Ruan Carlos dos Santos
Faculdade São Luiz; Uniasselvi; Unilas; Unicesumar, Brazil
E-mail: ruan_santos1984@hotmail.com
Thais Helena Moreira Pinho
Faculdade Luciano Feijão-FLF; Centro Social Clodoveu
Arruda - CSCA, Brazil
E-mail: thaismoreiracontabilidade@hotmail.com
Submission: 2/14/2019
Revision: 3/20/2019
Accept: 3/28/2019
ABSTRACT
The
understanding of competitive advantages is one of the major theoretical
questions in strategy research. It is known that strategic resources generate
competitive advantage and that the disclosure of strategic information in a
transparent way, mainly of resources, values the organization for investors
and works as an attraction. Within this context, it was analyzed whether the
dissemination of strategic resources influences the performance of
organizations. Twenty companies from the São Paulo Stock Exchange of the most
profitable sector of B3 from 2010 to 2018 were part of the analysis. A
qualitative approach is adopted through a detailed analysis of the strategic
resources of the Reference Forms. This analysis was carried out with the aid of
Atlas TI software. After this step the number of disclosure of strategic resources
was compared with the performance measured by ROE. The study contributes to the
evolution of strategy research in relation to RBV and Theory of Disclosure and,
as a practical contribution, to assist in the strategic choice of disclosed
information. It was concluded that the disclosure of strategic resources does
not influence the performance of the sample companies. Companies choose to
disclose what is advantageous and do not consider it advantageous to disclose
strategic resources because there is a greater risk of competitors copying
their strategy of resources.
Keywords: Competitive Advantage; RBV; Disclosure
of information; Performance
1. INTRODUCTION
Competitive advantage can be considered the achievement of superior
results above the average of the competitors as a result of the strategies
adopted by the organization (VASCONCELOS; CYRINO, 2000). Carvalho, Kayo and
Martin (2010) affirm that the term competitive advantage, although it is used
in the economy as well as in strategy and administration in general, does not
present a clear definition, although there is an area of intersection between
value creation and superior performance of companies.
Given the above, the greatest challenge for managers is to maintain
competitive advantage in a turbulent and highly competitive market in which
strategies can contribute to advances for a short period of time, but in order
to overcome this challenge, executives and researchers seek to understand the
causes that lead certain companies to be more competitive than the others and
obtain better results (OYADOMARI et al., 2009).
Penrose (2009) sought to explain the company's growth and the role of
resources in this progress, as the company assumes an economic role by
acquiring and organizing resources in a cost-effective way. Beuren
and Marcello (2016) consider strategic resources essential for an organization
to gain competitive advantage.
One of the difficulties in identifying and evaluating the resources of
an organization is the lack of quality of the management information systems
when presenting resources separately and incompletely. One example is the
Balance Sheet when it highlights resources inefficiently and underestimates and
capacities (GRANT, 1991).
In order to ensure better use of information, companies should follow
the guidelines of Garllon and Beuren
(2009): to provide information that allows stakeholders, managers and investors
to understand and evaluate the company's activities through qualitative and
quantitative data.
The disclosure of strategic information values organizations in the
capital market. For this reason, it relies on the Theory of Disclosure for
dealing with the disclosure of accounting data (BEUREN; ANGONESE, 2015) from
various expectations. In order to add to the strategy research, the idea
developed in this study is to analyze how the disclosure of organizational
resources influences the performance of the sample companies by means of the
detailed analysis of their Reference Forms. In order to obtain a satisfactory
and useful result for other organizations, the strategy was generally approached,
the RBV with an emphasis on the resources studied by Barney and the Theory of
Disclosure by Verrecchia (1983) and Dye (1985).
Based on Serra's studies, Ferreira, Pereira and Lissoni
(2017) analyzed the last 10 years of articles published in EnANPAD
(Meeting of the National Association of Graduate Studies and Research in
Administration), highlighting some points in relation to the evolution of a
strategy study with a RBV approach in Brazil and propose an agenda that can
guide future research.
They note a tendency for case studies, more empirical than purely
theoretical. They are part of the theoretical research agenda associated with
RBV, core competency, dynamic capabilities, knowledge management and RBV
relation with other theoretical approaches. The present work intends to fill
the last research gap recommended by these authors.
In view of this context, the question that directs the present research
whose objective is to satisfy the following question is formulated: The
disclosure of strategic organizational resources influences the performance of
the companies of the most profitable sector listed in B3 in the two years of
greatest performance between 2010 to 2018 Brazil has been negotiating large
amounts of resources in other countries and, in order to demonstrate its
attractiveness, the number of financial disclosures, responsibilities and
ethical behavior of the companies (FORTE; SANTOS-NETO; NOBRE; DE-QUEIROZ, 2016)
has increased in this way the Brazilian capital market is recognized worldwide as
one of the most important and presented a great evolution in the volume of
shares traded in Brazil, from 1.21% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) in 1990 to
43.15% in 2010, fourth place in the world in market value (ARANHA et al.,
2016). In this way, companies, mainly publicly-held companies, offer the
largest possible information, with content referring to current and future
businesses (ANGONESE et al., 2014). Still, B3 has encouraged the strengthening
of good practices, providing useful and predictive information, by increasing
transparency and good corporate governance practices (DONÁ et al., 2015).
The theoretical contributions of this work are aimed at the evolution of
strategy research from the viewpoint of the RBV, considering the theoretical
framework that best clarifies the superior sustainable performance of companies
(BARNEY, 1995; SALAZAR, 2015) for better use of the Theory of Disclosure
(VERRECCHIA, 1983; DYE, 1985) and the achievement of a growing organizational
performance.
The practical contributions directly focus on the performance of
organizations, which seek incessantly better results and are made up of
resources, but need to disclose them strategically with quality to be
identified and evaluated, with the aim of increasing performance, as well as
contributing to business practice in the choice of information to be disclosed.
Therefore, Aragon and Cavalcante (2014) show
the importance of the behavior of Brazilian companies in relation to completing
the Reference Form, analyze the quality of information and practices in the
conduct of business and verify compliance with the requirements of Instruction Comissão de Valores Mobiliários (ICVM) n. 480/2009.
2. LITERATURE REVISION
2.1.
Strategy
Building a strategy means choosing a particular course of action, based
on information and data conferencing on the threats and opportunities of the
organizational environment (MACHADO-DA-SILVA et al., 1999). Developing
strategies is fundamental for any organization (BESANKO et al., 2009). Several
of the theoretical approaches that deal with strategy include Penrose (1959),
Porter (1980), Dierickx and Cool (1989), Barney
(1991), Grant (1991), Peteraf (1993), Collis and
Montgomery (1995), Mintzberg (2000), each with its
vision in an attempt to innovate and improve business performance, since the
depth of strategic knowledge is as important as its size (BESANKO et al.,
2009).
Hoskirson et. al. (1999)
questions whether strategic management has reverted to its origins as a
pendulum swing. It analyzes the main theories, strategic management issues and
methods used in each phase and divides the study of the strategy into five
moments: early development aimed at the internal vision of the company;
oscillation towards the economy of industrial organization as early intermediate
theories; oscillation back to the company: organizational economics as
intermediate theories; back to the starting point, the resource-based view -
RBV as current theories. This study discusses the future directions of this
constantly evolving research theme, challenged by technological and global
dynamics to meet the needs of executives. Finally, it concludes that the
oscillations deepen the domain of the strategic area and its evolution is a
consequence for the next centuries.
For this reason, strategy studies aim to identify how organizations
achieve and maintain competitive advantages (TEECE et al., 1997). Coff (1999) raises the question about competitive advantage
does not mean superior performance, the expression is linked to the creation of
value, which differentiates it from superior performance. For organizations,
strategy is the combination of internal resources, skills, opportunities and
risks created by the external environment (GRANT, 1991).
While the majority of the application of strategy theories aims at
factors external to the organization, the RBV initially aims at internal
factors, trying to understand how the assets are attracted, absorbed,
associated and used or provided to the organizational environment. Comparing
the idea of Porter (1999), which understands the organization in the field of
competitive strategy as a package or set of activities, the RBV understands as
a set of exclusive resources (SPANO; LIOUKAS, 2001). For Barney (1991) one of
the best ways to create an organizational strategy, whose objective is the
achievement of competitive advantage, is to know the internal resources of the
company to better use them, scenario proposed by the RBV.
2.2.
RBV -
Resource-Based Theory
One of the most important theoretical currents of the studies developed
in strategy is the RBV, because it is adapted to several situations in which
the main resources and key factors are determinant for the performance of an
organization (CARVALHO et al, 2012). Its origin comes from the studies in
strategy, whose initial mark is the research realized by Penrose (1959), with
the idea that the limit of the growth of the company is better related with the
internal resources than with the market, and the way these resources are used
is the singularity of the company (RIBEIRO et al, 2011).
Barney (1991) classifies internal resources into four categories:
physical resources, financial resources, human resources, and organizational
resources. In the understanding of Oyadomari et al.
(2009), internal resources encompass assets, capacities, information, knowledge
and processes that contribute positively to organizational efficiency and
effectiveness.
Most of the methods of sustaining competitive advantage in the RBV
approach have their origin in four key conditions described by Peter (1993): a)
heterogeneity: different resources lead companies to different results, without
these differences there is no competitive advantage; b) ex-ante competition
limits: the financial return that an asset brings to the company has to be advantageous
compared to the acquisition value; c) limits for ex-post competition: there
must be exclusivity of valuable assets so that competitors cannot achieve the
results achieved through these resources; d) imperfect mobility: the value of
these assets is associated with the creation and combination of resources
versus identity of the specific organization, which can result in other firms
results quite different.
Barney (1991) put the resources in the VRIS model (valuable, rare,
inimitable and non-replaceable) and in 2007 he perfected his ideas with the
VRIO model (valuable, rare, inimitable and organizable).
This change occurred by the perception that the inimitable characteristic was
confused with the non-replaceable, one was inserted in the other. The 2007
model is the practical application of the theory (GONÇALVES et al, 2014).
Researches such as Beuren and Marcello (2016)
reinforce that VRIO resources are essential elements of the strategy. Gonçalves, Coelho and Souza (2014) presented a theoretical
discussion between RBV evolution with Barney (1991) and Resource Based Theory
(RBT) with Barney and Clark (2007). Table 1 systematizes a comparison of
Barney's works.
Table 1: Comparison
between VRIS and VRIO
Characteristics of resource |
BARNEY, 1991 VRIS |
BARNEY; CLARK, 2007 VRIO |
FOCUS |
In the source strategy of a value resource |
In the resource itself and in the ability to allow
external effects to be exploited or neutralized |
VALUE |
They are the resources that enable the company to
adopt a strategy that improves its efficiency and effectiveness. |
It is the resources and capabilities that enable the company to seize
opportunities or neutralize external threats. |
RARE |
If the resource has value and many companies own it
is not a source of competitive advantage |
If the resource or capacity is controlled by many
companies in the same industry, it is rarely a source of competitive
advantage. |
INIMITABLE |
Valuable and rare resource is only a source of
competitive advantage if imitation is not possible. |
Valuable and rare resources are only a source of
sustainable competitive advantage if the cost to obtain or develop is too
high to make it difficult for competitors to have such a resource. |
SUBSTITUTABILITY |
When it is not possible to imitate the resource of a
company, it is possible to replace it with another |
In VRIO was considered as a member of INIMITABLE |
ORGANIZABLE |
Not
considered in VRIS |
In addition to possessing valuable resources and
capabilities, rare, without limitation, the company organized. |
Source: Adapted from Gonçalves,
Coelho and Souza (2014).
In order to achieve a competitive advantage for a long time, the
resources must present the characteristics VRIO together, when it is valuable
and not uncommon, there is no competitive advantage, since it is similar to
other companies; if a resource is valuable, rare, but it is easy to imitate,
that company may have temporary competitive advantage; is the difficulty of
imitation, whether by high cost or secret formula of doing something, which
establishes sustainable competitive advantage (ALVARES, 2004).
For the VRIO model, having valuable, rare and inimitable / irreplaceable
resources is not enough to obtain sustainable competitive advantage, it is
necessary the organization attribute to exploit the resources to their full
potential (GONÇALVES et al., 2014). These authors compared Barney's works,
presented in 1991 and 2007, and perceived a repetition in the concepts of
inimitability and substitutability. They agreed with Barney's (2007)
understanding of the impossibility of substitution being embedded in
inimitability. The VRIO resources of the companies must be known by their
managers and investors. Disseminating information about these features can be a
way to make the company more attractive and demonstrate transparency.
2.3.
Disclosure
of Information
The Theory of Disclosure has been approached by the international
positivist research in accounting since the mid-1980s, by several authors,
among them Verrecchia (1983) and Dye (1985), with the
main purpose of explaining the disclosure of financial information, the effect
of disclosure of financial statements on the price of shares and economically
justify the choice of voluntary information (SALOTTI; YAMAMOTO, 2005). This
theory presents two understandings: for Verrecchia
(2001), there is no basic theory to deepen these studies beyond what has
already been done and, for Dye (2001), this subject has a good theoretical
basis (FORT et al., 2016).
The disclosure of accounting information is of fundamental importance in
capital market activities (KOS; ESPEJO; RAIFUR, 2014), as they depict the whole
history of the organizations. Information has value only if it says something
that is not yet known, considering a historical series of asset prices irrelevant
(ROCHA; PROCIANOY, 2010).
Disclosing information to the market in greater quantity and better
quality is usually understood as a way of equating information among
shareholders and increasing the credibility of managers and managers in the
capital market (AVELINO et al., 2014). The contributions of Trombeta
(2002) warn that companies hardly divulge their information completely,
voluntarily only reveal what they favor, thus there are three levels of
disclosure, this decision is made according to the company's choice of strategy
contained in the Table 2.
Table 2: Advantages and
Disadvantages of Disclosure
Type |
Advantages |
Disadvantages |
Total Disclosure |
- Maximum Transparency; - Good Investor
Relations - Low Cost of Capital. |
- Information overload. - Loss of
Competitive Advantage. |
Partial
Disclosure |
- Selectivity of information; Difficult to
distinguish from full disclosure; - Absence of Disclosure Costs |
- Possibility of a high cost of
capital; - Possible loss of
competitive advantage. |
Not Disclosed |
- Competitive Advantage Protection; - Hide
the bad news. |
- High Cost of Capital; - Negative
reputation on the markets. - Possible reaction of the regulators. |
Source: Trombetta (2002,
p.5)
The level of detail of the disclosed information should be associated
with the value and performance of the company (FERNANDES; SILVA, 2016).
Increasing the level of information disclosure in the market leads to a
decrease in the information gap between managers and investors, shareholders
and suppliers of capital (MAROSKI; OSTH, 2015). Compulsory disclosures ensure
that companies publish sufficient information for investors to act safely while
volunteers bring enough benefits for the company to have an interest in
publishing spontaneous information (FORT et al., 2016).
Disclosure has three levels: adequate, fair and complete disclosure.
Adequate disclosure provides the minimum volume for the demonstration not to be
considered misleading, fair disclosure discloses ethics as a fair treatment
priority for all readers, and in full disclosure, the company goes through the
ways of maximizing market value for evidencing information beyond (AVELINO et
al., 2014).
The companies have been improving the forms of communication in several
formats of disclosures: Quarterly Reports; Annual Reports Printed and Electronic;
web conferencing; Meetings with Analysts; Meetings via the Internet; Visit to
the Facilities; Websites; Roadshows; Updated electronic contents, among others
(DONÁ et al., 2015). Fernandes and Silva (2016) cite as examples of accounting
narratives the Management Reports, the Explanatory Notes and the Reference
Forms.
Disclosure is the opening of the company through disclosure of
information, provides corporate transparency to those interested and reduces
the risk of irregularities and fraud (MAROSKI; OSTH, 2015), is one of the most
efficient forms of communication between the organization and its stakeholders.
The disclosure of information must be of good quality, timely and consistent;
after all it is a proof of respect for shareholders and an asset in the
credibility of the capital market (KOS; ESPEJO; RAIFUR, 2014).
When studying disclosure, it was observed that the act of disclosing
information brings many advantages to the company, such as reduction of agency
costs and cost of capital, greater ease in the sale of shares, among other less
visible benefits, for this reason this practice has aroused the interest of
scholars in deepening research on this subject (AVELINO et al., 2014).
2.4.
Organizational
Performance
The line of thought that considers competitive advantage is based on
resources and observes the relationship between internal characteristics of an
organization and its performance (BARNEY, 1991). Any valuable resource that
provides conditions for the company to perform business operations efficiently
and cost-effectively is a competitive advantage (CRUBELLATE; PASCUCCI; GRAVE,
2005).
Ribeiro, Scherer and Babosa da Silva (2016)
state that, in situations where performance is obtained by the use of resources
or capabilities that competitors do not have, the financial return is greater
than that of competitors.
Medeiros and Mol (2016) investigated whether
the persistence of superior performance in Brazilian companies listed in B3 by
sector is related to tangibility, intangibility, levels of corporate governance
and degree of social responsibility. Significant evidence has been found that
intangibility imposes reductions on the persistence of the development of these
firms in most industries.
Tangibility and corporate governance affect persistent performance in
different ways. And the degree of social responsibility interferes, in a
positive and significant way, in the insistence of the superior performance of
the companies studied (MATARAZZO, 1998; ASSAF NETO, 2002; MARION, 2005; KOS;
ESPEJO; RAIFUR, 2014).
The economic and financial indicators are the basis for the performance
appraisal, portraying the balance or financial, patrimonial and economic
imbalance of organizations), among other authors consider the most cited
indicators: Liquidity, Capital Structure and Profitability. Performance is how
you measure the achievement of the organization's goals. The most applied
profitability indicators are: Profitability on Shareholders' Equity,
Profitability on Assets, Operating Margin; EBITDA, Earnings per share, Earnings
per share, Net Asset Value per Share and Distributed Results (dividends) per
share (KOS; ESPEJO; RAIFUR, 2014).
Traditional performance measures such as net income return on assets and
budget variations do not provide information on future performance,
intellectual capacities, or resources used by companies in their economic
activities (BEUREN; MARCELLO, 2016). The company that performs well has greater
liquidity, higher profitability and lower indebtedness (KOS; ESPEJO; RAIFUR,
2014).
Both the RBV and the Disclosure Theory are important approaches for the
performance of companies that disclose their information, since VRIO resources
have the potential to promote superior and sustainable performance, and the
strategic disclosure of information influences the price of assets and,
consequently, performance of the organization.
3. METHODOLOGICAL ASPECTS
This study is guided by the Resource Based View (RBV) and the
Dissemination Theory discussed by Verrecchia (1983)
and Dye (1985), whose design configures a qualitative research with detailed
analysis. In agreement with the typologies of research designs cited by Raupp and Beuren (2006), the
objectives of this study fit into a descriptive research, when reporting the
influence between the disclosure of strategic resources and the performance in
companies of the chosen sample.
In order to carry out the descriptive research it is necessary for the
researcher to have information in sequence of what he intends to research, as
an aid in describing the events of a given reality (GERHARDT; SILVEIRA, 2009).
Data from secondary sources were searched in the Economática
database and in documentary analysis of information disclosed in company
documents that aim to attract investors, such as the Reference Form.
Another aspect of this research was a detailed analysis of the
companies' reference forms. In order to achieve the proposed objectives, this
choice is the most coherent and adequate to verify the number of disclosure of
the strategic resources based on the RBV.
Performance analysis was performed using the ROE, an index that measures
profitability over equity and allows the evaluation of companies that present
superior performance. For the calculation of the annual average and the
standard deviation of the ROE of these companies some exclusions were made:
companies that presented incomplete data, such as Miranda, Vasconcelos,
Silva-Filho, Dos Santos and Maia (2013); Perez and Famá
(2015); with negative PL for judging as financial solvency problems, such as
Lara and Mesquita (2008); companies in the finance
and insurance sector, since they have a very peculiar financial structure,
according to Carvalho, Kayo and Martin (2010). There were 165 companies in 18
sectors. The highest annual averages of ROE were 24.34 in 2010 and 23.20 in
2011, as shown in table 1.
Table 1: Calculation of arithmetic mean and standard
deviation
Data |
2010 |
2011 |
2012 |
2013 |
2014 |
2015 |
2016 |
2017 |
2018 |
Mean |
24,34 |
23,20 |
22,19 |
21,17 |
20,78 |
16,83 |
19,25 |
23,41 |
22,30 |
Standard
Deviation |
26,19 |
21,57 |
20,89 |
20,49 |
22,74 |
21,38 |
20,58 |
22,01 |
19,75 |
Source:
Prepared by the authors based on data from Economática
Then, the arithmetic mean and standard deviation of ROE for each sector
were calculated in the most profitable years, 2010 and 2011. Because of this calculation,
four sectors with the highest index were highlighted in descending order:
software and data, electronics, transport and services, and non-metal minerals;
in 2011, software and data, transportation and services, commerce and
electricity. Only two sectors are present in the two years: software and data,
and transportation and services.
The first sector, besides presenting the highest standard deviation
(according to information in table 2), is composed of only 2 companies, which
makes its selection impossible to compose the sample of this research.
Therefore, we selected the transport and services sector, whose sample is
composed of 20 publicly traded companies of B3, according to table 2.
Table 2: Arithmetic mean and standard deviation of ROE
Sector |
Number |
2010 |
2011 |
2010 |
2011 |
Agro and fishing |
1 |
3,10 |
8,30 |
- |
- |
Food and drinks |
7 |
11,89 |
16,37 |
10,03 |
11,93 |
Trade |
10 |
27,70 |
35,96 |
20,55 |
38,71 |
Constrution |
10 |
28,34 |
19,24 |
20,50 |
6,67 |
Appliance |
2 |
36,35 |
20,75 |
1,06 |
0,35 |
Electricity |
38 |
30,93 |
26,42 |
41,85 |
17,65 |
Industrial machines |
1 |
15,10 |
15,50 |
- |
- |
Non-metal ores |
3 |
27,80 |
20,03 |
23,90 |
11,01 |
Others |
41 |
14,28 |
15,62 |
8,64 |
15,73 |
Paper And Cellulose |
1 |
7,40 |
2,00 |
- |
- |
Oil and Gas |
4 |
21,88 |
15,90 |
17,42 |
10,60 |
Chemistry |
2 |
11,45 |
8,25 |
4,74 |
9,97 |
Siderurgical and metallurgical |
6 |
10,92 |
9,20 |
4,04 |
4,23 |
Software and data |
2 |
87,55 |
75,05 |
92,98 |
74,18 |
Telecommunications |
3 |
23,37 |
14,97 |
4,04 |
8,60 |
Textile |
6 |
24,38 |
20,95 |
15,30 |
11,87 |
Transport and services |
20 |
34,42 |
40,16 |
12,83 |
26,48 |
Vehicles and spare parts |
8 |
21,78 |
16,35 |
15,02 |
8,12 |
Source:
Prepared by the authors based on data from Economática
The main reason for the choice of the sample by companies that compose
B3 was the same one cited by Bueno (1999) when considering them more
transparent, since the data are audited and exposed to the market, therefore,
they provide security and credibility.
For the selection of the sample, we searched for financial information
provided by the Economática database for an analysis
of the superior performance of the companies that published information in B3.
The period analyzed for the sample was from 2010 to 2018, starting on that date
as the first year after the regulation of the Reference Form by ICVM n.
480/2009.
Table 3: ROE of the companies of the sector transport
and services
Companies / year |
2010 |
2011 |
AG
concessões |
37,60 |
17,10 |
All Norte |
44,10 |
30,80 |
Arteris |
28,00 |
28,90 |
Autoban-Conc.
do Sist. Anhanguera Bandeirantes S/A |
47,30 |
110,30 |
Autovias
AS |
37,20 |
36,80 |
CCR AS |
21,60 |
28,30 |
Centrovias
Sistemas Rodov. S/A |
55,40 |
51,40 |
Conc. de
Rod. do Oeste de SP - Viaoeste S/A |
36,00 |
47,70 |
Conc. de
Rodov. do Interior Paulista S/A |
43,00 |
48,30 |
Conc. Rio
Ter |
42,80 |
49,40 |
Conc.
Rodov. Pres. Dutra S/A |
37,30 |
45,60 |
Conc.
Ecovias Dos Imigrantes S/A |
45,90 |
65,20 |
Ecorodovias |
33,20 |
20,60 |
Ecorodovias
Concessões e Serv. S/A |
49,90 |
43,40 |
JSL |
11,40 |
6,70 |
Menezes
Cort |
11,90 |
13,10 |
Mrs
Logist |
21,90 |
22,70 |
Rodonorte–
Conc. Rod. Integradas S/A |
43,00 |
96,40 |
Vianorte
S/A |
17,60 |
20,50 |
Vix
Logística S/A |
23,20 |
19,90 |
Source:
Elaborated by the authors from the Economática data.
In the classification of B3, the sector selected for the sample is
inserted in the economic sector of material goods, transportation subsector. It
is subdivided into the segments of Air, Rail, Waterway, Highway, Highway
Exploration and Support and Storage Services. Some of the information regarding
the disclosure of funds was extracted from the B3 website, accessed through the
'fast access', 'listed companies', 'sector of activity' option, access to
companies in the transportation and services sector, 'financial reports' and
low the 'Reference Forms'. Three sectors were excluded from the sample because
they presented only one company: agriculture and fishing, industrial machinery,
and paper and pulp.
In cases where the data were not found or were incomplete, other sources
of information such as the CVM website were used in 'company', periodical and
occasional information of companies', by name or CNPJ, and downloaded the
report for the survey or the company's own website at: 'investor relations' and
choose the document for the survey.
4. PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION OF RESULTS
Based on the RBV line of thought, a theoretical framework was elaborated
- formed by four categories that classify the resources cited in this research:
physical, financial, human and organizational. The definition of the categories
was based on the resources included in the RBV approach to be introduced in the
IT Atlas, in codes, and grouped into families according to common
characteristics. As financial resources there are shareholders, creditors and
money (PADILHA; BANDEIRA-DE-MELLO, 2007), financing capacity and revenues
(BARCELOS et al, 2011).
For the latter authors financial resources are the pillar to obtain the
other resources. Physical resources are "assets that make it possible to
implement strategies to improve the efficiency of organizational
processes" (BARNEY, 1991). Human resources correspond to the capabilities
of the company, because they integrate the experience, judgment, intelligence,
relationships and the individual vision of the managers with the opportunities
available in the market and the organizational resources are a union of the
people of the organization with the formal structure of corporate reporting,
formal and informal planning systems (BARNEY, 2002).
In order to assist this step, the systematic procedures for data
analysis and coding were used, software was used to organize, separate and
visualize the selected strategic information. Atlas IT software is identified
as a support tool for the analysis of qualitative data fed by the computer. Its
development was given by the Technical University of Berlin to attend a
multidisciplinary project (1989-1992), whose objective was to interpret texts
in the late 80's. Atlas comes from the German Archiv fuer Technik, Lebens
weltund Alltagassprache,
translated as archive for technology, the world and everyday language. TI, is
translated as text interpretation (BANDEIRA-DE-MELLO, 2006).
Bandeira-de-Mello (2006)
highlights the most important components of the program: a) hermeneutical unit:
union of all data and elements; b) primary documents: are the primary data
collected; c) citations: data segments, such as relevant excerpts from the
primary document; d) codes: they are concepts or categories generated by the
interpretations of the researcher; e) memos or notes of analysis: describe the
history of the research and record the interpretations of the researcher; f)
graphical schemes: they are graphical representations of the associations
between codes. In selecting each of these terms in the Reference Forms, an
in-depth analysis of each specific expression and interpreted within the
context according to the criteria of the RBV theory was made, in a set of
concepts and categories of the theory in search of evidence of resources in the
documents of the organizations under study.
Detailed analysis was used as a search technique. In order to facilitate
this process, the research design was based on the theoretical framework
derived from RBV, which brought together the main resources and capacities,
central objects of this research, according to Table 4. According to the data
observed in the realization of documentary research, the resources presented in
the greatest number of each category are: physical resources: technology and
equipment; of financial resources: shareholder and money; human resources:
expertise, knowledge and staff; and organizational resources: brand and
governance. After the detailed analysis of the strategic resources in the
Reference Forms, table 4 presents the number of disclosures in 2010 and 2011.
Table 4: Theoretical Framework and dissemination of
strategic resources
Categories |
Theoretical basis |
Resources / capabilities |
2010 |
2011 |
Physical |
Carvalho, Prevot e
Machado (2012) |
Equipments |
7 |
4 |
Padilha e
Bandeira-de-Mello (2007) |
Geographic
location |
4 |
2 |
|
Penrose (1959); |
Machines |
3 |
2 |
|
Bandeira-de-Mello et.
al. (2011) |
Plant |
3 |
3 |
|
Carvalho, Prevot e
Machado (2012) |
Technology |
11 |
4 |
|
Padilha e
Bandeira-de-Mello (2007) |
Physical and
technology |
0 |
3 |
|
Financial |
Padilha e
Bandeira-de-Mello (2007) |
Shareholders |
1 |
1 |
Bandeira-de-Mello et.
al. (2011) |
Financing
capacity |
0 |
0 |
|
Padilha e
Bandeira-de-Mello (2007) |
Creditors |
0 |
0 |
|
Padilha e
Bandeira-de-Mello (2007) |
Money |
1 |
1 |
|
Bandeira-de-Mello et.
al. (2011) |
Revenues |
0 |
0 |
|
Human |
Barney (1991); |
Knowledge |
3 |
2 |
Penrose (1959) |
Hiring of
specialized people |
1 |
1 |
|
Carvalho, Prevot e
Machado (2012) |
Development
of competences |
2 |
0 |
|
Bandeira-de-Mello et.
al. (2011) |
Technical
and qualified team |
2 |
5 |
|
Fonseca e Cunha
(2015) |
Expertise |
5 |
3 |
|
Padilha e
Bandeira-de-Mello (2007) |
Offices |
0 |
0 |
|
Padilha e
Bandeira-de-Mello (2007) |
Relationships |
1 |
0 |
|
Carvalho, Prevot e
Machado (2012) |
Trainings |
1 |
1 |
|
Organizational |
Barney (1991) |
Management
control |
1 |
0 |
Padilha e
Bandeira-de-Mello (2007) |
Coordination |
0 |
2 |
|
Barney e Clark
(2007); |
Organizational
culture |
0 |
0 |
|
Henri (2006) |
Business |
0 |
0 |
|
Bandeira-de-Mello et.
al. (2011) |
Corporate
governance |
3 |
3 |
|
Carvalho, Prevot e
Machado (2012) |
Innovation |
2 |
1 |
|
Penrose (1959);
Collin (2005); |
Brand |
11 |
12 |
|
Vasconcelos e Brito
(2004) |
Marketing |
1 |
1 |
|
Collin (2005);
Ferraresi et al. (2012) |
Patents |
0 |
0 |
|
Padilha e
Bandeira-de-Melllo (2007) |
Planning |
1 |
3 |
|
Collin (2005) |
Procedures |
0 |
1 |
|
Grant (1991); |
Reputation |
0 |
0 |
|
Collin (2005); |
Routines |
0 |
0 |
|
Barney e Clark (2007) |
Values |
1 |
1 |
Source:
Elaborated by the authors with research data
The use of this tool softens the researcher's burden to interpret and
understand his research (BANDEIRA-DE-MELLO, 2006). Barcelos,
Marcon and Bandeira-de-Mello
(2011) emphasize that the program is prepared to simplify the organization of
information and to create codes and families, but it is necessary to understand
how these connectors work and communicate, so that there are insights in
understanding the data.
The findings of this research are in line with the findings of Miranda
et al. (2013) regarding investments in intangible assets, which are positively
related to the market value of the companies surveyed, but are not related to
ROE. A company that has high ROE and low disclosure can be considered a form of
protection, since full disclosure entails loss of competitive advantage
(TROMBETA, 2002).
The most publicized features over the two years are technology and
brand. The results of this research disagree with the study by Carvalho et. al.
(2012), since they affirm that the strategic technological resources of the
rural sector are the least cited by the company. For the authors, this
variation is due to the particularity of each sector in relation to innovation
and technological impacts. Norton's (2001) observations explain this fact by
pointing out that intangible assets, such as technology, are unlikely to be
directly related to revenue or profit, the effects of which are indirect.
The brand is widely publicized, because companies do not care enough to
protect it because of the difficulty in copying this type of resource. This
perception is in line with the conclusions of Hexsel
and Lagreca (2007), accumulation of resources is
directly associated with the brand because they are difficult to reproduce by
other companies and consider it an important resource, the result of continuous
and specific investments in the long term.
The results of this research corroborate the rationale of the Theory of
Disclosure, when Verrechia (2001) associates the decision
to disclose to the judgment of the manager, discloses what is interesting to
the organization. The results also meet Dye's (2001) understanding of the
information disclosure inserted in the Game Theory, since managers' decisions
seek the cost-benefit relation of the disclosed information, but the benefit
must always exceed cost. For the latter author, disclosing only what favors the
company protects it from competitors, as evidencing strategic resources would
facilitate modeling by these competitors, although it favors investors. There
are several other ways to arouse the investor's interest, as well as to divulge
the source of competitive advantage.
The most publicized Strategic Physical Resources were, respectively,
technology and equipment in 2010, and equipment and technology in 2011. The
companies that most publicized these resources were Ecorodovia
Concessionária, with 4 disclosures in 2010, and Ecorodovia, with 5 disclosures in 2011. In 2010, any
company did not disclose hardware and software as strategic, in 2011 all the
resources listed in table 6 had at least two disclosures.
The most publicized strategic financial resources in 2010 and 2011 were
shareholder and cash, each with a single disclosure. It is important to note
that the only company that disclosed these resources as strategic was Ecorodovia. Lenders, financing capacity and billing were
not disclosed as strategic by any company. In the literature there are data
that coincide with this result, such as those of Carvalho, Prevot
and Machado (2012), when they affirm that strategic financial resources were
the least cited. Hendriksen and Van Breda (1999)
justify this resistance of organizations to increase the degree of disclosure
to hinder the possibility of information being used by their competitors.
Figure 1 illustrated below shows the most publicized strategic
organizational resources in 2010 and 2011. Brand and corporate governance are
ahead in the two years. Noteworthy are the companies that most publicized the
category of organizational resources in 2010: Ecorodovia
and JSL with 4 disclosures each, and in 2011, JSL with 5 disclosures.
Organizational resources such as coordination, organizational culture,
reputation, routine, entrepreneurship and patents were not disclosed as
strategic in 2010 and 2011. Also noteworthy is an effective procedure as an
undisclosed resource in 2010.
Figure 1: Strategic Human Resources Disclosure Chart
Source:
Prepared by the authors
The most publicized strategic human resources were, in 2010, expertise
and knowledge and in 2011, team and expertise. They stand out as the companies
that most publicized this type of resource in 2010, Vix
and in 2011 the Ecorodovia, each with 5 disclosures.
We have as undisclosed resources as strategic: employees in 2010, and
development of skills, employees and relationships in 2011. These results are
in line with the findings of Souza et al. (2016) when they concluded that
disclosure of human resources is low.
This result is justified by Carvalho, Kayo and Martin (2010), when they
understand brand as an intangible asset that contributes to the creation of
value of firms, because it is responsible for the choice of consumers and the
image associated with the product or service. A strong brand creates a link
between product/service and the customer, greater loyalty to competitive
marketing, and more attractive profit margins. Therefore, good governance
practices protect the interests of shareholders through procedures adopted by
managers and favor strategic management of the company and follow-up of
executive management planning and actions (CATAPAN; DOUGLAS, 2013). These
authors reinforce the importance of disseminating this resource as strategic.
5. FINAL CONSIDERATIONS
The main objective of this study was to analyze the relationship between
the disclosure of strategic organizational resources and the performance of
companies listed in B3, in the most profitable sector of 2010 and 2018,
transportation and services. In order to achieve this objective, the following
variables were considered: resources considered strategic in RBV theory and ROE
to measure performance in the Economática database.
Resources were classified into four categories: physical, financial, human, and
organizational.
When analyzing the resources most divulged by categories they are
verified: the physical resources, technology and equipment; financial
resources, shareholders and money; human resources, expertise, knowledge and
staff; and organizational resources, branding and corporate governance. It was observed
that the category of organizational resources was the most publicized category
and the least publicized financial category. In general, the resources that
reached the highest number of disclosure were technology (physical resources)
and brand (organizational resources).
We used the RBV theory and the Disclosure Theory to try to explain the
findings of the research. It is concluded that the disclosure of strategic
resources is not related to the superior performance of the company, therefore,
it is not a source of competitive advantage. A significant number of companies
with high ROE disclose few or none of these resources, this behavior may be
associated with the protection of strategic information from the company to
competitors. The majority of companies that chose not to disclose strategic
resources had above-average ROE and the companies with the highest number of
disclosures obtained ROE below average, and there was also a variability
between the number of disclosures and ROE.
Companies only disclose information that, to a certain extent, offers
them advantages. Disclosing its strategic resources can bring more disadvantage
than advantage, after all, it is easier for competitors to try to copy the
strategy through these resources and the company can lose the competitive
advantage.
This result is in line with the theory of disclosure regarding the
strategic disclosure of resources. The choice of these strategic resources to
be disclosed deserves close scrutiny with the objective of protecting them, since
they collaborate to achieve the competitive advantage. Given these results, it
is possible to conclude that the objectives of the work have been achieved. The
present study sought to fill the theoretical gaps, to contribute to the
evolution of the researches in strategy and to relate the RBV with another
theory, in this case the theory of the disclosure. It also sought to contribute
to the business practice in choosing the information to be disclosed.
Four limitations were experienced. The first, the contradiction and
imperfect overlap between the concepts of resources and capacity building,
flexibility is important for discoveries and evolutions of the definitions of
concepts, but they hinder a global and logical understanding. The second,
although organizational performance is the most studied and used construct in
the field of strategy, its approach is incomplete. Because it is a complex and
multidirectional construct, it presents innumerable dimensions and an immense
variety of approaches, besides the complexity in defining or explaining
organizational performance.
REFERENCES
ALVARES, A. C.
T. (2004) Incentive to the generation of ideas: internal system of suggestions
of high performance. RAE-Revista de Administração de
Empresas, v.
55, n. 3, p. 368-369.
ARAGÃO, L. A.; CAVALCANTE, D. S. (2014) Quality
of the information of the reference forms of the Brazilian companies listed in
the new BM & FBovespa market. RACE, v. 13, n. 3, p. 1089-1118,
set./dez.
ARANHA, C. E.; ROSSONI, L.; MENDES-DA-SILVA, W. (2016) Social
Capital Of The Board Of Directors And Performance Of Brazilian Public
Companies. RAM, v. 17, n. 1, p. 15-39.
ARAÚJO, U. P.; JOSÉ DE BRITO, M.; RIBEIRO, L. M. P.; LOPES,
F. T. (2016) Meter: Fifteen Years of Research with the Management
Report. Revista Contabilidade
& Finanças, v. 27, n. 71, p. 217-231.
ARAÚJO, V. R. B. S. (2016) Corporate disclosure and share liquidity: an analysis of different size
levels of Brazilian companies. Dissertation (MSc in Accounting
Sciences) - University of Brasília, Federal University of Paraíba
and Federal University of Rio Grande do Norte, João
Pessoa-PB.
ASSAF, N. A.
(2002) Structure of balance sheets: an
economic-financial approach, trade and services, industries, commercial and
multiple banks. São
Paulo, Atlas.
AVELINO, B. C.; DA CUNHA, J. V. A.; DE LIMA, G. A. S. F.;
COLAUTO, R. D. (2014) Explanatory characteristics of the level of voluntary
disclosure of municipalities in the state of Minas Gerais.
Race: journal of management, accounting
and economics, v. 13, n. 2, p. 571-608, 2014.
BANDEIRA-DE-MELLO,
R. (2006). Software in qualitative
research. Qualitative research in organizational studies: paradigms, strategies
and methods. São
Paulo, SP: Saraiva.
BARCELOS, L.;
MARCON, R.; BANDEIRA-DE-MELLO, R. (2011) Evidence of organizational resources
and capabilities: a case study in light of RBV theory. Journal of Business, v. 16, n. 3, p. 113-134.
BARNEY, J. B.
(1986) Strategic factor markets: Expectations, luck, and business strategy. Management science, v. 32, n. 10, p.
1231-1241.
BARNEY, J. B.
(1991) Firm resource and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Manegement.
BARNEY, J. B.
(1995) Looking inside for competitive advantage. The Academy of Management Executive, v. 9, n. 4, p. 49-61.
BARNEY, J. B.
(2001) Is the Resource-Based "View" a Useful Perspective for
Strategic Management Research? Yes. Academy
of Management Review, v. 26, n. 1, p. 41-56.
BARNEY, J. B. (2002)
Strategic management: From informed conversation to academic discipline. The Academy of Management Executive, v.
16, n. 2, p. 53-57.
BARNEY, J. B.;
CLARK, D. N. (2007). Resource-based
theory: Creating and sustaining competitive advantage. Oxford University
Press on Demand.
BESANKO, D.;
DRANOVE, D.; SHANLEY, M.; SCHAEFER, S. (2009) The economics of strategy. Bookman Editora.
BEUREN, I. M.;
ANGONESE, R. (2015) Instruments for determining the disclosure index of
accounting information. Revista Eletrônica de Estratégia
& Negócios,
v. 8, n. 1, p. 120-144.
BEUREN, I. M.; MARCELLO, I. E. (2016) Relation
of the Importance of the Strategic Resources with the Measures of Performance
in Brazilian Companies. IJSM, v. 15,
n. 1, p. 65-82.
BRITO, L.A. L.;
VASCONCELOS, F. C. (2004) Firm performance in an extremely turbulent
environment: year, industry and firm effects. Anais do EnANPAD.
BUENO, A. F.
(1999) Problems of disclosure in Brazil: the case of companies with shares
abroad. Book of Studies, n. 20, p.
01-13.
CARVALHO, D. M.; PREVOT, F.; MACHADO, J. A. D. (2012) The
role of resources in organizational performance: the use of resource-based view
theory in rural properties. ENANPAD,
v. 36.
CATAPAN, A.; COLAUTO, R. D. (2014) Corporate
governance: an analysis of its relation with the economic-financial performance
of companies listed in Brazil in the years 2010-2012. Accounting and Administration,
v. 59, n. 3, p. 137-164.
COLAUTO, R. D.; NASCIMENTO, P. S.; AVELINO, B. C.; BISPO,
O. N. A. (2009) Evidence of intangible assets not acquired in the
management reports of listed companies in the Bovespa
corporate governance levels. Accounting
Vista & Revista, v. 20, n. 1, p. 143-169.
COLLIS, D. J.;
MONTGOMERY, C. A. (1995) Competing on Resources: Strategy in the 1990s. Knowledge and strategy, p. 25-40.
CRUBELLATE, J. M.; PASCUCCI, L.;
GRAVE, P. S. (2005) Vision based on legitimate resources: resources and
institutional standards in the formulation of strategies in organizations. Meeting Studies In Strategy, v. 2.
BRAZIL,
Brazilian Securities and Exchange Commission (CVM). (2017) CVM Resolution No. 488/05. Available at: <www.cpc.org.br>.
Accessed on: 09 February 2017.
DA SILVA, J. F.; DA MOTTA, L. F. J. (2012) The
competitive advantage of nations and the competitive advantage of companies:
what matters in the localization. RAP, v. 46, n. 3, p. 701-720.
DE OLIVEIRA SILVA, M. F.; SILVA, J. F.; DA MOTTA, L. F. J.
(2012) The Competitive Advantage of Nations and the
Competitive Advantage of Firms: What Matters in Localization? Journal of Public Administration, v.
46, n. 3, p. 701-720.
DE OLIVEIRA, M. O. R.; SCHOSSLER, D. P.; CAMPOS, R. E.;
LUCE, F. B. (2014) Intangible assets and economic-financial performance:
comparison between tangible-intensive and intangible-intensive business
portfolios. Journal of Management of
UFSM, v. 7, n. 4, p. 678-699.
MOURA, G. D.; VARELA, P. S.; BEUREN, I. M. (2014) Conformity
of Mandatory Disclosure of Intangible Assets and Corporate Governance
Practices. Journal of Management
Mackenzie, v. 15, n. 5.
DE SOUZA, C. M. L. (2011) Between Formal
and Informal Strategic Planning: an Exploratory Case Study on the Strategy
Practice in Organizations. RAC, v.
15, n. 5, p. 855.
DIERICKX, I.;
COOL, K. (1989) Asset stock accumulation and sustainability of competitive
advantage. Management Science, vol.
35, n. 12.
DONÁ, A. L.; MARQUES, K. C. M.; MORIBE, A. M.; HERCOS
JUNIOR, J. B. (2015) Factors determining the content disclosed in the
report of management of Brazilian companies. Journal of Mathematics, v. 11, n. 4, p. 82.
DYE, R. A.
(1985) Disclosure of nonproprietary information. Journal of accounting research, p. 123-145.
DYE, R. A.
(2001) An evaluation of "essays on disclosure" and the disclosure
literature in accounting. Journal of
Accounting and Economics, v. 32, n. 1, p. 181-235.
ESPÍNDULA, R.
P.; DE SOUZA COSTA, P. (2008) Analysis of the influence of the publication and
readability of the relevant acts or facts on the share price of Brazilian
publicly traded companies from 2002 to 2006. Horizonte, v. 2, n. 1.
FERNANDES, J. L. T.; SILVA, C. A. T. (2016) Performance
analysis as a characteristic of Brazilian publicly traded companies in the
disclosure of relevant facts in 2010. Registro Contábil, v. 6, n. 3, p. 22-37.
FERNANDES,
B.H.R.; FLEURY, M. T. L.; MILLS, J. (2006) Building the dialogue between
competence, resources and organizational performance. RAE, v. 46, n. 4.
FERRARESI, A. A.; QUANDT, C. O.; DOS SANTOS, S. A.; FREGA,
J. R. (2012) Knowledge management and strategic orientation: lever
aging in novativeness and performance. Journal
of Knowledge Management, v. 16, n. 5, p. 688-701.
FORTE, L. M.; DOS SANTOS NETO, J. B.; NOBRE, F. C.; NOBRE,
L. H. N.; QUEIROZ, D. B. (2016) Determinants of Voluntary
Disclosure: A Study in the Brazilian Banking Sector. Journal of Management, Finance and Accounting, v. 5, n. 2, p.
23-37.
GONÇALVES, A. R.;
QUINTELLA, R. H. (2005) Contribution of internal and external factors to the
performance of Brazilian companies and their revolution in the last decade. In:
Anais ENANPAD, 29, 2005, Brasília.
GONÇALVES, C. A.;
DE FREITAS COELHO, M.; SOUZA, É. M. (2014) VRIO: Competitive advantage
sustainable by the organization. Journal
of Management Science, v. 17, n. 3.
GRANT, R. (1991)
The resource-based theory of competitive advantage: Implications for strategy
formulation. California Management
Review, v. 33, n. 3, p. 114-135.
HELFAT, C. E.;
PETERAF, M. A. (2003) The dynamic resource-based view: Capability lifecycles. Strategic management journal, v. 24, n.
10, p. 997-1010.
HENRI, J. F.
(2006) Management control systems and strategy: a resource-based perspective. Accounting, Organizations and Society, n.
31, p. 529-558.
HOSKISSON, R.E.;
HITT, M.A.; WAN, W. P.; YIU, D. (1999) Theory and research in strategic
management: Swings of a pendulum. Journal
of management, v. 25, n. 3, p. 417-456.
KOS, S.R.;
MIRROR, M. M. S. B.; RAIFUR, L. (2014) The information content of the
management report and the performance of Ibovespa's
Brazilian companies. Journal of Mathematics, v. 10, n. 2, p. 43-62.
MACHADO-DA-SILVA, C. L.; FONSECA, V. S.; FERNANDES, B. H.
R. (1999) Change and strategy in organizations: cognitive and
institutional perspectives. Contemporary
management: strategic perspectives. São Paulo: Atlas.
MARITAN, C. A.;
PETERAF, M. A. (2011) Invited editorial: Building a bridge between resource acquisition
and resource accumulation. Journal of
management, v. 37, n. 5, p. 1374-1389.
MATARAZZO, D. C.
(1998) Financial analysis of balance
sheets: a basic and managerial approach. São Paulo: Atlas.
MIA, L.; CLARKE,
B. (1999) Market competition, management accounting systems and business unit
performance. Management Accounting
Research, v. 10, n. 2, p. 137-158.
MINTZBERG, H.;
WATERS, J. A. (1985) Of strategies, deliberate and emergent. SMJ, v. 6, n. 3, p. 257-272.
MINTZBERG, H.;
AHLSTRAND, B.; LAMPEL, J. (2000) Strategy Safari: A Jungle Roadmap of Planning.
Translation
Nivaldo Montingelli Jr.
MIRANDA, K. F.; VASCONCELOS, A. C.; SILVA-FILHO, J. C.
L.M.; SANTOS, J. G. C.; MAIA, A. B. G. R. (2013) Intangible
assets, degree of innovation and performance of Brazilian companies from
innovative sectoral groups. RGO, v.
6, n. 1, p. 4.
MURCIA, F. D.; DOS SANTOS, A. (2009) Factors
determining the level of voluntary disclosure of publicly traded companies in
Brazil. REPeC, v. 3, n. 2, p. 72-95.
OYADOMARI, J. C. T.; FREZATTI, F.; BRAGA DE AGUIAR, A.; CARDOSO,
R. (2009) Analysis of the works that used the Simons Levers of
Control model in the international literature from 1995 to 2007. RCO, v. 3, n. 7, p. 25-42.
PADILHA, E.; BANDEIRA-DE-MELLO, R. (2007) An
analysis of the heterogeneity of small companies in the light of the Resource
Based View (RBV): the case of the Professional Engineering Services. XXXI ANPAD NATIONAL MEETING.
PENROSE, E. T.
(1959) The Theory of the Growth of the
Firm. Oxford University Press.
PEREZ, M. M.; FAMÁ, R. (2006) Intangible
assets and business performance. Revista Contabilidade & Finanças,
v. 17, n. 40, p. 7-24.
PETERAF, M. A.
(1993) The Cornerstones of Competitive Advantage: A Resource-Based View. Strategic
Management Journal, v. 14, p. 179-191.
PETERAF, M. A.;
BARNEY, J. B. (2003) Unraveling the resource-based tangle. Managerial and decision economics, v. 24, n. 4, p. 309-323.
PORTER, M. E.
(1980) Industry structure and competitive strategy: Keys to profitability. Financial Analysts Journal, v. 36, n.
4, p. 30-41.
PORTER, M. E.
(1990) The competitive advantage of nations. Harvard business review, v. 68, n. 2, p. 73-93.
PORTER, M. E.
(1996) What is strategy? Published
November.
PORTER, M. E. (1999) Competition: essential competitive
strategies. Rio de Janeiro, Campus.
RAUPP, F. M.;
BEUREN, I. M. (2006) Research
Methodology Applicable to Science. São Paulo: Atlas.
RIBEIRO, F.; SCHERER, L. M.; DA SILVA, A. A. B. (2016) Resource
Based View: a study of the impact of the financial crisis on the heterogeneity
of the performance of Brazilian publicly traded companies. However, 14, n. 2, p. 09-24.
RIBEIRO, R.; ROSSETTO, C. R.; VERDINELLI, M. A. (2011) Strategic
company behavior and resource-based view: a study in the retail sector of construction
material. Management & Production,
v. 18, n. 1, p. 175-192.
ROCHA, C.F. P.;
PROCIANOY, J. L. (2010) Disclosure of Brazilian publicly traded companies: an
exploratory study. Electronic Journal of
Organizational Management, v. 2, n. 3.
SALAZAR, V. S.
(2015) Acquisition and development of
strategic resources of gastronomic restaurants: a multi-country study in Latin
America. Thesis (Doctoral Degree in Administration, area of
Organizational Management concentration) - Federal University of Pernambuco,
Recife, PE.
SALOTTI, B. M.; YAMAMOTO,
M. M. (2005) Essay on the theory of dissemination. BBR, v. 2, n. 1, p. 53-70.
SERRA, F. A.; RIBEIRO et al. (2017) Evolution
of research in RBV: a study of the last EnANPAD's. REBRAE, v. 1, n. 1.
SOUZA, G. H. C.; FELIX JUNIOR, L. A.; LAGIOIA, U. C. T.;
NASCIMENTO DE ARAÚJO, J. G. (2016) Financial performance and
disclosure of human resources information: an analysis of IBRX-100 companies. REPeC, v. 10, n.
1.
TEECE, D. J.;
PISANO, G.; SHUEN, A. (1997) Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. SMJ, v. 18, n. 7, p. 509-533, 08.
TROMBETTA, M.
(2002) The decision to voluntarily disclose company information: from the
theoretical analysis to a methodological proposal. Working Paper. Department of Business Economics. University Carlos
III. Madrid.
VASCONCELOS, F.
C.; CYRINO, Á. B. (2000) Competitive Advantag: the
current theoretical models e. RAE, v. 40, n. 4, p. 21.
VERRECCHIA, R.
E. (2001) Essays on disclosure. Journal
of Accounting and Economics, v. 32, n. 1, p. 97-180.
YAMAMOTO, M. M.;
SALOTTI, B. M. (2005) Accounting
information: studies on its disclosure in the capital market. São Paulo: Atlas.