A firm’s resource is rare because demand for it is low. Which conclusion best reflects RBV logic?

Question

BlackTom AI · Accepted Answer

Under RBV, competitive advantage requires resources to be not only rare but also valuable (alongside inimitability and non-substitutability), so rarity alone cannot generate advantage if demand — and thus value — is low.

1. Relevant concepts:
- Resource-Based View (RBV/VRIN or VRIO): a resource must be Valuable, Rare, Inimitable, and Non-substitutable (or Valuable, Rare, Organized to capture value) to yield sustained competitive advantage.
- Value: ability of a resource to enable a firm to exploit opportunities or neutralize threats (often reflected by market demand or cost savings).
- Rarity: scarcity relative to competitors; only matters if the resource produces value.

2. Step-by-step reasoning:
- Premise: the resource is rare.
- Observation: demand for the resource is low, meaning the resource does not enable profitable opportunities or address market needs — it lacks value.
- RBV logic: rarity amplifies advantage only when combined with value. Without value, competitors cannot be kept from achieving superior performance because the resource doesn’t affect rents or market position.
- Therefore: a rare but non-valuable resource yields no competitive advantage.

3. Intermediate points (no numeric calculations needed):
- Example: a unique manufacturing capability for a product with no buyers is scarce but worthless; it cannot drive profits.
- Potential counterpoint: if future demand rises the resource could become valuable, but RBV assesses current strategic value; future potential does not change the present conclusion.

4. Why the correct answer is correct:
- The statement "Rarity without value provides no advantage" directly reflects RBV’s requirement that value is necessary; rarity alone is insufficient.

5. Why other likely alternatives are incorrect:
- "Rarity alone gives an advantage" is incorrect because without value there’s nothing to exploit.
- "Inimitability or organization alone suffices" is incorrect because a non-valuable resource still won’t generate returns even if inimitable or well-organized.
- "Scarcity automatically creates demand" is incorrect when demand is already low.

Conclusion: The correct RBV-based conclusion is "Rarity without value provides no advantage," matching the provided answer.

A firm’s resource is rare because demand for it is low. Which conclusion best reflects RBV logic?单项选择题

类似问题

Question at position 27 Firm X possesses valuable resources that are neither rare nor costly to imitate. What is the most likely outcome for Firm X?sustained competitive advantagecompetitive paritycompetitive disadvantagetemporary advantage

Over time, a resource of the Fast & Furious movies included off screen drama. This resource is: Access PDF Here: Click to open: Download Fast & Furious & Way Less Expensive. A Star Film Franchise Gets a Reality Check. - WSJ.pdf Manage Alternates

Over time, the resources of the Fast & Furious movies changed to include , which are __. Access PDF Here: Click to open: Download Fast & Furious & Way Less Expensive. A Star Film Franchise Gets a Reality Check. - WSJ.pdf Manage Alternates

Competitive parity exists when a resource is:

According to the resource-based view, there is a growing trend showing that a firm’s competitive advantage often stems from its

更多留学生实用工具

智能学习助手

风格化写作助手

论文查重助手

文献引用助手

课堂转译助手

课堂笔记助手

Quiz搜索助手

学校历年真题

智能刷题助手

智能匹配练习

希望你的学习变得更简单