Abstract
Strategy theorists share (1) the view that the strategic imperative of a firm should be sustained, superior financial performance and (2) the belief that this goal can be achieved through a sustainable competitive advantage in the marketplace. Neoclassical perfect competition and traditional industrial organization economics, however, imply that the sustained performance goal advocated by strategy theorists is anticompetitive and its achievement presumptively detrimental to social welfare. This article addresses the strategy-is-anticompetitive thesis with the goal of grounding strategy in a theory of competition— resource-advantage theory—that does not imply that the strategic imperative and its achievement are presumptively anticompetitive and antisocial. As such, this article initiates a discussion of the public policy implications of resource-advantage theory.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
