Competitive Advantage is the result of better use of available Resources.
NOTE: In this article “Resources” picks up Infrastructure plus Renewal Resources plus Non-Renewal Resources.
The range of Resources for any corporation can include:
Capital, Access to Capital, Land, Equipment, Tools, Premises, Staff, Current Products/Services, Products / Services Under Development, Projects Awaiting Approval, Technology Trends, Changing Legislation, Competitors.
We know from RBV (Resource Based View) that corporations that are able to “view” all of their Resources tend to make better decisions re building up a proper mix of initiatives that draw on these resources (i.e. avoid high risk / low return initiatives; avoid initiatives that tie up key resources for too long a period of time; terminate or cancel initiatives that are non-performing).
Clearly, Operations needs to put a dual focus on work that advances the state of initiatives and work that is supportive of ongoing initiatives (i.e. maintaining compliance with external rules and regulations).
A problem arises when Operations puts too sharp a focus on, for example, processes.
There is no direct path between “continuous process improvement” and success from the implementation of corporate initiatives. Whereas process improvement impacts efficiency, it only impacts effectiveness marginally.
The direct path from work to competitive advantage is as detailed below:
It’s not that difficult for an organization to transition to this model.
1.
Actors who perform the work and oversee the progress of work need a workspace (commonly called “Case”).
2.
The workspace must have an undercurrent comprising
- orchestration from background BPM,
- governance at the Case\Initiative level,
- workload management i.e. RALB (Resource Allocation, Leveling, Balancing)
- non-subjective assessment of progress toward meeting goals/objectives i.e. FOMM (Figure of Merit Matrices).
See some 300+ articles on the importance of orchestration from workflows, governance, workload management and non-subjective approaches to decision – making for both strategy development, and for achievement of operational efficiency and effectiveness
https://kwkeirstead.wordpress.com/
Photo Credit:
benwhitephotography
KWKeirstead's Blog 
A very good observation, Karl. However, considering what technology has done to business for the last few years, I would outline that _having_ resources is not enough anymore. YOur competitve advantage will not vanish if you take care of nedded resources available in the marker, tomorrow, in a month, in a year. A compatitve advantage capability is the one that is based on the planning for the future resources and/or planning for funding for those resources looking ahead. The compatitve advantage will be in your ability to re-compose resources (your own AND leased from the market) faster than your competitors can.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Hi, Michael. . . Nice to hear from you.
I fully agree that a narrow focus on existing internal resources is limiting – my list of “resources” includes “capital” and “access to capital” allowing a corporation to acquire/retain/use/divest to the extent it wishes.
And, speed, is indeed important because corporations can easily have great ideas-in-progress only to be leapfrogged by competitors who are agile, fast and able to bring into the marketplace highly disruptive technologies.
LikeLike