Competências organizacionais e vantagem competitiva: o desafio da gerência intermediária

FÓRUM AME DE ESTRATÉGIA E LIDERANÇA

Competências organizacionais e vantagem competitiva: o desafio da gerência intermediária

Adelaide Wilcox King^I; Sally W. Fowler^II; Carl P. Zeithaml^III

^IProfessora-Assistente da McIntire School of Commerce da University of Virginia (Estados Unidos). E-mail: [e-mail]

^IIProfessora-Assistente da University of Victoria (Canadá). E-mail: [e-mail]

^IIIDiretor e Professor da McIntire School of Commerce da University of Virginia (Estados Unidos). E-mail: [e-mail]

RESUMO

Embora a maior parte dos gerentes reconheça as competências da empresa como fonte importante de vantagem competitiva, muitas organizações encontram dificuldades em identificá-las e avaliá-las. Para os gerentes, competências específicas são, muitas vezes, ambíguas, e a percepção individual sobre elas pode variar muito. Essa falta de especificidade pode ocultar visões distorcidas e errôneas acerca das competências, e, quando isso ocorre com os gerentes de nível intermediário, encarregados da administração rotineira de tais competências, as implicações para a empresa podem ser extremamente graves. Identificamos e examinamos os principais aspectos das competências e a relação existente entre a percepção dos gerentes de nível intermediário sobre elas e o desempenho da empresa. Descrevemos um estudo realizado com gerentes de nível intermediário de 17 empresas em dois setores: o têxtil e o hospitalar. Os resultados indicam a relação entre os aspectos das competências e o êxito da empresa. Além disso, apresentamos um método que pode ser empregado por qualquer empresa, a fim de avaliar suas competências, e indicamos como a gerência pode fazer uso dessa avaliação para aumentar a vantagem competitiva da empresa.

Palavras-chave: Estratégia, vantagem competitiva, gerência intermediária, competências, desempenho.

ABSTRACT

Although most managers recognize that a firm's competencies are an important source of competitive advantage, many firms encounter difficulties when they attempt to identify and assess those competencies. Specific competencies are often ambiguous to managers, and individual perceptions of a firm's competencies may vary significantly. This lack of specificity may mask significant misunderstanding and confusion about competencies. When this misunderstanding or confusion occurs among middle managers who are responsible for the day-to-day management of these competencies, the implications for an organization can be serious. We identify and examine key characteristics of competencies and the relationship between middle managers' perceptions of competencies and firm performance. We report a study of middle managers at 17 organizations in two industries: textile manufacturing and hospitals. Results demonstrate the linkages between competency characteristics and firm success. In addition, we describe a method that any firm can use to assess its competencies, and we show how management can use the assessment to enhance the firm's competitive advantage.

Key words: Strategy, competitive advantage, middle management, competences, performance.

Texto completo disponível apenas em PDF.

Full text available only in PDF format.

BURGELMAN, R. A. A process model of internal corporate venturing in the diversified major firm. Administrative Science Quarterly, v. 28, n. 2, p. 223- 244, 1983.

• BARNEY, J. B. Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, v. 17, n. 1, p. 99-120, 1991.
• BARNEY, J. B. Looking inside for competitive advantage. The Academy of Management Executive, v. 9, n. 4, p. 49-61, 1995.
• BOGNER, W. C., THOMAS, H. Core competence and competitive advantage: a model and illustrative evidence from the pharmaceutical industry. In: HAMEL, G., HEENE, A. (Eds.). Competence-based competition New York : John Wiley & Sons, 1994. p. 111-147.
• BOURGEOIS, J. B. Performance and consensus. Strategic Management Journal, v. 1, p. 227-248, 1980.
• BROWN, J. S., DUGUID, P. Organizational learning and communities-of-practice: toward a unified view of working, learning, and innovation. Special issue: Organizational learning: papers in honor of (and by) James G. March. Organization Science, v. 2, n. 1, p. 40-57, 1991.
• COLLIS, D. J. A resource-based analysis of global competition: the case of the bearings industry. Strategic Management Journal, v. 12, p. 49-68, 1991.
• COOK, S. D., YANOW, D. Culture and organizational learning. Journal of Management Inquiry, v. 2, n. 4, p. 373-390, 1993.
• DESS, G. Consensus on strategy formulation and organizational performance: competitors in a fragmented industry. Strategic Management Journal, v. 8, n. 3, p. 259-277, 1987.
• DESS, G., ORIGER, N. K. Environment, structure and consensus in strategy formulation: a conceptual integration. Academy of Management Review, v. 12, p. 313-330, 1987.
• DIERICKX, I., COOL, K. Asset stock accumulation and sustainability of competitive advantage. Management Science, v. 35, n. 12, p. 1504-1511, 1989.
• DUNCAN, W. J., GINTER, P. M., SWAYNE, L. E. Competitive advantage and internal organizational assessment. The Academy of Management Executive, v. 12, n. 3, p. 6-17, 1998.
• FIOL, C. M. Consensus, diversity, and learning in organizations. Organization Science, v. 5, n. 3, p. 403- 420, 1994.
• FIRE and forget? The Economist, p. 51, 20 Apr. 1996.
• FLOYD, S. W., WOOLDRIDGE, B. Dinosaurs or dynamos? Recognizing middle management's strategic role. The Academy of Management Executive, v. 8, n. 4, p. 47- 57, 1994.
• FLOYD, S. W., WOOLDRIDGE, B. The strategic middle manager San Francisco : Jossey-Bass, 1996.
• GROVE, A. Only the paranoid survive . New York : Currency Doubleday, 1996.
• GUTH, W., MCMILLAN, I. Strategic implementation versus middle management self-interest. Strategic Management Journal, v. 7, p. 313-327, 1986.
• HAMBRICK, D., MASON, P. Upper echelons: the organization as a reflection of its top managers. Academy of Management Review, v. 9, p. 193-206, 1984.
• HEDLUND, G. A model of knowledge management and the N-form corporation. Strategic Management Journal, v. 15, p. 73-90, 1994. Special issue.
• JANIS, I. Victims of groupthink Boston : Houghton Mifflin, 1972.
• KING, A. W., ZEITHAML, C. P. Competencies and firm performance: examining the causal ambiguity paradox. Strategic Management Journal, v. 22, p. 75-99, 2001.
• LANSITI, M., CLARK, K. B. Integration and dynamic capability: evidence from product development in automobiles and mainframe computers. Industrial and Corporate Change, v. 3, n. 3, p. 557-605, 1994.
• LEONARD-BARTON, D. Core capabilities and core rigidities: a paradox in managing new product development. Strategic Management Journal, v. 13, p. 111-125, 1992.
• MANGALISO, M. The strategic usefulness of management information as perceived by middle managers. Journal of Management, v. 21, n. 2, p. 231-250, 1995.
• MARKETPLACE, National Public Radio. Entrevista com Andrew S Grove. 5 Feb. 1996.
• NONAKA, I., TAKEUCHI, H. The knowledge-creating company New York : Oxford University Press, 1995.
• PRAHALAD, C. K., HAMEL, G. The core competence of the corporation. Harvard Business Review, v. 68, n. 3, p. 79-91, 1990.
• SCHERMERHORN, J. R. Management for productivity New York : Wiley & Sons, 1986.
• SHERMAN, S. Hot products from hot tubs, or how middle managers innovate. Fortune, p. 165-167, 29 Apr.1996.
• SPENDER, J.-C. Competitive advantage from tacit knowledge? Unpacking the concept and its strategic implications. In: ACADEMY OF MANAGEMENT ANNUAL MEETING, 53, 1993, Atlanta. Best Papers Proceedings . Atlanta : Academy of Management, 1993.
• STEWART, T. A. Intellectual capital: the new wealth of organizations. New York : Currency Doubleday, 1998.
• THE KNOWLEDGE. The Economist, 2 Nov. 1995.
• WOOLDRIDGE, B., FLOYD, S. W. The strategy process, middle management involvement, and organizational performance. Strategic Management Journal, v. 11, n. 3, p. 231-241 1990.

Datas de Publicação

• Publicação nesta coleção
  15 Fev 2011
• Data do Fascículo
  Mar 2002