Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage公司资源与持续的竞争优势

Abstract 摘要 

Understanding sources of sustained competitive advantage has become a major area of research in strategic management. Building on the assumptions that strategic resources are heterogeneously distributed across firms and that these differences are stable over time, this article examines the link between firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Four empirical indicators of the potential of firm resources to generate sustained competitive advantage—value, rareness, imitability, and substitutability—are discussed. The model is applied by analyzing the potential of several firm resources for generating sustained competitive advantages. The article concludes by examining implications of this firm resource model of sustained competitive advantage for other business disciplines.了解持续竞争优势的来源已成为战略管理领域的一项主要研究方向。文章基于战略资源在企业之间异质性分布以及这些差异随时间稳定的假设，考察了企业资源与持续竞争优势之间的联系。讨论了四个企业资源产生持续竞争优势的潜在实证指标——价值、稀缺性、不可模仿性和不可替代性。通过分析几种企业资源在生成持续竞争优势方面的潜力来应用模型。文章最后探讨了该企业资源模型对其他商业学科持续竞争优势的启示。

Introduction 引言 

Understanding sources of sustained competitive advantage for firms has become a major area of research in the field of strategic management (Porter, 1985; Rumelt, 1984). Since the 1960s, a single organizing framework has been used to structure much of this research (Andrews, 1971; Ansoff, 1965; Hofer & Schendel, 1978). This framework, summarized in Figure One, suggests that firms obtain sustained competitive advantages by implementing strategies that exploit their internal strengths, through responding to environmental opportunities, while neutralizing external threats and avoiding internal weaknesses. Most research on sources of sustained competitive advantage has focused either on isolating a firm’s opportunities and threats (Porter, 1980, 1985), describing its strengths and weaknesses (Hofer & Schendel, 1978; Penrose, 1958; Stinchcombe, 1965), or analyzing how these are matched to choose strategies.理解企业的持续竞争优势来源已成为战略管理领域的一项主要研究方向（波特，1985；拉梅尔特，1984）。自20世纪60年代以来，已有一个统一的组织框架用于构建大部分研究（安德鲁斯，1971；安索夫，1965；霍夫与申德尔，1978）。这一框架在图一中总结，表明企业通过实施利用其内部优势的战略来获得持续竞争优势，同时响应环境机会，消除外部威胁并避免内部弱点。大多数关于持续竞争优势来源的研究要么专注于孤立企业的机会和威胁（波特，1980，1985），要么描述其优势和劣势（霍夫与申德尔，1978；彭罗斯，1958；斯廷克科姆，1965），或分析如何匹配这些因素以选择策略。

Although both internal analyses of organizational strengths and weaknesses and external analyses of opportunities and threats have received some attention in the literature, recent work has tended to focus primarily on analyzing a firm’s opportunities and threats in its competitive environment (Lamb, 1984). As exemplified by research by Porter and his colleagues (Caves & Porter, 1977; Porter, 1980, 1985) this work has attempted to describe the environmental conditions that favor high levels of firm performance. Porter’s (1980) “five forces model,” for example, describes the attributes of an attractive industry and thus suggests that opportunities will be greater, and threats less, in these kinds of industries.尽管组织内部强项和弱项的分析以及外部机会和威胁的分析在文献中受到了一定关注，但近期的研究往往更侧重于分析企业在竞争环境中的机会和威胁（Lamb, 1984）。正如波特及其同事的研究所示（Caves & Porter, 1977; Porter, 1980, 1985），这项工作试图描述有利于企业高水平表现的环境条件。波特（1980）的“五力模型”例如，描述了一个有吸引力行业的特征，从而表明在这些行业中机会会更大，威胁会更小。

To help focus the analysis of the impact of a firm’s environment on its competitive position, much of this type of strategic research has placed little emphasis on the impact of idiosyncratic firm attributes on a firm’s competitive position (Porter, 1990)为了帮助集中分析企业环境对其竞争地位的影响，这类战略研究在很大程度上对企业特有属性对竞争地位的影响重视不够（波特，1990年）. Implicitly, this work has adopted two simplifying assumptions. First, these environmental models of competitive advantage have assumed that firms within an industry (or firms within a strategic group) are identical in terms of the strategically relevant resources they control and the strategies they pursue (Porter, 1981; Rumelt, 1984; Scherer, 1980). Second, these models assume that should resource heterogeneity develop in an industry or group (perhaps through new entry), that this heterogeneity will be very short lived because the resources that firms use to implement their strategies are highly mobile (i.e., they can be bought and sold in factor markets) (Barney, 1986a; Hirshleifer, 1980).隐含地，这项工作采用了两个简化假设。首先，这些竞争优势的环境模型假设一个行业内的企业（或一个战略集团内的企业）在它们控制的战略相关资源和所追求的策略上是相同的（波特，1981年；鲁梅特，1984年；舍勒，1980年）。其次，这些模型假设如果行业或集团内出现资源异质性（或许是通过新进入），这种异质性会非常短暂，因为企业用于实施其策略的资源高度流动（即它们可以在要素市场上买卖）（巴尼，1986年a；赫希莱弗，1980年）。 Thus, for example, Porter (1980) suggests that firms should analyze their competitive environment, choose their strategies, and then acquire the resources needed to implement their strategies. Firms are assumed to have the same resources to implement these strategies or to have the same access to these resources. More recently, Porter (1985) has introduced a language for discussing possible internal organizational attributes that may affect competitive advantage. The relationship between this “value chain” logic and the resource based view of the firm is examined below.因此，例如，波特 (1980) 建议公司应分析其竞争环境，选择其战略，然后获得实施战略所需的资源。假设公司拥有相同的资源来实施这些战略，或者对这些资源有相同的获取途径。近年来，波特 (1985) 引入了一种讨论可能影响竞争优势的内部组织属性的语言。下面将讨论这种“价值链”逻辑与基于资源的公司视角之间的关系。

There is little doubt that these two assumptions have been very fruitful in clarifying our understanding of the impact of a firm’s environment on performance. However, the resource-based view of competitive advantage, because it examines the link between a firm’s internal characteristics and performance, obviously cannot build on these same assumptions. These assumptions effectively eliminate firm resource heterogeneity and immobility as possible sources of competitive advantage (Penrose, 1958; Rumelt, 1984; Wernerfelt, 1984, 1989). The resource-based view of the firm substitutes two alternate assumptions in analyzing sources of competitive advantage. First, this model assumes that firms within an industry (or group) may be heterogeneous with respect to the strategic resources they control. Second, this model assumes that these resources may not be perfectly mobile across firms, and thus heterogeneity can be long lasting. The resource-based model of the firm examines the implications of these two assumptions for the analysis of sources of sustained competitive advantage.毫无疑问，这两个假设在澄清公司环境对绩效影响的理解方面非常有效。然而，基于资源的竞争优势视角，因其考察公司内部特征与绩效之间的联系，显然不能依赖这些相同的假设。这些假设有效地排除了公司资源异质性和不动性作为潜在竞争优势的来源（佩恩罗斯，1958；鲁梅尔特，1984；维尔纳费尔特，1984，1989）。基于资源的公司模型在分析竞争优势来源时替代了两个不同的假设。首先，该模型假设行业（或组）内的公司在其控制的战略资源方面可能是异质的。其次，该模型假设这些资源在公司之间可能并不完全可移动，因此异质性可能会持久存在。基于资源的公司模型考察这两个假设对持久竞争优势来源分析的影响。

This article begins by defining some key terms, and then examining the role of idiosyncratic, immobile firm resources in creating sustained competitive advantages. Next, a framework for evaluating whether or not particular firm resources can be sources of sustained competitive advantage is developed. As an example of how this framework might be applied, it is used in the analysis of the competitive implications of several resources that others have suggested might be sources of sustained competitive advantage. The article concludes by describing the relationship between this resource-based model of sustained competitive advantage and other business disciplines.本文首先定义了一些关键术语，然后考察了个别、静态的企业资源在创造持续竞争优势中的作用。接下来，提出了一个评估特定企业资源是否可以成为持续竞争优势来源的框架。作为该框架可能应用的例子，它被用于分析其他人所建议的几种资源的竞争含义，这些资源可能是持续竞争优势的来源。本文最后描述了这种基于资源的持续竞争优势模型与其他商业学科之间的关系。

Defining Key Concepts 定义关键概念 

To avoid possible confusion, three concepts that are central to the perspective developed in this article are defined in this section. These concepts are firm resources, competitive advantage, and sustained competitive advantage.为避免可能的混淆，本节定义了三个在本文中发展出的观点中至关重要的概念。这些概念是公司资源、竞争优势和持续竞争优势。

Firm Resources 公司资源 

In this article, firm resources include all assets, capabilities, organizational processes, firm attributes, information, knowledge, etc. controlled by a firm that enable the firm to conceive of and implement strategies that improve its efficiency and effectiveness (Daft, 1983). In the language of traditional strategic analysis, firm resources are strengths that firms can use to conceive of and implement their strategies (Learned, Christensen, Andrews, & Guth, 1969; Porter, 1981).在本文中，公司的资源包括公司所控制的所有资产、能力、组织流程、公司属性、信息、知识等，这些因素使公司能够构思和实施提高其效率和有效性的战略（Daft, 1983）。在传统战略分析的语言中，公司资源是公司用来构思和实施其战略的优势（Learned, Christensen, Andrews, & Guth, 1969; Porter, 1981）。

A variety of authors have generated lists of firm attributes that may enable firms to conceive of and implement value-creating strategies (Hitt & Ireland, 1986; Thompson & Strickland, /1987). For purposes of this discussion, these numerous possible firm resources can be conveniently classified into three categories: physical capital resources (Williamson, I975), human capital resources (Becker, 1964), and organizational capital resources (Tomer, 1987). Physical capital resources include the physical technology used in a firm, a firm’s plant and equipment, its geographic location, and its access to raw materials. Human capital resources include the training, experience, judgment, intelligence, relationships, and insight of individual managers and workers in a firm. Organizational capital resources include a firm’s formal reporting structure, its formal and informal planning, controlling, and coordinating systems, as well as informal relations among groups within a firm and between a firm and those in its environment.各种作者生成了一系列可能使公司能够构思和实施创造价值的战略的公司属性（Hitt & Ireland, 1986; Thompson & Strickland, 1987）。为了本讨论的目的，这些众多可能的公司资源可以方便地分为三类：物质资本资源（Williamson, 1975）、人力资本资源（Becker, 1964）和组织资本资源（Tomer, 1987）。物质资本资源包括公司使用的物理技术、公司的厂房和设备、其地理位置及其对原材料的获取。人力资本资源包括公司中个人经理和工人的培训、经验、判断力、智力、关系和洞察力。组织资本资源包括公司的正式汇报结构、其正式和非正式的规划、控制和协调系统，以及公司内部各组之间和公司与其环境中其他主体之间的非正式关系。

Of course, not all aspects of a firm’s physical capital, human capital, and organizational capital are strategically relevant resources. Some of these firm attributes may prevent a firm from conceiving of and implementing valuable strategies (Barney, 1986b). Others may lead a firm to conceive of and implement strategies that reduce its effectiveness and efficiency. Still others may have no impact on a firm’s strategizing processes. However, those attributes of a firm’s physical, human, and organizational capital that do enable a firm to conceive of and implement strategies that improve its efficiency and effectiveness are, for purposes of this discussion, firm resources (Wernerfelt, 1984). The purpose of this article is to specify the conditions under which such firm resources can be a source of sustained competitive advantage for a firm.当然，并非企业的所有实物资本、人力资本和组织资本的方面都是具有战略相关性的资源。某些企业属性可能会阻止企业构思和实施有价值的战略（Barney，1986b）。其他可能会导致企业构思和实施降低其效能和效率的战略。还有一些可能对企业的战略过程没有影响。然而，企业的实物、人力和组织资本中能够使企业构思和实施提升其效率和效能的战略的那些属性，在本讨论中被视为企业资源（Wernerfelt，1984）。本文的目的是明确这些企业资源成为企业持续竞争优势来源的条件。

Competitive Advantage and Sustained Competitive Advantage竞争优势与持续竞争优势

In this article, a firm is said to have a competitive advantage when it is implementing a value creating strategy not simultaneously being implemented by any current or potential competitors. A firm is said to have a sustained competitive advantage when it is implementing a value creating strategy not simultaneously being implemented by any current or potential competitors and when these other firms are unable to duplicate the benefits of this strategy. These two definitions require some discussion.在本文中，当一家公司实施一种没有当前或潜在竞争对手同时实施的创造价值的战略时，它被认为具有竞争优势。当一家公司实施一种没有当前或潜在竞争对手同时实施的创造价值的战略，并且这些其他公司无法复制该战略的好处时，它被认为具有持续竞争优势。这两项定义需要一些讨论。

First, these definitions do not focus exlusively on a firm’s competitive position vis-a-vis firms that are already operating in its industry. Rather, following Baumol, Panzar, and Willig (1982), a firm’s competition is assumed to include not only all of its current competitors, but also potential competitors poised to enter an industry at some future date. Thus, a firm that enjoys a competitive advantage or a sustained competitive advantage is implementing a strategy not simultaneously being implemented by any of its current or potential competitors (Barney, McWilliams, & Turk, 1989).首先，这些定义并不专注于公司相对于已经在其行业内运营的公司的竞争地位。相反，遵循巴莫尔、潘扎尔和威利赫（1982）的观点，公司的竞争被假定不仅包括所有当前的竞争对手，还包括在未来某个时刻准备进入该行业的潜在竞争对手。因此，享有竞争优势或持续竞争优势的公司所实施的战略是当前或潜在竞争对手尚未同时实施的战略（巴尼、麦克威廉斯和特克，1989）。

Second, the definition of sustained competitive advantage adopted here does not depend upon the period of calendar time during which a firm enjoys a competitive advantage. Some authors have suggested that a sustained competitive advantage is simply a competitive advantage that lasts a long period of calendar time (Jacobsen, 1988; Porter, 1985). Although an understanding of how firms can make a competitive advantage last a longer period of calendar time is an important research issue, the concept of sustained competitive advantage used in this article does not refer to the period of calendar time that a firm enjoys a competitive advantage.其次，此处采用的持续竞争优势的定义并不依赖于公司享有竞争优势的日历时间段。一些作者建议，持续竞争优势只是持续很长时间的竞争优势（雅各布森，1988；波特，1985）。尽管了解公司如何使竞争优势持续更长时间是一个重要的研究课题，但本文中使用的持续竞争优势的概念并不指公司享有竞争优势的日历时间段。

Rather, whether or not a competitive advantage is sustained depends upon the possibility of competitive duplication. Following Lippman and Rumelt (1982) and Rumelt (1984), a competitive advantage is sustained only if it continues to exist after efforts to duplicate that advantage have ceased. In this sense, this definition of sustained competitive advantage is an equilibrium definition (Hirshleifer, 1982).相反，竞争优势是否得以维持取决于竞争复制的可能性。遵循 Lippman 和 Rumelt (1982) 以及 Rumelt (1984)，仅当竞争优势在复制该优势的努力停止后仍然存在时，才算得以维持。从这个意义上说，该持续竞争优势的定义是一个平衡定义 (Hirshleifer, 1982)。

Theoretically, this equilibrium definition of sustained competitive advantage has several advantages, not the least of which is that it avoids the difficult problem of specifying how much calendar time firms in different industries must possess competitive advantages in order for those advantages to be “sustained.” Empirically, sustained competitive advantages may, on average, last a long period of calendar time. However, it is not this period of calendar time that defines the existence of a sustained competitive advantage, but the inability of current and potential competitors to duplicate that strategy that makes a competitive advantage sustained.理论上，这种对持续竞争优势的均衡定义有几个优点，其中最重要的是，它避免了一个困难的问题，即说明不同行业的公司需要多长的日历时间来拥有竞争优势，以使这些优势得以“持续”。 从经验上看，持续竞争优势在平均情况下可能持续很长的日历时间。然而，定义持续竞争优势存在的不是这段日历时间，而是当前和潜在竞争对手无法复制该战略，这使得竞争优势得以持续。

Finally, that a competitive advantage is sustained does not imply that it will “last forever.” It only suggests that it will not be competed away through the duplication efforts of other firms. Unanticipated changes in the economic structure of an industry may make what was, at one time, a source of sustained competitive advantage, no longer valuable for a firm, and thus not a source of any competitive advantage. These structural revolutions in an industry—called “Schumpeterian Shocks” by several authors (Barney, 1986c; Rumelt & Wensley, 1981; Schumpeter, 1934, 1950)–redefine which of a firm’s attributes are resources and which are not. Some of these resources, in turn, may be sources of sustained competitive advantage in the newly defined industry structure (Barney, 1986c). However, what were resources in a previous industry setting may be weaknesses, or simply irrelevant, in a new industry setting. A firm enjoying a sustained competitive advantage may experience these major shifts in the structure of competition, and may see its competitive advantages nullified by such changes. However, a sustained competitive advantage is not nullified through competing firms duplicating the benefits of that competitive advantage.最后，竞争优势的持续并不意味着它会“永远存在”。这仅仅表明它不会通过其他公司的复制努力而被竞争淘汰。 行业经济结构的意外变化可能使曾经是持续竞争优势来源的因素对于公司不再有价值，从而不再是任何竞争优势的来源。 行业内的这些结构性革命—被若干作者称为“熊彼特震荡”（Barney, 1986c; Rumelt & Wensley, 1981; Schumpeter, 1934, 1950）—重新定义了公司的哪些属性是资源，哪些不是。这些资源在新的行业结构中可能成为持续竞争优势的来源（Barney, 1986c）。然而，在之前行业环境中被视为资源的因素，在新的行业环境中可能成为弱点，或仅仅是无关紧要的。享有持续竞争优势的公司可能会经历竞争结构的重大变化，并可能看到其竞争优势因这些变化而被取消。然而，持续竞争优势并不因竞争公司复制该竞争优势的好处而被取消。

Competition with Homogeneous and Perfectly Mobile Resources同质且完全可移动资源的竞争

Armed with these definitions, it is now possible to explore the impact of resource heterogeneity and immobility on sustained competitive advantage. This is done by examining the nature of competition when firm resources are perfectly homogeneous and mobile.通过这些定义，现在可以探讨资源异质性和不可移动性对持续竞争优势的影响。这是通过检查当公司资源完全同质且可移动时竞争的性质来完成的。

In this analysis, it is not being suggested that there are industries where the attributes of perfect homogeneity and mobility exist. Although this is ultimately an empirical question, it seems reasonable to expect that most industries will be characterized by at least some degree of resource heterogeneity and immobility (Barney & Hoskisson, 1989). Thus, rather than making an assertion that firm resources are homogeneous and mobile, the purpose of this analysis is to examine the possibility of discovering sources of sustained competitive advantage under these conditions. Not surprisingly, it is argued that firms, in general, cannot expect to obtain sustained competitive advantages when strategic resources are evenly distributed across all competing firms and highly mobile. This conclusion suggests that the search for sources of sustained competitive advantage must focus on firm resource heterogeneity and immobility.在本分析中，并没有建议存在完全同质性和流动性特征的行业。虽然这最终是一个经验性的问题，但似乎合理地预期大多数行业至少会具有一定程度的资源异质性和不流动性（Barney & Hoskisson, 1989）。因此，本分析的目的是探讨在这些条件下发现持续竞争优势来源的可能性，而不是断言企业资源是同质且可流动的。毫不奇怪，普遍认为，当战略资源在所有竞争公司间均匀分布且高度流动时，企业通常无法期待获得持续的竞争优势。这个结论表明，对于持续竞争优势来源的搜索必须集中在企业资源的异质性和不流动性上。

Resource Homogeneity and Mobility and Sustained Competitive Advantage资源的同质性与流动性及可持续竞争优势

Imagine an industry where firms possess exactly the same resources. This condition suggests that firms all have the same amount and kinds of strategically relevant physical, human, and organizational capital. Is there a strategy that could be conceived of and implemented by any one of these firms that could not also be conceived of and implemented by all other firms in this industry? The answer to this question must be no. The conception and implementation of strategies employs various firm resources (Barney, 1986a; Hatten & Hatten, 1987;Wernerfelt, 1984). That one firm in an industry populated by identical firms has the resources to conceive of and implement a strategy means that these other firms, because they possess the same resources, can also conceive of and implement this strategy. Because these firms all implement the same strategies, they all will improve their efficiency and effectiveness in the same way, and to the same extent. Thus, in this kind of industry, it is not possible for firms to enjoy a sustained competitive advantage.想象一个行业，其中公司拥有完全相同的资源。这种情况表明，所有公司都拥有相同数量和类型的具有战略意义的物质、人力和组织资本。在这些公司中，有没有一种策略可以由任何一家公司构思和实施，而其他所有公司也无法构思和实施？对此问题的答案必须是否定的。策略的构思和实施需要使用各种公司资源（Barney, 1986a; Hatten & Hatten, 1987; Wernerfelt, 1984）。在一个由相同公司组成的行业中，或许有一家公司的资源足以构思和实施策略，这意味着因为其他公司拥有相同资源，它们也可以构思和实施这一策略。由于这些公司都实施相同的策略，它们的效率和有效性将以相同的方式和程度得到改善。因此，在这种类型的行业中，公司不可能享有持续的竞争优势。

Resource Homogeneity and Mobility and First-Mover Advantages资源同质性与流动性及先发优势

One objection to this conclusion concerns so-called “first mover advantages” (Lieberman & Montgomery, 1988). In some circumstances, the first firm in an industry to implement a strategy can obtain a sustained competitive advantage over other firms. These firms may gain access to distribution channels, develop goodwill with customers, or develop a positive reputation, all before firms that implement their strategies later. Thus, first-moving firms may obtain a sustained competitive advantage.对这一结论的一个反对意见涉及所谓的“先发优势”（Lieberman & Montgomery，1988）。在某些情况下，在一个行业中首个实施某一战略的公司可以获得相对于其他公司的持续竞争优势。这些公司可能获得分销渠道的接入，与客户建立良好的声誉，或在其他公司实施其战略之前建立良好的声誉。因此，先发公司可能获得持续的竞争优势。

However, upon reflection, it seems clear that if competing firms are identical in the resources they control, it is not possible for any one firm to obtain a competitive advantage from first moving. To be a first mover by implementing a strategy before any competing firms, a particular firm must have insights about the opportunities associated with implementing a strategy that are not possessed by other firms in the industry, or by potentially entering firms (Lieberman & Montgomery, 1988). This unique firm resource (information about an opportunity) makes it possible for the better informed firm to implement its strategy before others. However, by definition, there are no unique firm resources in this kind of industry. If one firm in this type of industry is able to conceive of and implement a strategy, then all other firms will also be able to conceive of and implement that strategy, and these strategies will be conceived of and implemented in parallel, as identical firms become aware of the same opportunities and exploit that opportunity in the same way.然而，经过反思可以清楚地看出，如果竞争公司在其控制的资源上是相同的，那么没有任何一家公司能够通过先发制人获得竞争优势。要成为先行者，实施策略之前，特定公司必须对实施该策略所带来的机会有洞察，而这些洞察是行业内其他公司或潜在进入公司的所不具备的（Lieberman & Montgomery, 1988）。这一独特的公司资源（关于机会的信息）使得信息较丰富的公司能够在其他公司之前实施其策略。然而，根据定义，这种行业中没有独特的公司资源。如果这一类行业中的一家公司能够构思和实施一个策略，那么所有其他公司也将能够构思和实施该策略，并且这些策略将是同时构思和实施的，因为相同的公司意识到相同的机会并以相同的方式利用这一机会。

It is not being suggested that there can never be first-mover advantages in industries. It is being suggested that in order for there to be a first-mover advantage, firms in an industry must be heterogeneous in terms of the resources they control.并不是说在某些行业中永远不存在先发优势。所要表达的是，为了产生先发优势，一个行业中的公司在其控制的资源方面必须是异质的。

Resource Homogeneity and Mobility and Entry/Mobility Barriers资源同质性和流动性及进入/流动壁垒

A second objection to the conclusion that sustained competitive advantages cannot exist when firm resources in an industry are perfectly homogeneous and mobile concerns the existence of “barriers to entry” (Bain, 1956), or more generally, “mobility barriers” (Caves & Porter, 1977). The argument here is that even if firms within an industry (group) are perfectly homogeneous, if there are strong entry or mobility barriers, these firms may be able to obtain a sustained competitive advantage vis-a-vis firms that are not in their industry (group). This sustained competitive advantage will be reflected in above normal economic performance for those firms protected by the entry or mobility barrier (Porter, 1980).对竞争优势持续性不能成立的第二个反对意见是，当一个行业内的企业资源完全同质且流动时，所存在的“进入壁垒”（Bain，1956）或更一般的“流动壁垒”（Caves & Porter，1977）。这里的论点是，即使行业内（群体内）的企业完全同质，如果存在强大的进入或流动壁垒，这些企业仍可能相对于不在其行业（群体）中的企业获得持续的竞争优势。对于受进入或流动壁垒保护的企业来说，这种持续的竞争优势将体现在其超出正常水平的经济表现中（Porter，1980）。

However, from another point of view, barriers to entry or mobility are only possible if current and potentially competing firms are heterogeneous in terms of the resources they control and if these resources are not perfectly mobile (Barney, McWilliams, Turk, 1989). The heterogeneity requirement is self-evident. For a barrier to entry or mobility to exist, firms protected by these barriers must be implementing different strategies than firms seeking to enter these protected areas of competition. Firms restricted from entry are unable to implement the same strategies as firms within the industry or group. Because the implementation of strategy requires the application of firm resources, the inability of firms seeking to enter an industry or group to implement the same strategies as firms within that industry or group suggests that firms seeking to enter must not have the same strategically relevant resources as firms within the industry or group. Thus, barriers to entry and mobility only exist when competing firms are heterogeneous in terms of the strategically relevant resources they control. Indeed, this is the definition of strategic groups suggested by McGee and Thomas (1986).然而，从另一个角度来看，进入或流动的壁垒只有在当前和潜在的竞争企业在其控制的资源方面异质，以及这些资源不是完全可流动的情况下才有可能（Barney, McWilliams, Turk, 1989）。异质性要求是不言自明的。为了使进入或流动的壁垒存在，受这些壁垒保护的企业必须实施与寻求进入这些受保护竞争领域的企业不同的策略。被限制进入的企业无法实施与行业或集团内企业相同的策略。由于战略实施需要企业资源的应用，寻求进入某个行业或集团的企业无法实施与该行业或集团内企业相同的策略，这表明寻求进入的企业与该行业或集团内企业在战略相关资源上必须存在差异。因此，只有当竞争企业在其控制的战略相关资源方面异质时，才能存在进入和流动的壁垒。确实，这正是McGee和Thomas（1986）所提出的战略集团的定义。

The requirement that firm resources be immobile in order for barriers to entry or mobility to exist is also clear. If firm resources are perfectly mobile, then any resource that allows some firms to implement a strategy protected by entry or mobility barriers can easily be acquired by firms seeking to enter into this industry or group. Once these resources are acquired, the strategy in question can be conceived of and implemented in the same way that other firms have conceived of and implemented their strategies. These strategies are thus not a source of sustained competitive advantage.公司资源必须是不动的，以便存在进入或流动的障碍，这一点也是明确的。如果公司资源是完全流动的，那么任何能够使某些公司实施受到进入或流动障碍保护的战略的资源，都可以被寻求进入该行业或群体的公司轻易获得。一旦这些资源被获取，相关的战略就可以像其他公司构思和实施其战略那样被构思和实施。因此，这些战略并不是持续竞争优势的来源。

Again, it is not being suggested that entry or mobility barriers do not exist. However, it is being suggested that these barriers only become sources of sustained competitive advantage when firm resources are not homogeneously distributed across competing firms and when these resources are not perfectly mobile.再次强调，并不是说进入或流动障碍不存在。然而，这里所建议的是，只有当企业资源在竞争企业之间没有均匀分布，并且这些资源又不完全可流动时，这些障碍才会成为持续竞争优势的来源。

Research that has focused on the impact of opportunities and threats in a firm’s environment on competitive advantage has recognized the limitations inherent in analyzing competitive advantage with the assumption that firm resources are homogeneously distributed and highly mobile. In his recent work, Porter (1985) introduced the concept of the value chain to assist managers in isolating potential resource-based advantages for their firms. The resource-based view of the firm developed here simply pushes this value chain logic further, by examining the attributes that resources isolated by value chain analyses must possess in order to be sources of sustained competitive advantage (Porter, 1990).聚焦于公司环境中机遇和威胁对竞争优势影响的研究认识到，在分析竞争优势时假设公司资源均匀分布且高度流动的内在局限性。在他最近的研究中，波特（1985）引入了价值链的概念，以帮助管理者识别其公司的潜在基于资源的优势。这种在此发展出的基于资源的公司视角进一步推动了价值链逻辑，通过检查由价值链分析所隔离的资源必须具备的属性，以成为持续竞争优势的来源（波特，1990）。

Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage企业资源与持续竞争优势

Thus far, it has been suggested that in order to understand sources of sustained competitive advantage, it is necessary to build a theoretical model that begins with the assumption that firm resources may be heterogeneous and immobile. Of course, not all firm resources hold the potential of sustained competitive advantages. To have this potential, a firm resource must have four attributes: (a) it must be valuable, in the sense that it exploit opportunities and/or neutralizes threats in a firm’s environment, (b) it must be rare among a firm’s current and potential competition, (c) it must be imperfectly imitable, and (d) there cannot be strategically equivalent substitutes for this resource that are valuable but neither rare or imperfectly imitable. These attributes of firm resources can be thought of as empirical indicators of how heterogeneous and immobile a firm’s resources are and thus how useful these resources are for generating sustained competitive advantages. Each of these attributes of a firm’s resources are discussed in more detail below.迄今为止，已提出为了理解持续竞争优势的来源，有必要建立一个理论模型，该模型以公司资源可能是异质且不流动的假设为起点。当然，并非所有公司资源都具有持续竞争优势的潜力。要具有这种潜力，一个公司资源必须具备四个属性：（a）它必须是有价值的，在于能够利用机遇和/或中和公司环境中的威胁，（b）它必须在公司当前和潜在竞争中是稀有的，（c）它必须是难以模仿的，以及（d）不能有策略上等价的替代品，这些替代品有价值但既不稀有也不是难以模仿的。这些公司资源的属性可以被视为公司资源的异质性和不流动性的经验指标，进而推断这些资源为产生持续竞争优势的有用性。以下将更详细地讨论公司资源的每个属性。

Valuable Resources 有价值的资源 

Firm resources can only be a source of competitive advantage or sustained competitive advantage when they are valuable. As suggested earlier, resources are valuable when they enable a firm to conceive of or implement strategies that improve its efficiency and effectiveness. The traditional “strengths-weaknesses-opportunities-threats” model of firm performance suggests that firms are able to improve their performance only when their strategies exploit opportunities or neutralize threats. Firm attributes may have the other characteristics that could qualify them as sources of competitive advantage (e.g., rareness, inimitability, non-substitutability), but these attributes only become resources when they exploit opportunities or neutralize threats in a firm’s environment.企业资源只有在有价值时才能成为竞争优势或持续竞争优势的来源。如前所述，当资源使企业能够构思或实施提高其效率和有效性的策略时，这些资源才是有价值的。传统的“优势-劣势-机会-威胁”模型表明，企业只有在其战略利用机会或中和威胁时，才能改善其绩效。企业属性可能具有其他特征，使其能够作为竞争优势的来源（例如，稀缺性、不可模仿性、非可替代性），但这些属性只有在它们利用机会或中和威胁时才会成为企业的资源。

That firm attributes must be valuable in order to be considered resources (and thus as possible sources of sustained competitive advantage) points to an important complementarity between environmental models of competitive advantage and the resource-based model. These environmental models help isolate those firm attributes that exploit opportunities and/or neutralize threats, and thus specify which firm attributes can be considered as resources. The resource-based model then suggests what additional characteristics that these resources must possess if they are to generate sustained competitive advantage.该公司特征必须具有价值，才能被视为资源（因此可能成为持续竞争优势的来源），这指出了环境竞争优势模型与资源基础模型之间的重要互补性。这些环境模型有助于识别那些利用机会和/或中和威胁的公司特征，从而明确哪些公司特征可以被视为资源。资源基础模型则建议这些资源必须具备哪些额外特征，以产生持续的竞争优势。

Rare Resources 稀有资源 

By definition, valuable firm resources possessed by large numbers of competing or potentially competing firms cannot be sources of either a competitive advantage or a sustained competitive advantage. A firm enjoys a competitive advantage when it is implementing a value-creating strategy not simultaneously implemented by large numbers of other firms. If a particular valuable firm resource is possessed by large numbers of firms, then each of these firms have the capability of exploiting that resource in the same way, thereby implementing a common strategy that gives no one firm a competitive advantage.根据定义，由大量竞争或潜在竞争企业拥有的有价值的公司资源不能成为竞争优势或持续竞争优势的来源。当一家公司实施一种价值创造战略，而该战略没有被大量其他公司同时实施时，公司就享有竞争优势。如果某一特定的有价值的公司资源被大量公司拥有，那么这些公司就都有能力以相同的方式利用该资源，从而实施一种共同策略，这种策略不会使任何一家公司获得竞争优势。

The same analysis applies to bundles of valuable firm resources used to conceive of and implement strategies. Some strategies require a particular mix of physical capital, human capital, and organizational capital resources to implement. One firm resource required in the implementation of almost all strategies is managerial talent (Hambrick, 1987). If this particular bundle of firm resources is not rare, then large numbers of firms will be able to conceive of and implement the strategies in question, and these strategies will not be a source of competitive advantage, even though the resources in question may be valuable.相同的分析适用于用于构思和实施战略的有价值的企业资源组合。有些战略需要特定的实物资本、人力资本和组织资本资源的组合来实施。在几乎所有战略的实施中所需的一个企业资源是管理人才（Hambrick, 1987）。如果这个特定的企业资源组合不稀有，那么大量企业将能够构思和实施相关战略，而这些战略将不会成为竞争优势的来源，即使相关资源可能是有价值的。

To observe that competitive advantages (sustained or otherwise) only accrue to firms that have valuable and rare resources is not to dismiss common (i.e., not rare) firm resources as unimportant. Instead, these valuable but common firm resources can help ensure a firm’s survival when they are exploited to create competitive parity in an industry (Barney, 1989a). Under conditions of competitive parity, though no one firm obtains a competitive advantage, firms do increase their probability of economic survival (McKelvey, 1980; Porter, 1980).观察到只有拥有有价值和稀有资源的企业才能获得竞争优势（持续或其他）并不是要否定普通（即不是稀有的）企业资源的重要性。相反，当这些有价值但普通的企业资源被利用来在行业中创造竞争平价时，可以帮助确保企业的生存（Barney, 1989a）。在竞争平价的条件下，尽管没有一家企业获得竞争优势，但企业确实提高了其经济生存的概率（McKelvey, 1980；Porter, 1980）。

How rare a valuable firm resource must be in order to have the potential for generating a competitive advantage is a difficult question. It is not difficult to see that if a firm’s valuable resources are absolutely unique among a set of competing and potentially competing firms, those resources will generate at least a competitive advantage and may have the potential of generating a sustained competitive advantage. However, it may be possible for a small number of firms in an industry to possess a particular valuable resource and still generate a competitive advantage. In general, as long as the number of firms that possess a particular valuable resource (or a bundle of valuable resources) is less than the number of firms needed to generate perfect competition dynamics in an industry (Hirshleifer, 1980), that resource has the potential of generating a competitive advantage.一项有价值的公司资源必须多么稀缺才能具有产生竞争优势的潜力是一个困难的问题。很明显，如果一家公司有价值的资源在一系列竞争和潜在竞争的公司中是绝对独特的，那么这些资源将产生至少一种竞争优势，并可能具有产生持续竞争优势的潜力。然而，行业中少数公司拥有特定有价值资源的情况下，仍然可以产生竞争优势。一般来说，只要拥有特定有价值资源（或一组有价值资源）的公司数量少于在一个行业中产生完全竞争动态所需的公司数量（Hirshleifer，1980），该资源就具有产生竞争优势的潜力。

Imperfectly Imitable Resources 不完全可模仿资源 

It is not difficult to see that valuable and rare organizational resources may be a source of competitive advantage. Indeed, firms with such resources will often be strategic innovators, for they will be able to conceive of and engage in strategies that other firms could either not conceive of, or not implement, or both, because these other firms lacked the relevant firm resources. The observation that valuable and rare organizational resources can be a source of competitive advantage is another way of describing first-mover advantages accruing to firms with resource advantages.不难看出，有价值且稀缺的组织资源可能成为竞争优势的来源。实际上，拥有这些资源的企业通常会成为战略创新者，因为它们能够构思并实施其他企业无法构思或无法实施的战略，或者两者兼而有之，原因在于这些其他企业缺乏相关的公司资源。有价值且稀缺的组织资源可以成为竞争优势的来源，这一观察是对那些资源优势企业所获得的先发优势的另一种描述。

However, valuable and rare organizational resources can only be sources of sustained competitive advantage if firms that do not possess these resources cannot obtain them. In language developed in Lippman and Rumelt (1982) and Barney (1986a; 1986b), these firm resources are imperfectly imitable. Firm resources can be imperfectly imitable for one or a combination of three reasons: (a) the ability of a firm to obtain a resource is dependent upon unique historical conditions, (b) the link between the resources possessed by a firm and a firm’s sustained competitive advantage is causally ambiguous, or (c) the resource generating a firm’s advantage is socially complex (Dierickx & Cool, 1989). Each of these sources of the imperfect imitability of firm resources are examined below.然而，只有当不拥有这些资源的企业无法获得它们时，有价值且稀缺的组织资源才能成为持久竞争优势的来源。用Lippman和Rumelt（1982）以及Barney（1986a；1986b）所使用的语言来说，这些企业资源是不完全可模仿的。企业资源之所以不完全可模仿，可能有三个原因中的一个或多个：(a) 企业获得资源的能力依赖于独特的历史条件，(b) 企业所拥有的资源与企业的持久竞争优势之间的联系具有因果模糊性，或(c) 产生企业优势的资源在社会上是复杂的（Dierickx & Cool, 1989）。以下将讨论企业资源不完全可模仿的每一个来源。

Unique historical conditions and imperfectly imitable resources. Another assumption of most environmental models of firm competitive advantage, besides resource homogeneity and mobility, is that the performance of firms can be understood independent of the particular history and other idiosyncratic attributes of firms (Porter, 1981; Scherer, 1980). These researchers seldom argue that firms do not vary in terms of their unique histories, but rather that these unique histories are not relevant to understanding a firm’s performance (Porter, 1980).独特的历史条件和难以模仿的资源。除了资源同质性和流动性之外，大多数关于企业竞争优势的环境模型的另一个假设是，企业的表现可以独立于特定历史及其他特有属性进行理解（波特，1981；谢列尔，1980）。这些研究者很少争辩企业在独特历史方面的差异，而是认为这些独特的历史与理解企业表现无关（波特，1980）。

The resource-based view of competitive advantage developed here relaxes this assumption. Indeed, this approach asserts that not only are firms intrinsically historical and social entities, but that their ability to acquire and exploit some resources depends upon their place in time and space. Once this particular unique time in history passes, firms that do not have space- and time-dependent resources cannot obtain them, and thus these resources are imperfectly imitable.基于资源的竞争优势视角在这里放松了这一假设。事实上，这种方法主张，企业不仅是内在的历史和社会实体，而且它们获取和利用某些资源的能力取决于它们在时间和空间中的位置。一旦这段特定的历史时间过去，没有时间和空间依赖资源的企业无法获得这些资源，因此这些资源是不可完美模仿的。

Resource-based theorists are not alone in recognizing the importance of history as a determinant of firm performance and competitive advantage. Traditional strategy researchers (e.g., Ansoff, 1965; Learned et al., 1969; Stintchcombe, 1965) often cited the unique historical circumstances of a firm’s founding, or the unique circumstances under which a new management team takes over a firm, as important determinants of a firm’s long term performance. More recently, several economists (e.g., Arthur, Ermoliev, & Kaniovsky, 1987; David, 1985) have developed models of firm performance that rely heavily on unique historical events as determinants of subsequent actions. Employing path-dependent models of economic performance (Arthur, 1983, 1984a, 1984b; Arthur, Ermiliev, & Kaniovski, 1984) these authors suggest that the performance of a firm does not depend simply on the industry structure within which a firm finds itself at a particular point in time, but also on the path a firm followed through history to arrive where it is. If a firm obtains valuable and rare resources because of its unique path through history, it will be able to exploit those resources in implementing value-creating strategies that cannot be duplicated by other firms, for firms without that particular path through history cannot obtain the resources necessary to implement the strategy.基于资源的理论家并不孤单，他们认识到历史作为企业绩效和竞争优势的决定因素的重要性。传统的战略研究者（例如，安索夫，1965年；莱纳德等人，1969年；斯廷特科姆，1965年）常常引用企业成立时的独特历史背景或新管理团队接管企业时的独特情况，作为企业长期绩效的重要决定因素。最近，一些经济学家（例如，阿瑟，厄尔莫利耶夫，和卡尼奥夫斯基，1987年；大卫，1985年）发展了 heavily 依赖于独特历史事件作为后续行为决定因素的企业绩效模型。采用路径依赖的经济绩效模型（阿瑟，1983年，1984a年，1984b年；阿瑟，厄尔米利耶夫，和卡尼奥夫斯基，1984年），这些作者建议，企业的绩效不仅仅依赖于特定时刻企业所处的行业结构，还依赖于企业在历史上所走的路径。如果企业因为其独特的历史路径而获得了有价值且稀缺的资源，那么它将能够利用这些资源实施那些其他企业无法复制的创造价值的战略，因为没有经过那条特定历史路径的企业无法获得实施该战略所需的资源。

The acquisition of all the types of firm resources examined in this article can depend upon the unique historical position of a firm. A firm that locates it facilities on what turns out to be a much more valuable location than was anticipated when the location was chosen possesses an imperfectly imitable physical capital resource (Hirshleifer, 1988; Ricardo, 1966). A firm with scientists who are uniquely positioned to create or exploit a significant scientific breakthrough may obtain an imperfectly imitable resource from the history-dependent nature of these scientist’s individual human capital (Burgelman & Maidique, 1988; Winter, 1988). Finally, a firm with a unique and valuable organizational culture that emerged in the early stages of a firm’s history may have an imperfectly imitable advantage over firms founded in another historical period, where different (and perhaps less valuable) organizational values and beliefs come to dominate (Barney, 1986b; Zucker, 1977).本文中考察的所有类型的公司资源的获取可能依赖于公司的独特历史位置。一个将其设施设于比选址时预期更有价值的位置的公司，拥有一种无法被完美模仿的物质资本资源（Hirshleifer, 1988; Ricardo, 1966）。拥有科学家且这些科学家在创造或利用显著科学突破方面处于独特地位的公司，可能会因这些科学家个人人力资本的历史依赖性而获得一种无法被完美模仿的资源（Burgelman & Maidique, 1988; Winter, 1988）。最后，拥有在公司历史早期阶段形成的独特且有价值的组织文化的公司，可能在与在另一个历史时期创立的公司相比，具备一种无法被完美模仿的优势，后者在其中不同（或许价值较低）的组织价值观和信念占据主导地位（Barney, 1986b; Zucker, 1977）。

The literature in strategic management is littered with examples of firms whose unique historical position endowed them with resources that are not controlled by competing firms and that cannot be imitated. These examples are the case analyses that have dominated teaching and research for so long in the field of strategic management (Learned et al., 1969; Miles & Cameron,. 1982), However, the systematic study of the impact of history on firm performance is in its infancy (David, 1985).战略管理文献中充斥着许多公司的例子，这些公司独特的历史位置赋予了它们一些资源，这些资源并不为竞争公司所控制，且无法被模仿。这些例子是长期主导战略管理领域教学和研究的个案分析（Learned et al., 1969; Miles & Cameron, 1982）。然而，历史对公司绩效影响的系统研究仍处于起步阶段（David, 1985）。

Causal ambiguity and imperfectly imitable resources. Unlike the relationship between a firm’s unique history and the imitability of its resources, the relationship between the causal ambiguity of a firm’s resources and imperfect imitability has received systematic attention in the literature (Alchian, 1950; Barney, 1986b, Lippman & Rumelt, 1982; Mancke, 1974; Reed and DeFillippi, 1990; Rumelt, 1984). In this context, causal ambiguity exists when the link between the resources controlled by a firm and a firm’s sustained competitive advantage is not understood or understood only very imperfectly.原因模糊性和难以模仿的资源。与企业独特历史与其资源可模仿性之间的关系不同，企业资源的原因模糊性与难以模仿性之间的关系在文献中受到系统的关注（Alchian, 1950；Barney, 1986b，Lippman & Rumelt, 1982；Mancke, 1974；Reed和DeFillippi, 1990；Rumelt, 1984）。在这种情况下，当一个企业控制的资源与其持续竞争优势之间的联系未被理解或仅被非常不完全地理解时，便存在原因模糊性。

When the link between a firm’s resources and its sustained competitive advantage are poorly understood, it is difficult for firms that are attempting to duplicate a successful firm’s strategies through imitation of its resources to know which resources it should imitate. Imitating firms may be able to describe some of the resources controlled by a successful firm. However, under conditions of causal ambiguity, it is not clear that the resources that can be described are the same resources that generate a sustained competitive advantage, or whether that advantage reflects some other non-described firm resource. As Demsetz (1973) once observed, sometimes it is difficult to understand why one firm consistently outperforms other firms. Causal ambiguity is at the heart of this difficulty. In the face of such causal ambiguity, imitating firms cannot know the actions they should take in order to duplicate the strategies of firms with a sustained competitive advantage.当一个公司的资源与其持续竞争优势之间的联系不明确时，试图通过模仿成功公司的资源来复制其战略的公司就很难知道应模仿哪些资源。模仿公司可能能够描述一些成功公司所控制的资源。然而，在因果模糊的情况下，不清楚能够被描述的资源是否是那些产生持续竞争优势的相同资源，或者该优势是否反映了其他未被描述的公司资源。正如德梅茨（Demsetz, 1973）曾观察到的，有时很难理解为何一家公司始终优于其他公司。因果模糊正是这种困难的核心。在这种因果模糊的情况下，模仿公司无法知道应采取何种行动来复制拥有持续竞争优势公司的战略。

To be a source of sustained competitive advantage, both the firms that possess resources that generate a competitive advantage and the firms that do not possess these resources but seek to imitate them must be faced with the same level of causal ambiguity (Lippman & Rumelt, 1982). If firms that control these resources have a better understanding of their impact on competitive advantage than firms without these resources, then firms without these resources can engage in activities to reduce their knowledge disadvantage. They can do this, for example, by hiring away well placed knowledgeable managers in a firm with a competitive advantage or by engaging in a careful systematic study of the other firm’s success. Although acquiring this knowledge may take some time and effort, once knowledge of the link between a firm’s resources and its ability to implement certain strategies is diffused throughout competing firms, causal ambiguity no longer exists, and thus cannot be a source of imperfect imitability. In other words, if a firm with a competitive advantage understands the link between the resources it controls and its advantages, then other firms can also learn about that link, acquire the necessary resources (assuming they are not imperfectly imitable-for other reasons), and implement the relevant strategies. In such a setting, a firm’s competitive advantages are not sustained because they can be duplicated.要成为持续竞争优势的来源，不仅拥有产生竞争优势资源的公司，而且没有这些资源但试图模仿它们的公司都必须面临相同程度的因果模糊（Lippman & Rumelt, 1982）。如果控制这些资源的公司对其对竞争优势的影响的理解优于没有这些资源的公司，那么没有这些资源的公司可以采取行动以减少其知识劣势。例如，他们可以通过挖角在具有竞争优势公司中地位良好的知识渊博的经理，或通过对另一家公司的成功进行仔细的系统研究来实现。虽然获得这些知识可能需要一些时间和努力，但一旦关于公司资源与其实施某些战略能力之间的联系的知识在竞争公司之间传播开来，因果模糊便不再存在，因此也不能成为不完全可模仿的来源。换句话说，如果拥有竞争优势的公司理解其控制的资源与其优势之间的联系，那么其他公司也可以了解到该联系，获得必要的资源（假设它们因其他原因不是不完全可模仿的），并实施相关的战略。在这种环境下，一家公司的竞争优势不能持续，因为它们可以被复制。

On the other hand, when a firm with a competitive advantage does not understand the source of its competitive advantage any better than firms without this advantage, that competitive advantage may be sustained because it is not subject to imitation (Lippman & Rumelt, 1982). Ironically, in order for causal ambiguity to be a source of sustained competitive advantage, all competing firms must have an imperfect understanding of the link between the resources controlled by a firm and a firm’s competitive advantages. If one competing firm understands this link, and no others do, in the long run this information will be diffused through all competitors, thus eliminating causal ambiguity and imperfect imitability based on causal ambiguity.另一方面，当一个具有竞争优势的公司对其竞争优势的来源的理解与没有这种优势的公司一样有限时，这种竞争优势可能会得以维持，因为它不容易被模仿（Lippman & Rumelt, 1982）。具有讽刺意味的是，为了使因果模糊性成为持续竞争优势的来源，所有竞争公司必须对一个公司所控制的资源与公司的竞争优势之间的联系有不完美的理解。如果有一家竞争公司理解这一联系，而其他公司则不理解，从长远来看，这条信息将通过所有竞争对手传播，从而消除基于因果模糊性的因果模糊性和不完美的可模仿性。

At first, it may seem unlikely that a firm with a sustained competitive advantage will not fully understand the source of that advantage. However, given the very complex relationship between firm resources and competitive advantage, such an incomplete understanding is not implausible. The resources controlled by a firm are very complex and interdependent. Often, they are implicit, taken for granted by managers, rather than being subject to explicit analysis (Nelson & Winter, 1982; Polanyi, 1962; Winter, 1988). Numerous resources, taken by themselves or in combination with other resources, may yield sustained competitive advantage. Although managers may have numerous hypotheses about which resources generate their firm’s advantages, it is rarely possible to rigorously test these hypotheses. As long as numerous plausible explanations of the sources of sustained competitive advantage exist within a firm, the link between the resources controlled by a firm and sustained competitive advantage remains somewhat ambiguous, and thus which of a firm’s resources to imitate remains uncertain.起初，似乎不太可能一个拥有持续竞争优势的公司不会完全理解这种优势的来源。然而，考虑到公司资源与竞争优势之间非常复杂的关系，这种不完全的理解并非不合理。公司所控制的资源是非常复杂和相互依赖的。通常，它们是隐性的，由管理者视为理所当然，而不是经过明确分析的（Nelson & Winter, 1982; Polanyi, 1962; Winter, 1988）。许多资源，单独或与其他资源组合在一起，可能会产生持续竞争优势。尽管管理者可能对哪些资源产生公司的优势有多种假设，但很少能够严格测试这些假设。只要在一个公司内部存在众多合理的解释来说明持续竞争优势的来源，公司所控制资源与持续竞争优势之间的联系就仍然有些模糊，因此，哪些公司资源值得模仿仍不确定。

Social complexity. A final reason that a firm’s resources may be imperfectly imitable is that they may be very complex social phenomena, beyond the ability of firms to systematically manage and influence. When competitive advantages are based in such complex social phenomena, the ability of other firms to imitate these resources is significantly constrained.社会复杂性。一个公司资源可能难以模仿的最终原因是，它们可能是非常复杂的社会现象，超出了公司系统性管理和影响的能力。当竞争优势基于如此复杂的社会现象时，其他公司模仿这些资源的能力受到显著限制。

A wide variety of firm resources may be socially complex. Examples include the interpersonal relations among managers in a firm (Hambrick, 1987), a firm’s culture (Barney, 1986b), a firm’s reputation among suppliers (Porter, 1980) and customers (Klein, Crawford & Alchian, 1978; Klein & Lefler, 1981). Notice that in most of these cases it is possible to specify how these socially complex resources add value to a firm. Thus, there is little or no causal ambiguity surrounding the link between these firm resources and competitive advantage. However, understanding that, say, an organizational culture with certain attributes or quality relations among managers can improve a firm’s efficiency and effectiveness does not necessarily imply that firms without these attributes can engage in systematic efforts to create them (Barney, 1989b; Dierickx & Cool, 1989). Such social engineering may be, for the time being at least, beyond the capabilities of most firms (Barney, 1986b; Porras & Berg, 1978). To the extent that socially complex firm resources are not subject to such direct management, these resources are imperfectly imitable.各种公司资源可能具有社会复杂性。例子包括公司内经理之间的人际关系（Hambrick，1987），公司的文化（Barney，1986b），公司在供应商（Porter，1980）和客户（Klein，Crawford & Alchian，1978；Klein & Lefler，1981）中的声誉。请注意，在这些情况下，大多数情况下可以明确这些社会复杂资源如何为公司增值。因此，这些公司资源与竞争优势之间的联系几乎没有因果模糊性。然而，理解例如，具有特定属性的组织文化或经理之间良好的关系可以提高公司的效率和效能，并不一定意味着没有这些属性的公司可以进行系统性的努力来创造这些属性（Barney，1989b；Dierickx & Cool，1989）。这种社会工程可能至少在目前超出了大多数公司的能力范围（Barney，1986b；Porras & Berg，1978）。在社会复杂的公司资源未受此类直接管理的程度上，这些资源是不可完全模仿的。

Notice that complex physical technology is not included in this category of sources of imperfectly imitable. In general, physical technology, whether it takes the form of machine tools or robots in factories (Hayes & Wheelwright, 1984) or complex information management systems (Howell & Fleishman, 1982), is by itself typically imitable. If one firm can purchase these physical tools of production and thereby implement some strategies, then other firms should also be able to purchase these physical tools, and thus such tools should not be a source of sustained competitive advantage.注意到复杂的物理技术不包括在这种不可模仿来源的类别中。一般来说，物理技术，无论是以机器工具或工厂中的机器人（Hayes & Wheelwright, 1984）或复杂的信息管理系统（Howell & Fleishman, 1982）的形式存在，通常都是可以被模仿的。如果一家企业能够购买这些生产工具并因此实施某些策略，那么其他企业也应能够购买这些生产工具，因此这些工具不应成为持续竞争优势的来源。

On the other hand, the exploitation of physical technology in a firm often involves the use of socially complex firm resources. Several firms may all possess the same physical technology, but only one of these firms may possess the social relations, culture, traditions, etc. to fully exploit this technology in implementing strategies (Wilkins, 1989). If these complex social resources are not subject to imitation (and assuming they are valuable and rare and no substitutes exist), these firms may obtain a sustained competitive advantage from exploiting their physical technology more completely than other firms, even though competing firms do not vary in terms of the physical technology they possess.另一方面，企业对物理技术的利用通常涉及社会复杂的企业资源。多个企业可能都拥有相同的物理技术，但这些企业中只有一家可能拥有社会关系、文化、传统等资源，以充分利用该技术来实施战略（Wilkins, 1989）。如果这些复杂的社会资源不易被模仿（假设它们是有价值和稀缺的，并且没有替代品存在），这些企业可能会通过比其他企业更全面地利用其物理技术而获得持续的竞争优势，即使竞争企业在其拥有的物理技术方面没有差异。

Substitutability 可替代性 

The last requirement for a firm resource to be a source of sustained competitive advantage is that there must be no strategically equivalent valuable resources that are themselves either not rare or imitable. Two valuable firm resources (or two bundles of firm resources) are strategically equivalent when they each can be exploited separately to implement the same strategies. Suppose that one of these valuable firm resources is rare and imperfectly imitable, but the other is not. Firms with this first resource will be able to conceive of and implement certain strategies. If there were no strategically equivalent firm resources, these strategies would generate a sustained competitive advantage (because the resources used to conceive and implement them are valuable, rare, and imperfectly imitable). However, that there are strategically equivalent resources suggests that other current or potentially competing firms can implement the same strategies, but in a different way, using different resources. If these alternative resources are either not rare or imitable, then numerous firms will be able to conceive of and implement the strategies in question, and those strategies will not generate a sustained competitive advantage. This will be the case even though one approach to implementing these strategies exploits valuable, rare, and imperfectly imitable firm resources.一项资源成为持续竞争优势的最后要求是，必须没有战略等价的有价值资源，而这些资源本身要么不稀缺要么可模仿。当两项有价值的公司资源（或两组公司资源）可以被分别利用以实施相同策略时，它们就是战略等价的。假设其中一项有价值的公司资源是稀缺的且不易模仿，但另一项则不是。拥有这第一项资源的公司将能够构思并实施某些策略。如果没有战略等价的公司资源，这些策略将产生持续竞争优势（因为用于构思和实施这些策略的资源是有价值的、稀缺的且不易模仿）。然而，战略等价资源的存在表明，其他当前或潜在的竞争公司可以以不同的方式实施相同的策略，使用不同的资源。如果这些替代资源要么不稀缺要么可模仿，那么众多公司将能够构思并实施相关策略，而这些策略将不会产生持续竞争优势。即使某种实施策略的方法利用了有价值的、稀缺的和不易模仿的公司资源，情况仍然如此。

Substitutability can take at least two forms. First, though it may not be possible for a firm to imitate another firm’s resources exactly, it may be able to substitute a similar resource that enables it to conceive of and implement the same strategies. For example, a firm seeking to duplicate the competitive advantages of another firm by imitating that other firm’s high quality top management team will often be unable to copy that team exactly (Barney & Tyler, 1990). However, it may be possible for this firm to develop its own unique top management team. Though these two teams will be different (different people, different operating practices, a different history, etc.), they may likely be strategically equivalent and thus be substitutes for one another. If different top management teams are strategically equivalent (and if these substitute teams are common or highly imitable), then a high quality top management team is not a source of sustained competitive advantage, even though a particular management team of a particular firm is valuable, rare and imperfectly imitable.可替代性至少可以呈现两种形式。首先，尽管一家公司可能无法完全模仿另一家公司的资源，但它可能能够替代一种类似的资源，使其能够构思和实施相同的战略。例如，一家公司试图通过模仿另一家公司的高质量高管团队来复制该公司的竞争优势，但通常无法完全复制该团队（Barney & Tyler, 1990）。然而，这家公司可能能够发展自己独特的高管团队。尽管这两个团队会有所不同（不同的人，不同的操作实践，不同的历史等），但它们可能在战略上是等效的，因此可以相互替代。如果不同的高管团队在战略上是等效的（而且这些替代团队是普遍存在或高度可模仿的），那么高质量的高管团队就不再是持续竞争优势的来源，即使某个特定公司的特定管理团队是有价值的、稀有的和不完全可模仿的。

Second, very different firm resources can also be strategic substitutes. For example, managers in one firm may have a very clear vision of the future of their company because of a charismatic leader in their firm (Zucker, 1977). Managers in competing firms may also have a very clear vision of the future of their companies, but this common vision may reflect these firms’ systematic, company-wide strategic planning process (Pearce, Freeman, & Robinson, 1987). From the point of view of managers having a clear vision of the future of their company, the firm resource of a charismatic leader and the firm resource of a formal planning system may be strategically equivalent, and thus substitutes for one another. If large numbers of competing firms have a formal planning system that generates this common vision (or if such a formal planning is highly imitable), then firms with such a vision derived from a charismatic leader will not have a sustained competitive advantage, even though the firm resource of a charismatic leader is probably rare and imperfectly imitable.其次，截然不同的公司资源也可以是战略替代品。例如，某公司的管理者可能因为公司内一位富有魅力的领导者而对公司的未来有非常清晰的视野（Zucker，1977）。竞争公司的管理者也可能对其公司的未来有非常清晰的视野，但这种共同的愿景可能反映了这些公司的系统性、全公司范围的战略规划过程（Pearce，Freeman，& Robinson，1987）。从拥有公司未来清晰愿景的管理者的角度来看，魅力型领导者的公司资源和正式规划系统的公司资源在战略上可能是等同的，因此可以相互替代。如果大量竞争公司拥有一个产生这种共同愿景的正式规划系统（或如果这种正式规划是高度可模仿的），那么即使魅力型领导者的公司资源可能是稀有且不完美可模仿的，拥有这种愿景的公司也不会拥有持续的竞争优势。

Of course, the strategic substitutability of firm resources is always a matter of degree. It is the case, however, that substitute firm resources need not have exactly the same implications for an organization in order for those resources to be equivalent from the point of view of the strategies that firms can conceive of and implement. If enough firms have these valuable substitute resources (i.e. they are not rare), or if enough firms can acquire them (i.e. they are imitable), then none of these firms (including firms whose resources are being substituted for) can expect to obtain a sustained competitive advantage.当然，企业资源的战略替代性始终是一个程度问题。然而，替代企业资源不必在其对组织的影响上完全相同，以便从企业所能构思和实施的战略角度来看，这些资源是等价的。如果足够多的企业拥有这些有价值的替代资源（即它们并不稀缺），或者如果足够多的企业能够获取这些资源（即它们是可模仿的），那么这些企业（包括那些其资源被替代的企业）都无法期待获得持续的竞争优势。

Applying the Framework 应用该框架 

The relationship between resource heterogeneity and immobility; value, rareness, imitability, and substitutability; and sustained competitive advantage is summarized in Figure Two. This framework can be applied in analyzing the potential of a broad range of firm resources to be sources of sustained competitive advantage. These analyses not only specify the theoretical conditions under which sustained competitive advantage might exist, they also suggest specific empirical questions that need to be addressed before the relationship between a particular firm resource and sustained competitive advantage can be understood. Three brief examples of how this framework might be applied are presented below.资源异质性与不动性之间的关系；价值、稀缺性、模仿性和可替代性；以及持续竞争优势在图二中进行了总结。该框架可用于分析广泛的公司资源在持续竞争优势中作为潜在来源的可能性。这些分析不仅明确了持续竞争优势存在的理论条件，还提出了在理解特定公司资源与持续竞争优势之间关系之前需要解决的具体实证问题。以下简要列出了该框架可能应用的三个示例。

Strategic Planning and Sustained Competitive Advantage战略规划与持续竞争优势

There is a large and growing literature on the ability of various strategic planning processes to generate competitive advantages for firms (Pearce, Freeman, & Robinson, 1987). Evaluating strategic planning as a firm resource may help resolve some of the conflicting results in this literature (Armstrong, 1982; Rhyne, 1986).关于各种战略规划过程为企业带来竞争优势的能力，有大量日益增长的文献（Pearce, Freeman, & Robinson, 1987）。将战略规划评估为企业资源可能有助于解决该文献中部分相互矛盾的结果（Armstrong, 1982; Rhyne, 1986）。

It seems reasonable to expect that formal strategic planning systems (Lorange, 1980) are unlikely by themselves to be a source of sustained competitive advantage. Even if these planning systems are valuable, in the sense that they enable firms to recognize opportunities and threats in their environment, there is empirical evidence that suggests that many firms engage in such formal planning exercises, and thus such planning mechanisms are not rare (Kudla, 1980; Steiner, 1979). Even if in a particular industry formal planning is rare, the formal planning process has been thoroughly described and documented in a wide variety of public sources (Steiner, 1979). Any firm interested in engaging in such formal planning can certainly learn how to do so, and thus formal planning seems likely to be highly imitable (Barney, 1989b). Thus, apart from substitutability considerations, formal strategic planning by itself is not likely to be a source of sustained competitive advantage.似乎合理地预期，正式的战略规划系统（Lorange，1980）不太可能单独成为持续竞争优势的来源。即使这些规划系统在某种程度上是有价值的，因为它们使公司能够识别环境中的机会和威胁，但有实证证据表明，许多公司参与这样的正式规划活动，因此这样的规划机制并不罕见（Kudla，1980；Steiner，1979）。即使在某个特定行业，正式规划是罕见的，正式规划过程在各种公共来源中已经被彻底描述和记录（Steiner，1979）。任何有兴趣参与这种正式规划的公司当然可以学习如何做到这一点，因此正式规划似乎很可能是高度可模仿的（Barney，1989b）。因此，除了可替代性考虑，正式战略规划本身不太可能成为持续竞争优势的来源。

This does not mean, however, that firms that engage in formal strategic planning will never obtain sustained competitive advantages. It may be that the formal planning system in a firm enables a firm to recognize and exploit other of its resources, and some of these resources might be sources of sustained competitive advantage. However, it is probably inappropriate to conclude that the sustained competitive advantages thus created reflect the formal planning process per se. Rather, the source of these advantages is almost certainly other resources controlled by a firm.然而，这并不意味着进行正式战略规划的公司就永远不会获得持续的竞争优势。正式的规划系统或许使公司能够识别和利用其其他资源，而这些资源中的某些可能是持续竞争优势的来源。然而，可能不适合得出这种创造的持续竞争优势反映正式规划过程本身的结论。相反，这些优势的来源几乎可以肯定是公司所控制的其他资源。

Of course, formal strategic planning is not the only way that firms choose their strategies. A variety of authors have described informal (Leontiades & Tezel, 1980), emergent (Mintzberg, 1978; Mintzberg & McHugh, 1985), and autonomous (Burgelman, 1983) processes by which firms choose their strategies. To the extent that these processes suggest valuable strategies for firms, they can be thought of as firm resources, and their potential for generating sustained competitive advantage can be evaluated by considering how rare, imperfectly imitable, and substitutable they are.当然，正式的战略规划并不是公司选择其战略的唯一方式。许多作者描述了公司选择其战略的非正式（Leontiades与Tezel，1980）、突现（Mintzberg，1978；Mintzberg与McHugh，1985）和自主（Burgelman，1983）过程。在这些过程暗示出有价值的公司战略的程度上，它们可以被视为公司资源，并且通过考虑它们的稀缺性、不可模仿性和可替代性，可以评估它们产生持续竞争优势的潜力。

Those who study these informal strategy-making processes tend to agree about their rareness and imitability. Although the rareness of these informal strategymaking processes is an empirical question, current research suggests that at least some firms attempt to prevent these informal processes from unfolding (Burgelman, 1983), or ignore the strategic insights they generate (Burgelman & Maidique, 1988). In industries where most current and potential competitors either prevent or ignore these informal processes, firms that understand their potential value may possess a rare strategic resource. Moreover, because these processes are socially complex (Mintzberg & McHugh, 1985), they are also likely to be imperfectly imitable.研究这些非正式战略制定过程的人们往往一致认为它们的稀有性和可模仿性。虽然这些非正式战略制定过程的稀有性是一个经验问题，但当前的研究表明，至少有一些公司试图阻止这些非正式过程的展开（Burgelman, 1983），或者忽视它们所产生的战略洞察（Burgelman & Maidique, 1988）。在大多数当前和潜在竞争对手要么阻止要么忽视这些非正式过程的行业中，理解其潜在价值的公司可能拥有一种稀有的战略资源。此外，由于这些过程具有社会复杂性（Mintzberg & McHugh, 1985），它们也可能是难以完美模仿的。

There is less agreement concerning possible substitutes for these informal strategy-making processes. On the one hand, some authors seem to suggest that formal planning mechanisms are strategic substitutes for informal, emergent, or autonomous processes (Pearce, Freeman, & Robinson, 1987). If this is true, because these formal processes are highly imitable, informal strategy making has a highly imitable substitute, and thus is not a source of sustained competitive advantage. On the other hand, others have argued that formal and informal strategy making are not substitutes for one another, that formal processes are effective in some settings and ineffective in others, that informal processes are effective where formal processes are not and are ineffective when formal processes are effective (Fredrickson, 1984; Fredrickson & Mitchell, 1984). If these processes are not substitutes for one another, and if the conditions of rareness and imperfect imitability hold, informal strategy-making processes may be a source of sustained competitive advantage. The question of the subtitutability of informal strategy making in firms needs to be resolved empirically before the impact of these firm resources on sustained competitive advantage can be fully understood.关于这些非正式战略制定过程的可能替代方案，意见分歧较大。一方面，一些作者似乎暗示正式规划机制是非正式、突现或自主过程的战略替代品（Pearce, Freeman, & Robinson, 1987）。如果这是真的，由于这些正式过程高度可模仿，非正式战略制定有一个高度可模仿的替代品，因此不构成持续竞争优势的来源。另一方面，其他人则争辩认为正式和非正式战略制定并不是彼此的替代品，正式过程在某些环境中有效，而在其他环境中无效，非正式过程在正式过程无效时有效，而在正式过程有效时无效（Fredrickson, 1984; Fredrickson & Mitchell, 1984）。如果这些过程不是彼此的替代品，并且稀缺性和不完全可模仿性的条件成立，非正式战略制定过程可能成为持续竞争优势的来源。企业中非正式战略制定的可替代性问题需要通过实证研究来解决，才能充分理解这些企业资源对持续竞争优势的影响。

Information Processing Systems and Sustained Competitive Advantage信息处理系统与持续竞争优势

There is also a growing literature that focuses on information processing systems and sustained competitive advantage (O’Brien, 1983). As with strategic planning, whether or not information processing systems are a source of sustained competitive advantage depends on the type of information processing system being analyzed. If seems very unlikely that computers (of any size, no matter how they are linked or networked) by themselves, can be a source of sustained competitive advantage (Hayes & Wheelwright, 1984). Machines, be they computers or other types of machines, are part of the physical technology of a firm, and usually can be purchased across markets (Barney, 1986a). Because the machines can be purchased, any strategy that exploits just the machines themselves is likely to be imitable and thus not a source of sustained competitive advantage.也有越来越多的文献关注信息处理系统和持续竞争优势（O’Brien, 1983）。与战略规划一样，信息处理系统是否是持续竞争优势的来源取决于所分析的信息处理系统的类型。计算机（无论大小，如何连接或网络）单独存在的情况下，似乎非常不可能成为持续竞争优势的来源（Hayes & Wheelwright, 1984）。机器，无论是计算机还是其他类型的机器，都是公司物理技术的一部分，通常可以在市场上购买（Barney, 1986a）。由于机器可以购买，任何仅仅利用机器本身的战略都可能是可模仿的，因此不构成持续竞争优势。

On the other hand, an information processing system that is deeply embedded in a firm’s informal and formal management decision-making process may hold the potential of sustained competitive advantage. Research seems to suggest that relatively few firms have been able to create this close manager-computer interface, and thus this kind of information processing system may be rare (Christie, 1985; Rasmussen, 1986). It is also a socially complex system, and thus will probably be imperfectly imitable.另一方面，深度融入企业非正式和正式管理决策过程的信息处理系统可能具有持续竞争优势的潜力。研究似乎表明，能创建这种紧密的管理者与计算机接口的公司相对较少，因此这种信息处理系统可能是稀有的（Christie, 1985; Rasmussen, 1986）。它也是一个社会复杂系统，因此可能会存在不完美可模仿的情况。

The question of possible substitutes for these complex machine-manager systems has not received as much attention in the literature. To specify possible strategic substitutes requires understanding what strategic benefits accrue to a firm that possesses a system where computers and managers are intimately linked. Any list of possible benefits might include an efficient flow of information among managers, the ability of consider large amounts of information quickly, and the ability to share this information efficiently (O’Brien, 1983). These same benefits might accrue to a firm with a closely knit, highly experienced management team, without an information management system (Hambrick, 1987). Thus, this type of management team may be a substitute for an information-processing system embedded in a firm’s informal and formal decision-making processes.这些复杂的机器管理系统可能的替代品在文献中并没有受到太多关注。要具体说明可能的战略替代品，需要理解拥有一个计算机与管理者紧密关联的系统的公司所获得的战略利益。任何可能的利益清单可能包括管理者之间高效的信息流动、快速考虑大量信息的能力以及有效分享这些信息的能力（O’Brien, 1983）。这些相同的利益也可能归属于拥有紧密团结、经验丰富的管理团队的公司，尽管没有信息管理系统（Hambrick, 1987）。因此，这种类型的管理团队可能是公司非正式和正式决策过程中的信息处理系统的替代品。

However, the existence of substitutes by itself does not mean that a particular firm resource cannot be a source of sustained competitive advantage. In addition, these substitutes have to be either not rare, or highly imitable, or both. Closely knit, highly experienced management teams for a particular set of competitors may be rare and, because they are socially complex, may be imperfectly imitable. If this is true, an embedded information-processing system may be a source of sustained competitive advantage, even if a close substitute for such a processing system (a close knit, highly experienced top management team) exists.然而，仅仅存在替代品并不意味着特定公司资源不能成为持续竞争优势的来源。此外，这些替代品要么不稀有，要么高度可模仿，或者两者兼而有之。对于特定竞争者的一组紧密结合、高度经验丰富的管理团队可能是稀有的，并且由于它们在社会上是复杂的，可能是无法完全模仿的。如果这一点是正确的，那么嵌入的信息处理系统可能成为持续竞争优势的来源，即使这种处理系统的紧密替代品（一个紧密结合、高度经验丰富的高层管理团队）存在。

Positive Reputations and Sustained Competitive Advantages积极声誉与持续竞争优势

Positive reputations of firms among customers and suppliers have also been cited as sources of competitive advantage in the literature (Porter, 1980). An application of the framework presented in Figure Two, again, suggests the conditions under which a firm’s positive reputation can be a source of sustained competitive advantage. If only a few competing firms have such reputations, then they are rare. In general, the development of a positive reputation usually depends upon specific, difficult-to-duplicate historical settings. To the extent that a particular firm’s positive reputation depends upon such historical incidents, it may be imperfectly imitable. In addition, positive firm reputations can be thought of as informal social relations between firms and key stakeholders (Klein & Leffler, 1981). Such informal relations are likely to be socially complex, and thus imperfectly imitable.公司在客户和供应商中积极的声誉在文献中也被认为是竞争优势的来源（波特，1980）。如图二所示的框架的一个应用，再次表明公司积极声誉可以成为持续竞争优势的条件。如果只有少数竞争公司拥有这样的声誉，那么它们就是稀有的。一般而言，积极声誉的发展通常取决于特定的、难以复制的历史环境。在某种程度上，如果一个特定公司的积极声誉依赖于这样的历史事件，那么它可能是无法完全模仿的。此外，积极的公司声誉可以被视为公司与关键利益相关者之间的非正式社会关系（Klein & Leffler，1981）。这样的非正式关系往往是社会复杂的，因此可能是无法完全模仿的。

The question of substitutes for a positive reputation is, again, more complicated. Some authors (Klein, Crawford, & Alchian, 1981) have suggested that rather than developing a positive reputation, firms may reassure their customers or suppliers through the use of guarantees and other long-term contracts. Thus, these guarantees substitute for a firm’s reputation. However, it is not clear that the implicit psychological contract between a firm and its stakeholders when a firm has a positive reputation is the same as the implicit psychological contract between a firm and its stakeholders when a firm uses guarantees for reassurance. If, in fact, reputation and guarantees are substitutes, why is it that some firms invest both in a positive reputation and guarantees? If these two firm resources are not substitutes, then a reputation (if it is rare and imperfectly imitable) may be a source of sustained competitive advantage.积极声誉的替代品问题再次变得更加复杂。一些作者（Klein, Crawford, & Alchian, 1981）建议，与其发展积极的声誉，企业可以通过使用保证和其他长期合同来安抚其客户或供应商。因此，这些保证替代了企业的声誉。然而，不清楚当企业拥有积极声誉时，企业与其利益相关者之间隐含的心理契约是否与企业使用保证进行安抚时的隐含心理契约相同。如果声誉和保证确实是替代品，那么为什么一些企业同时投资于积极声誉和保证？如果这两种企业资源不是替代品，那么声誉（如果它是稀有且不易模仿的）可能会成为持久竞争优势的来源。

Discussion 讨论 

The brief analyses of strategic planning, information processing, and a firm’s reputation among customers and suppliers and sustained competitive advantage are suggestive of the kinds of analyses that are possible with the framework presented in Figure Two. This framework suggests the kinds of empirical questions that need to be addressed in order to understand whether or not a particular firm resource is a source of sustained competitive advantage: is that resource valuable, is it rare, is it imperfectly imitable, and are there substitutes for that resource? This resource-based model of sustained competitive advantage also has a variety of implications for the relationship between strategic management theory and other business disciplines. Some of these implications are considered below.对战略规划、信息处理以及企业在客户和供应商中的声誉和持续竞争优势的简要分析，暗示了使用图二所呈现的框架可以进行的分析类型。该框架提示为了理解特定企业资源是否为持续竞争优势的来源，需要解决的实证问题：该资源是否有价值？该资源是否稀缺？该资源是否难以模仿？是否存在该资源的替代品？这种基于资源的持续竞争优势模型也对战略管理理论与其他商业学科之间的关系具有多种启示。以下考虑其中的一些启示。

Sustained Competitive Advantage and Social Welfare持续竞争优势与社会福利

The model presented here addresses important social welfare issues linked with strategic management research. Most authors agree that the original purpose of the structure-conduct-performance paradigm in industrial organization economics was to isolate violations of the perfectly competitive model, to address these violations in order to restore the social welfare benefits of perfectly competitive industries (Barney, 1986c; Porter, 1981). As applied by strategy theorists focusing on environmental determinants of firm performance, social welfare concerns were abandoned in favor of the creation of imperfectly competitive industries within which a particular firm could gain a competitive advantage (Porter, 1980). At best, this approach to strategic analysis ignores social welfare concerns. At worst, this approach focuses on activities that firms can engage in that will almost certainly reduce social welfare (Hirshliefer, 1980),此处提出的模型涉及战略管理研究中与社会福利相关的重要问题。大多数作者同意，工业组织经济学中结构-行为-绩效范式的最初目的是为了隔离对完全竞争模型的违反，以解决这些违反问题，从而恢复完全竞争行业的社会福利效益（Barney, 1986c；Porter, 1981）。战略理论家在关注企业绩效的环境决定因素时，社会福利的关注被抛弃，转而创造一种特定企业可以获得竞争优势的不完全竞争行业（Porter, 1980）。在最好的情况下，这种战略分析方法忽视了社会福利的关注；在最糟糕的情况下，这种方法则集中于企业可能参与的几乎肯定会减少社会福利的活动（Hirshliefer, 1980）。

The resource-based model developed here suggests that, in fact, strategic management research can be perfectly consistent with traditional social welfare concerns of economists. Beginning with the assumptions that firm resources are heterogeneous and immobile, it follows that a firm that exploits its resource advantages is simply behaving in an efficient and effective manner (Demsetz, 1973). To fail to exploit these resource advantages is inefficient and does not maximize social welfare. In this sense, the higher levels of performance that accrue to a firm with resource advantages are due to the efficiency of these firms in exploiting those advantages, rather than to the efforts of firms to create imperfectly competitive conditions in a way that fails to maximize social welfare. These profits, in a sense, can be thought of as “efficiency rents” (Demsetz, 1973) as opposed to “monopoly rents” (Scherer, 1980).在这里提出的基于资源的模型表明，实际上，战略管理研究可以与经济学家传统的社会福利关切完美一致。从公司资源异质且不易流动的假设出发，得出的结论是，利用其资源优势的公司仅仅是以高效和有效的方式行事（Demsetz, 1973）。未能利用这些资源优势是不高效的，并且没有最大化社会福利。从这个意义上说，因资源优势而获得的更高绩效水平是因为这些公司在利用这些优势方面的效率，而不是因为公司为了在未能最大化社会福利的情况下创造不完全竞争条件所做的努力。这些利润在某种意义上可以被视为“效率租金”（Demsetz, 1973），而不是“垄断租金”（Scherer, 1980）。

Sustained Competitive Advantage and Organization Theory and Behavior持续竞争优势与组织理论和行为

Recently, a variety of authors have suggested that economic models of organizational phenomena fundamentally contradict models of organizations based in organization theory or organizational behavior (Donaldson, 1990a, 1990b; Perrow, 1986). This assertion is fundamentally contradicted by the resource-based model of sustained competitive advantage (Barney, 1990). This model suggests that sources of sustained competitive advantage are firm resources that are valuable, rare, imperfectly imitable, and non-substitutable. These resources include a broad range of organizational, social, and individual phenomena within firms that are the subject of a great deal of research in organization theory and organizational behavior (Daft, 1983). Rather than being contradictory, the resource-based model of strategic management suggests that organization theory and organizational behavior may be a rich source of findings and theories concerning rare, non-imitable, and non-substitutable resources in firms. Indeed, a resource-based model of sustained competitive advantage anticipates a more intimate integration of the organizational and the economic as a way to study sustained competitive advantage.最近，一些作者建议，经济模型与基于组织理论或组织行为的组织模型之间存在根本矛盾（Donaldson, 1990a, 1990b; Perrow, 1986）。这一断言与基于资源的持续竞争优势模型（Barney, 1990）相矛盾。该模型认为，持续竞争优势的来源是那些有价值、稀缺、不易模仿和不可替代的企业资源。这些资源包括企业内部广泛的组织、社会和个体现象，已成为组织理论和组织行为领域大量研究的主题（Daft, 1983）。基于资源的战略管理模型并不矛盾，而是表明组织理论和组织行为可能是有关企业中稀有、不可模仿和不可替代资源的重要发现和理论的丰富来源。实际上，基于资源的持续竞争优势模型预见了组织与经济的更紧密整合，作为研究持续竞争优势的一种方式。

Firm Endowments and Sustained Competitive Advantage固定赋予与持续竞争优势

Finally, the model presented here emphasizes the importance of what might be called firm resource endowments in creating sustained competitive advantages. Implicit in this model is the assumption that managers are limited in their ability to manipulate all the attributes and characteristics of their firms (Barney & Tyler, 1991). It is this limitation that makes some firm resources imperfectly imitable, and thus potentially sources of sustained competitive advantage. Thus, the study of sustained competitive advantage depends, in a critical way, on the resource endowments controlled by a firm.最后，这里提出的模型强调了所谓的企业资源禀赋在创造持续竞争优势中的重要性。这个模型隐含的假设是，管理者在操控其企业的所有属性和特征的能力上是有限的（Barney & Tyler, 1991）。正是这种限制使得某些公司资源无法被模仿，因此有可能成为持续竞争优势的来源。因此，对持续竞争优势的研究在关键上依赖于企业所控制的资源禀赋。

That the study of sources of sustained competitive advantage focuses on valuable, rare, imperfectly imitable, and non-substitutable resource endowments does not suggest—as some population ecologists would have it (e.g., Hannan & Freeman, 1977)— that managers are irrelevant in the study of such advantages. In fact, managers are important in this model, for it is managers that are able to understand and describe the economic performance potential of a firm’s endowments. Without such managerial analyses, sustained competitive advantage is not likely. This is the case even though the skills needed to describe the rare, imperfectly imitable, and non-substitutable resources of a firm may themselves not be rare, imperfectly imitable, or non-substitutable.持续竞争优势来源的研究聚焦于有价值、稀缺、无法完美模仿和不可替代的资源禀赋，并不意味着——正如一些生态学家所认为的那样（例如，Hannan & Freeman, 1977）——管理者在这种优势的研究中是无关紧要的。实际上，管理者在这个模型中是重要的，因为管理者能够理解和描述企业禀赋的经济绩效潜力。如果没有这样的管理分析，持续竞争优势是 unlikely 的。尽管描述企业稀缺、无法完美模仿和不可替代资源所需的技能本身可能并不稀缺、无法完美模仿或不可替代。

Indeed, it may be the case that a manager or a managerial team is a firm resource that has the potential for generating sustained competitive advantages. The conditions under which this will be the case can be outlined using the framework presented in Figure Two. However, in the end, what becomes clear is that firms cannot expect to “purchase” sustained competitive advantages on open markets (Barney, 1986a, 1988; Wernerfelt, 1989). Rather, such advantages must be found in the rare, imperfectly imitable, and non-substitutable resources already controlled by a firm (Dierickx & Cool, 1989).事实上，管理者或管理团队可能成为一种企业资源，有潜力生成持续的竞争优势。可以使用图二中展示的框架概述此情况发生的条件。然而，最终明显的是，企业不能指望在公开市场上“购买”持续的竞争优势（Barney, 1986a, 1988；Wernerfelt, 1989）。相反，这种优势必须存在于企业已经掌握的稀有、不完全可模仿和不可替代的资源中（Dierickx & Cool, 1989）。