gathered the relevant information from our lecture note, textbook,
online article and then edited accordingly. It took almost 2 weeks to complete the
report.

Contribution Statement:
Name ID Percentage
S. M. Arafat 112191002 25%
Md. Habibur Rahman 113191005 25%
Iqbal Parvez 112191032 25%
Muzahidul Islam 113191003 25%

References

Barney, J. B., Ketchen & D. J., Wright, M. (2011). The Future of Resource-Based
Theory: Revitalization or Decline? Journal of Management, 2011,
Calder, B., Phillips, L., & Tybout, A. (1982). The concept of external validity. Journal
of Consumer Research,

Page | 24
Cheung, E., Chan, A. & Kajewski, S. (2010). The public sector’s perspective on
procuring public works projects: comparing the views of practitioners in Hong Kong
and Australia. Journal of Civil Engineering and Management,
Cronbach, L. (1975). Beyond the two disciplines of scientific psychology. American
Psychologist,.
Foss, N. and & Knudsen, T. (2003). The Resource-Based Tangle: Towards a
Sustainable Explanation of Competitive Advantage. Managerial and Decision
Economics, 2003,
Habbershon, T. & Williams, M. (1999). A Resource􀇦Based Framework for
Assessing the Strategic Advantages of Family Firms. Family Business Review, 1999,
Helfat, C.; Peteraf, M. (2003). The dynamic resource􀇦based view: capability
lifecycles. Strategic Management Journal, 2003
Killen, C., Jugdev, K., Drouin, N. & Petit, Y. (2012). Advancing project and portfolio
management research: Applying strategic management
theories. International Journal of Project Management, 2012, Vol.30(5),
Kraaijenbrink, Spender, J. & Aard J. (2010). The Resource-Based View: A Review
and Assessment of Its Critiques. Journal of Management 2010
Kristandl, G. & Bontis, N. (2007). Constructing a definition for intangibles using the
resource-based view of the firm. Management Decision, 2007,
Lado, A., Boyd, N., Wright, P. & Kroll, M. (2006). Paradox and Theorizing within
the Resource-Based View. The Academy of Management Review, 2006,
Levitas, E. & Ndofor, H. A. (2006). What to Do With the Resource-Based View: A
Few Suggestions for What Ails the RBV That Supporters and Opponents Might
Accept. Journal of Management Inquiry 15. 2 (Jun 2006)
Newbert, S. (2007). Empirical Research on the Resource-Based View of the Firm: An
Assessment and Suggestions for Future Research. Strategic Management Journal,
(Feb., 2007),
Pablo, A., Reay, T., Dewald, J. & Casebeer, A. (2007). Identifying, enabling and
managing dynamic capabilities in the public sector*. Journal of Management Studies,
Truijens, O. (2003). A Critical Review of the Resource-based View of the Firm.
University of Amsterdam, Netherlands. Sprouts: Working Papers on Information
Systems,

Page | 25
William, P., Hoskisson, R., Short, J. & Yiu, D. (2010). Resource-Based Theory and
Corporate Diversification: Accomplishments and Opportunities. Journal of
Management, 2010,
Barney, J.B. (2001), “Is the resource-based “view” a useful perspective for strategic
management research? Yes”, Academy of management review, Vol. 26
Baškarada, S. and Koronios, A. (2018), “The 5S organizational agility framework: a
dynamic capabilities perspective”, International Journal of Organizational Analysis,
Vol.
Bryson, J.M., Ackermann, F. and Eden, C. (2007), “Putting the resource‐based view
of strategy and distinctive competencies to work in public organizations”, Public
administration review, Vol. 67
Ferlie, E., Hartley, J. and Martin, S. (2003), “Changing public service organizations:
current perspectives and future prospects”, British Journal of Management, Vol. 14,
Grant, R.M. (1996), “Toward a knowledge‐based theory of the firm”, Strategic
management journal, Vol. 17
Kenya Law Review Commission (2018), Objectives and Principles of devolution,
Government Printers, Nairobi.
Koh, B.H., Wong, W.P., Tang, C.F. and Lim, M.K. (2018), “The double-edge
resource-based view of logistics performance and governance in Asian countries”,
Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, Vol. 30
Martin, J.A. and Eisenhardt, K.M. (2004), “Coping with decline in dynamic markets:
Corporate entrepreneurship and the recombinative organizational form”, In Business
Strategy over the Industry Lifecycle,.
Matthews, J. and Shulman, A.D. (2005), “Competitive advantage in public-sector
organizations: explaining the public good/sustainable competitive advantage
paradox”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 58
Mugambi, K.W. and Theuri, F.S. (2014), “The challenges encountered by county
governments in Kenya during budget preparation”, IOSR Journal of Business and
Management, Vol. 16

Page | 26