The resource-based view of the firm in two enviroments: The Hollywood film studios from 1936 to 1965

Headnote

This article continues to operationally define and test the resourcebased view of the firm in a study of the major U.S. film studios from 1936 to 1965. We found that property-based resources in the form of exclusive long-term contracts with stars and theaters helped financial performance in the stable, predictable environment of 1936-50. In contrast, knowledge-based resources in the form of production and coordinative talent and budgets boosted financial performance in the more uncertain (changing and unpredictable) post-television environment of 1951-65.

The resource-based view of the firm provides a useful complement to Porter's (1980) well-known structural perspective of strategy. This view shifts the emphasis from the competitive environment of firms to the resources that firms have developed to compete in that environment. Unfortunately, although it has generated a great deal of conceptualizing (see reviews by Black and Boal [1994] and Peteraf [1993]), the resource-based view is just beginning to occasion systematic empirical study (Collis,1991; Henderson & Cockburn, 1994; Montgomery & Wernerfelt, 1988; McGrath, MacMillan, & Venkatraman, 1995). Thus, the concept of resources remains an amorphous one that is rarely operationally defined or tested for its performance implications in different competitive environments.

In the interests of testing and advancing the application of the resourcebased view, this research develops the distinction between property-based and knowledge-based resources. We argue that the former are likely to contribute most to performance in stable and predictable settings, whereas the latter will be of the greatest utility in uncertain-that is, changing and unpredictable-environments (Miller,1988; Thompson,1967). Indeed, in this article we attempt to move from a resource-based "view" toward a "theory" by progressing from description to testable prediction. A view is a product of evocative description, but theory demands the formulation of falsifiable propositions.

THE NATURE OF RESOURCES

According to Wernerfelt, resources can include "anything that might be thought of as a strength or weakness of a given firm" and so "could be defined as those [tangible and intangible assets] which are tied semipermanently to the firm" (1984: 172). Resources are said to confer enduring competitive advantages to a firm to the extent that they are rare or hard to imitate, have no direct substitutes, and enable companies to pursue opportunities or avoid threats (Barney, 1991). The last attribute is the most...