Strategy, Distinctive Competence, and Organizational Performance

TLDR

This study examines the relationships among strategy, distinctive competence, and organizational performance. The analysis surveys top managers in four industries—plastics, semiconductors, automotives, and air transportation—to assess their perceptions. Managers identified four strategy types—Defender, Prospector, Analyzer, and Reactor—where Defenders, Prospectors, and Analyzers exhibit general and financial management competence, with Defenders and Prospectors possessing distinct configurations of distinctive competence, while Reactors lack consistent patterns; moreover, Defenders, Prospectors, and Analyzers tend to outperform Reactors in competitive industries but not in highly regulated ones.

Abstract

June 1980, volume 25 This study examines relationships among strategy, distinctive competence, and organizational performance. The analysis focuses on the perceptions of top managers in four industries (plastics, semiconductors, automotives, and air transportation). Findings indicate that these managers perceive four strategy types, Defender, Prospector, Analyzer, and Reactor, to be present within their industry. Defenders, Prospectors, and Analyzers all show competence in general and financial management. Beyond these two functions, Defenders and Prospectors have identifiable but different configurations of distinctive competence, while Analyzers' special capabilities are considerably less apparent. Reactors, as expected, have no consistent pattern of distinctive competence. Finally, although the data are only suggestive, Defenders, Prospectors, and Analyzers consistently outperform Reactors in competitive industries, but not in an industry that is highly regulated.*