Russell Coff

Bio: Russell Coff is an academic researcher from University of Wisconsin-Madison. The author has contributed to research in topics: Human capital & Competitive advantage. The author has an hindex of 27, co-authored 61 publications receiving 7335 citations. Previous affiliations of Russell Coff include Washington University in St. Louis & Emory University.

Human Assets and Management Dilemmas: Coping With Hazards On the Road to Resource-Based Theory

Abstract: Resource-based theorists argue that human assets can be a source of sustainable advantage because tacit knowledge and social complexity are hard to imitate. However, these desirable attributes cause dilemmas that may prevent firms from generating an advantage. This article develops a framework for analyzing and coping with these challenges. Although the problem arises from the strategy literature, the solutions are drawn from the organizational behavior, human resource management, human capital, and professions literatures. Finally, I examine implications for how insights from these diverse literatures can be integrated to guide future strategy research.

When Competitive Advantage Doesn't Lead to Performance: The Resource-Based View and Stakeholder Bargaining Power

Abstract: Most theories of competitive advantage seek to explain rent capture at the firm level but ignore which internal stakeholders will appropriate this rent. For example, IO economics focuses on market structure and the resource-based view focuses on unique firm-level capabilities that rivals cannot imitate or acquire. As researchers apply these frameworks, they either: 1) assume rent is captured by shareholders, 2) treat within-firm rent appropriation exogenously, or 3) ignore internal rent appropriation altogether. However, internal rent appropriation determines how much of the rent will be observable in measures of firm performance and is therefore central to empirical research focused on firm performance. What if rent from a competitive advantage is appropriated internally so it cannot be observed in performance measures? The resource-based view was not formulated to examine who will get the rent. Yet, this essay argues that the factors leading to a resource-based advantage also predict who will appropriate rent. Knowledge-based assets are promising as a source of sustainable advantage because firm-specificity, social complexity and causal ambiguity make them hard for rivals to imitate. Accordingly, these strong roles for internal stakeholders may grant them a great deal of bargaining power especially relative to investors who contribute the most fungible of all resources. This article integrates the resource-based view with the bargaining power literature by defining the firm as a nexus of contracts. This lens can help to explain when rent will be generated and, simultaneously, who will appropriate it. In doing so, it provides a more robust theory of firm performance than the resource-based view alone. This lens might also be useful for examining other theories of firm performance.

When Competitive Advantage Doesn't Lead to Performance: the Resource-Based View and Stakeholder Bargaining Power

Abstract: What if rent from a competitive advantage is appropriated so it cannot be observed in performance measures? The resourcebased view was not formulated to examine who will get the rent. Yet, this essay argues that the factors leading to a resource based advantage also predict who will appropriate rent. Knowledge-based assets are promising because firm-specificity, social complexity, and causal ambiguity make them hard to imit ate. However, the roles of internal stakeholders may grant them a great deal of bargaining power especially relative to investors. This essay integrates the resource-based view with the bargaining power literature by defining the firm as a nexus of contracts. This new lens can help to explain when rent will be generated and, simultaneously, who will appropriate it. In doing so, it provides a more robust theory of firm performance than the resource-based view alone. It is also suggested that this lens might be useful for examining other theories of firm performance.

Rethinking Sustained Competitive Advantage from Human Capital

Abstract: The strategy literature often emphasizes firm-specific human capital as a source of competitive advantage based on the assumption that it constrains employee mobility. We first identify three boundary conditions that limit the applicability of this logic. We then offer a more comprehensive framework of human capital–based advantage that explores both demand- and supply-side mobility constraints. The critical insight is that these mobility constraints have more explanatory power than the firm specificity of human capital.

Dynamic Capabilities, Social Capital, and Rent Appropriation: Ties that Split Pies

Abstract: Rent appropriation is an emerging area in the strategic management literature. Along these lines, the article explores who reaps the fruits of a dynamic capability. We argue that while social capital is essential for the acquisition, integration, and release of resources at the core of a dynamic capability, actors can also use social capital for personal gain. Thus, social capital may be a key to understanding both rent generation and rent appropriation. Even when causal ambiguity obscures individual contributions, they may use their social capital to establish credible claims on the rent. Specifically, employees who occupy structural holes, span organizational boundaries, or who are highly central may be most able to appropriate rent because their social capital grants credibility to their claims. Rent that is appropriated in this way may be unobservable in performance measures that fail to distinguish normal compensation from rent. We contribute by identifying the specific role of social capital in a dynamic capability and linking social capital to rent appropriation patterns.

Is the Resource-Based “View” a Useful Perspective for Strategic Management Research?

Abstract: As a potential theory, the elemental resource-based view (RBV) is not currently a theoretical structure. Moreover, RBV proponents have assumed stability in product markets and eschewed determining resources' values. As a perspective for strategic management, imprecise definitions hinder prescription and static approaches relegate causality to a “black box.” We outline conceptual challenges for improving this situation, including rigorously formalizing the RBV, answering the causal “how” questions, incorporating the temporal component, and integrating the RBV with demand heterogeneity models.

The Influence of Intellectual Capital on the Types of Innovative Capabilities

Abstract: We examined how aspects of intellectual capital influenced various innovative capabilities in organizations. In a longitudinal, multiple-informant study of 93 organizations, we found that human, organizational, and social capital and their interrelationships selectively influenced incremental and radical innovative capabilities. As anticipated, organizational capital positively influenced incremental innovative capability, while human capital interacted with social capital to positively influence radical innovative capability. Counter to our expectations, however, human capital by itself was negatively associated with radical innovative capability. Interestingly, social capital played a significant role in both types of innovation, as it positively influenced incremental and radical innovative capabilities. It is widely accepted that an organization’s capability to innovate is closely tied to its intellectual capital, or its ability to utilize its knowledge resources. Several studies have underscored how new products embody organizational knowledge (e.g., Stewart, 1997), described innovation as a

Managing Firm Resources in Dynamic Environments to Create Value: Looking Inside the Black Box

Abstract: We address current criticisms of the RBV (oversight of dynamism, environmental contingencies, and managers' role) by linking value creation in dynamic environmental contexts to the management of firm resources. Components of the resource management model include structuring the resource portfolio; bundling resources to build capabilities; and leveraging capabilities to provide value to customers, gain a competitive advantage, and create wealth for owners. Propositions linking resource management and value creation are offered to shape future research.