Content area
Full Text
Keywords
Core competences, Surveys, Manufacturing, Competitive manufacturing
Abstract
A postal survey to manufacturing managers in six different industry sectors was conducted to ascertain their views on core competencies. Questions deemed important by the literature centred on establishing the level of understanding the manufacturing managers had on core competence and ascertaining if they operated in an environment where core competence could be built and enhanced. Their views were contrasted with those expressed in the current literature and it was concluded that manufacturing managers need to increase their knowledge and understanding of core competencies. To be more competitive they need to operate more in an outward/strategy driven way and develop a stategic architecture to enable their organisation to develop the necessary core competencies.Of the six manufacturing industries surveyed the machinery producers emerged as the strongest advocators for core competence development with the food indsutry having the least orientation towards their devleopmemnt. To assist in core competence management an Enabling core competence lens model was presented together with a framework for core competence maintenance.
Introduction
The term "core competence" emerged on the management scene by the advocators of this concept, Hamel and Prahalad, in their ground breaking paper, "The core competence of the corporation", (1990). Since then Canon, Kodak, 3M, Sony, Honda, Sharp and NEC and other organisations small and large, nationally and internationally, have been pursuing the route to gain core competence.
Core competencies are built on individual intangible or groups of intangible assets that constitute and embody the organisation's capabilities, skills, knowledge, experience, people, resources and intellectual property. Core competencies cannot be easily duplicated by competitors; however they also would be difficult to replace if a company found them destroyed or damaged. They are the source of the company's ability to deliver unique value to its customers. They are not to be mistaken with "leading-edge technologies", "world-class processes", or other "production-driven" definitions of distinctiveness. They are flexible enough to straddle a variety of business functions, or product family technologies and they are not tied to existing ways of doing business but are platforms for growth and stimuli for growth (Harvey and Lusch, 1997). They also define the unique opportunity set available to the firm, being those market openings or knowledge gaps that the company...