Pulling from the front or pushing from behind: how competency prioritisation should differ to optimise firm competitiveness
Purpose: This study aims to contrast the disparities in optimal competitiveness configurations across international economies. Additionally, we analyse the competitive efficiency across firms of different performance endowments to identify distinctions and determine whether standardised or customise...
| Authors: | , |
|---|---|
| Format: | article |
| Publication Date: | 2021 |
| Country: | España |
| Institution: | Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya (UPC) |
| Repository: | UPCommons. Portal del coneixement obert de la UPC |
| Language: | English |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:upcommons.upc.edu:2117/347341 |
| Online Access: | https://hdl.handle.net/2117/347341 https://dx.doi.org/10.1108/EBR-11-2020-0288 |
| Access Level: | Open access |
| Keyword: | Competition Competitiveness Multilevel Benefit of the doubt Competency configuration Competitive efficiency Competència econòmica Àrees temàtiques de la UPC::Economia i organització d'empreses::Competitivitat i innovació |
| Summary: | Purpose: This study aims to contrast the disparities in optimal competitiveness configurations across international economies. Additionally, we analyse the competitive efficiency across firms of different performance endowments to identify distinctions and determine whether standardised or customised competitiveness configurations are optimal. Design/methodology/approach: This study uses a multilevel regression model to confirm country-specific effects followed by a non-parametric “Benefit-of-the-Doubt” (BoD) method to conduct an international comparison of the competitive efficiency of top- and poor-performing firms across eight European and Latin American economies. Findings: Not only are national ecosystems significant differentiators of competitive efficiency, but firm-level characteristics also explain these differences. It is found that more recent start-ups tend to experience significantly greater competitive efficiency. However, by separating the top-performing firms from the poor performers in each economy, it is found that the configurational outputs that potentially contribute most to competitive efficiency are not necessarily the same; while “technology” is a key factor for driving the competitive efficiency of top-performing firms, “market” drivers are most essential for improving the competitive potential of poor performers. Originality/value: The configurational outputs that potentially contribute most to competitive efficiency are not necessarily universal. |
|---|