127公司企業(yè)營運(yùn)能力分析的外文文獻(xiàn)翻譯成品；運(yùn)營能力分析

1、<p>　　此文檔是畢業(yè)設(shè)計(jì)外文翻譯成品（ 含英文原文+中文翻譯），無需調(diào)整復(fù)雜的格式！下載之后直接可用，方便快捷！本文價(jià)格不貴,也就幾十塊錢！一輩子也就一次的事！</p><p>　　外文標(biāo)題：Operational Capability: The Missing Link between Supply Chain Practices and Performance</p><p&

2、gt;　　外文作者：Thoo Ai Chin, Abu Bakar Abdul Hamid,Amran Rasli</p><p>　　文獻(xiàn)出處:Applied Mechanics and Materials Vols 773-774 (2015) pp 856-860(如覺得年份太老，可改為近2年，畢竟很多畢業(yè)生這樣做)</p><p>　　英文2651單詞，18602字符，中文4102

3、漢字。</p><p>　　Operational Capability: The Missing Link between Supply Chain Practices and Performance</p><p>　　Keywords: Supply chain practices, operational capability, business performance, reso

4、urce-based view, neo-institutional theory</p><p>　　Abstract： The relationship between supply chain practices and business performance has been widely investigated by many academics and practitioners; however

5、, the relationship is not yet fully understood. Therefore, this paper aims to examine the relevance of several prominent theories in strategic management for explaining the mediating role of operational capability in the

6、 relationship between supply chain practices and business performance. The resource-based view of the firm and neo-instituti</p><p>　　Introduction</p><p>　　This article examines the relevance of

7、 several prominent theories in strategic management for explaining the mediating role of operational capability in the relationship between supply chain practices and business performance. Supply chain is a network consi

8、sts of all parties involved directly or indirectly which includes manufacturer, supplier, retailer, customer and so forth, in producing and delivering products or services to ultimate customers – both in upstream and dow

9、nstream sides through </p><p>　　Capability is a superior and distinctive way of coordinating, deploying and allocating resources; it is different from a resource [4]. Operational capability is “firm-specific

10、 sets of skills, processes, and routines, developed within the operations management system that is regularly used in solving its problems through configuring its operational resources” [5]. In fact, operation encompasse

11、s all facets of firm’s activities directed toward producing a product or rendering a service [6]. The con</p><p>　　Resource-based View</p><p>　　The static view of the RBV posits that a firm’s re

12、source base is the antecedent to competitive advantage [7]. Essentially, the RBV is based on the assumptions that firms have heterogeneous resources [8] and the resources remain imperfectly mobile over time [7]. In addit

13、ional, sustainable competitive advantage results when these four attributes of firm’s resources are satisfied: valuable, rareness, non-substitutability and inimitability [7,9]. First, the resources must be valuable to al

14、low the fi</p><p>　　Fig. 1: The relationship between firm resources and sustained competitive advantage [7]</p><p>　　In a world of fierce competition and business driven by speed to market, good

15、 quality and low costs; this environment requires firms to have a source of competitive advantage that is inimitable and non-substitutable. For a capability to achieve sustainable competitive advantage it must be non-sub

16、stitutable, inimitable, path-dependent and developed over time [11]. Inimitability is central to the RBV of the firm [12] and it provides the understanding that firms achieve sustainable competitive adva</p><p

17、>　　According to Schroeder et al. [11], practices are insufficient to drive better performance and improve profits, because the effects of competitors imitating a successful practice are not addressed in the practice–p

18、erformance relationship. Therefore, customised and proprietary practices are important to keep firms’ competitive edge over their rivals. However, practices are standardised and if many organisations adopt the same pract

19、ices, how can they lead to a sustainable competitive advantage? If</p><p>　　Neo-Institutional Theory</p><p>　　From the neo-institutional theory perspective, rational strategies for individual or

20、ganisations may not be rational when adopted by a large number of organisations [17]. This is because the concept of institutional isomorphism is a constraining process that forces one unit to resemble other units that f

21、ace the same set of environmental conditions. Normative isomorphism pushes organisations toward the adoption of common practices over time. Normative isomorphism refers to “organisational change a</p><p>　　O

22、perational Capabilities</p><p>　　Operation encompasses all facets of firm’s activities directed towards producing a product or rendering a service. The activities include, but are not limited to, plan- ning,

23、 scheduling, performance measurement, delegating and supervising the work, SCM, procurement, purchasing, logistics/warehousing, etc.. [27]. Resources and capabilities developed from operations are the basis for corporate

24、 profitability and source of direction to define a firm’s identity because they are the foundation for bus</p><p>　　In contrast, capabilities are long lasting due to the nature of elusiveness and uniqueness.

25、 Operational capabilities are firm-specific sets of routines, skills and processes that develop internally through various activities and practices in daily operations for a long period of time [5]. Capabilities are tigh

26、tly embedded in organisational processes and revolve around transformation, learning and coordination [20]. The capabilities evolve from the problems an organisation faces over time through</p><p>　　Conclusi

27、ons</p><p>　　Due to the fact that supply chain practices do not possess the necessary traits to be sources of competitive advantage (easy to substitute and imitable), there appears to be a means of nurturing

28、 the operational capabilities as sources of competitive advantage. As such, organisations must be able simultaneously to increase efficiency through supply chain practices and to be innovative through operational capabil

29、ities. Capabilities are hard to identify, articulate and decode once they are establis</p><p>　　An empirical study provides support for the view that operational capabilities mediate the relationship between

30、 operational practices and operational performance [6]. Essentially, practice is argued to provide a firm with superior performance; however, this occurs in relationship to capability and is aided by capability. Therefor

31、e, supply chain practices can have an impact on operational capability, which in turn affects performance. This chain implies an indirect link</p><p>　　between supply chain practices and performance. Althoug

32、h there is a debate, the operations literature has illustrated a positive relationship between operational capability and performance in the theory of production competence [23,24].</p><p>　　References</p

33、><p>　　[1] J. T. Mentzer, Supply Chain Management, Sage Publications, Inc., United States of America, 2001.</p><p>　　[2] S. C. L. Koh, M. Demirbag, E. Bayraktar, E. Tatoglu, S. Zaim, The Impact of

34、Supply Chain Management Practices on Performance of SMEs, Industrial Management & Data Systems.</p><p>　　107(2007) 103-124.</p><p>　　[3] S. Boon-itt, C. W. Wong, The Moderating Effects of Te

35、chnological and Demand Uncertainties on the Relationship Between Supply Chain Integration and Customer Delivery Performance, International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management. 41(2011) 253-276.<

36、;/p><p>　　[4] G. Schreyogg, M. Kliesch-Eberl, How Dynamic Can Organizational Capabilities Be? Towards a Dual-Process Model of Capability Dynamization, Strategic Management Journal. 28(2007) 913-</p><

37、p><b>　　933.</b></p><p>　　[5] S. J. Wu, S. A. Melnyk, B. B. Flynn, Operational Capabilities: The Secret Ingredient. Decision Sciences. 41(2010) 721-754.</p><p>　　[6] S. J. Wu, Expl

38、oring the Direct versus Indirect Linkages Among Operations Practices, Operations Capabilities and Operations Performance: Does Competitive Context Moderate the Key Relationships? Doctoral of Philosophy, Michigan State Un

39、iversity, USA, 2007.</p><p>　　[7] J. B. Barney, Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage, Journal of Management.</p><p>　　17(1991) 99-120.</p><p>　　[8] T. T. Coates, C. M.

40、 McDermott, An Exploratory Analysis of New Competencies: A Resource Based View Perspective, Journal of Operations Management. 20(2002) 435-450.</p><p>　　[9] I. Dierickx, K. Cool, Asset Stock Accumulation and

41、 Sustainability of Competitive Advantage, Management Science. 35(1989) 1504-1511.</p><p>　　[10] M. A. Hitt, R. D. Ireland, R. E. Hoskisson, Strategic Management: Competitiveness and Globalization: Concepts,

42、ninth ed., Cengage Learning, Canada, 2011.</p><p>　　[11] R. G. Schroeder, K. A. Bates, M. A. Junttila, A Resource-Based View of Manufacturing Strategy and the Relationship to Manufacturing Performance, Strat

43、egic Management Journal.</p><p>　　23(2002) 105-117.</p><p>　　[12] J. R. Bryson, M. Taylor, Competitiveness by Design and Inimitability through Service: Understanding the Dynamics of Firm-Based C

44、ompetition in the West Midlands Jewellery and Lock Industries, The Service Industries Journal. 30(2010) 583-596.</p><p>　　[13] J. C. Spender, R. M. Grant, Knowledge and the Firm: Overview, Strategic Manageme

45、nt Journal. 17(1996) 5-9.</p><p>　　[14] M. A. Peteraf, The Cornerstones of Competitive Advantage, Strategic Management Journal.</p><p>　　14(1993) 179-191.</p><p>　　[15] J. T. Mahone

46、y, J. R. Pandian, The Resource-Based View within the Conversation of Strategic Management, Strategic Management Journal. 15(1992) 363-380.</p><p>　　[16] K. Conner, C. K. Prahalad, A Resource-Based Theory of

47、the Firm: Knowledge versus Opportunism, Organization Science. 7(1996) 477-501.</p><p>　　[17] P. J. Dimaggio, W. Powell, The Iron Cage Revisited. Institutional Isomorphism and Collective Rationality in Organi

48、zational Fields, American Sociological Review, 48(1983) 147-160.</p><p>　　[18] B. Caemmerer, M. Marck, The Impact of Isomorphic Pressures on the Development of Organisational Service Orientation in Public Se

49、rvices, Australian and New Zealand Marketing Academy. 30 November - 2 December 2009, Melbourne, Australia: ANZAM, pp. 1-7, 2009.</p><p>　　[19] R. H. Hayes, S. C. Wheelwright, Restoring our Competitive Edge:

50、Competing Through Manufacturing, Wiley, New York, 1984.</p><p>　　[20] J. B. Harreld, C. A. O’reilly, M. L. Tushman, Dynamic Capabilities at IBM: Driving Strategy into Action, California Management Review. 49

51、(2007) 21-43.</p><p>　　[21] D. J. Teece, G. Pisano, A. Shuen, Dynamic Capabilities and Strategic Management, Strategic Management Journal. 18(1997) 509-533.</p><p>　　[22] R. Amit, P. J. H. Schoe

52、maker, Strategic Assets and Organizational Rent, Strategic Management Journal. 14(1993) 33-46.</p><p>　　[23] S. K. Vickery, C. Droge, R. E. Markland, Production Competence and Business Strategy: Do They Affe

53、ct Business Performance? Decision Sciences. 24(1993) 435-455.</p><p>　　[24] R. W. Schmenner, G. Vastag, Revisiting the Theory of Production Competence: Extensions and Cross-Validations, Journal of Operations

54、 Management. 24(2006) 893-909.</p><p>　　運(yùn)營能力：供應(yīng)鏈實(shí)踐與績效之間缺失的聯(lián)系</p><p>　　關(guān)鍵詞：供應(yīng)鏈實(shí)踐，運(yùn)營能力，經(jīng)營績效，資源基礎(chǔ)觀，新制度理論</p><p>　　摘要：供應(yīng)鏈實(shí)踐與經(jīng)營績效之間的關(guān)系已被許多學(xué)者和從業(yè)者廣泛研究;然而，這種關(guān)系尚未完全明了。因此，本文旨在研究戰(zhàn)略管理中幾個(gè)突出理論的相關(guān)

55、性，以解釋運(yùn)營能力在供應(yīng)鏈實(shí)踐與業(yè)務(wù)績效之間關(guān)系中的中介作用。對(duì)基于資源的企業(yè)和新制度理論的觀點(diǎn)進(jìn)行了審查，以確定它們是否適用于將供應(yīng)鏈實(shí)踐與運(yùn)營能力聯(lián)系起來，以解釋持續(xù)的業(yè)務(wù)績效。供應(yīng)鏈實(shí)踐不足以推動(dòng)業(yè)務(wù)績效。企業(yè)需要能夠通過供應(yīng)鏈實(shí)踐同時(shí)提高效率，并通過運(yùn)營能力進(jìn)行創(chuàng)新。具體而言，運(yùn)營能力作為關(guān)鍵的公司特定能力進(jìn)行轉(zhuǎn)發(fā)，可以在組織可持續(xù)性方面實(shí)現(xiàn)重大和長期的改進(jìn)。運(yùn)營能力可以作為一個(gè)關(guān)鍵的中介因素，更好地將供應(yīng)鏈實(shí)踐的雄心傳遞到業(yè)務(wù)

56、績效上。因此，本文提供了概念支持，以促進(jìn)進(jìn)一步研究，以實(shí)證評(píng)估供應(yīng)鏈實(shí)踐，運(yùn)營能力和業(yè)務(wù)績效之間的關(guān)系。</p><p><b>　　引言</b></p><p>　　本文探討了戰(zhàn)略管理中幾個(gè)突出理論的相關(guān)性，以解釋運(yùn)營能力在供應(yīng)鏈實(shí)踐與業(yè)務(wù)績效之間關(guān)系中的中介作用。供應(yīng)鏈?zhǔn)怯芍苯踊蜷g接涉及的所有各方組成的網(wǎng)絡(luò)，包括制造商，供應(yīng)商，零售商，客戶等，通過物流，信息流向最

57、終客戶生產(chǎn)和交付產(chǎn)品或服務(wù) - 包括上游和下游和財(cái)務(wù)[1]。供應(yīng)鏈實(shí)踐包括一組用于有效整合供需的方法和活動(dòng)，以改善供應(yīng)鏈的管理[2]。在本文中，供應(yīng)鏈實(shí)踐分為兩種形式的供應(yīng)鏈整合：內(nèi)部整合和外部整合。供應(yīng)鏈整合是一個(gè)業(yè)務(wù)公司內(nèi)部不同職能部門與供應(yīng)商和客戶協(xié)作的過程，以實(shí)現(xiàn)雙方都能接受的結(jié)果[3]。</p><p>　　能力是協(xié)調(diào)，部署和分配資源的一種卓越而獨(dú)特的方式;它與資源[4]不同。運(yùn)營能力是“公司特定的技能

58、，流程和慣例，在運(yùn)營管理系統(tǒng)中開發(fā)，通過配置其運(yùn)營資源來定期解決問題”[5]。事實(shí)上，運(yùn)營包括企業(yè)生產(chǎn)產(chǎn)品或提供服務(wù)的各個(gè)方面[6]。運(yùn)營能力的構(gòu)建包括合作，定制，響應(yīng)，改進(jìn)，創(chuàng)新和重新配置[5,6]。對(duì)公司和新制度理論的基于資源的觀點(diǎn)（RBV）進(jìn)行了審查，以確定它們是否適用于將供應(yīng)鏈實(shí)踐與運(yùn)營能力聯(lián)系起來，以解釋持續(xù)的業(yè)務(wù)績效。中小企業(yè)是許多地區(qū)潛在的經(jīng)濟(jì)支柱，對(duì)就業(yè)的貢獻(xiàn)大于大企業(yè)[1]。馬來西亞也存在類似的趨勢(shì)，中小企業(yè)有可能成為

59、強(qiáng)大的發(fā)動(dòng)機(jī)增長和創(chuàng)新，擁有99.2％的企業(yè)[2]。馬來西亞的中小企業(yè)分為四大類經(jīng)濟(jì)部門：服務(wù)業(yè)，制造業(yè)，基礎(chǔ)原材料生產(chǎn)者和農(nóng)業(yè)[3]。中小企業(yè)在2010年貢獻(xiàn)了占GDP的32％;服務(wù)業(yè)占20.2％的最大份額，其次是制造業(yè)占8.7％[2]。在當(dāng)前競(jìng)爭(zhēng)激烈的商業(yè)環(huán)境和全球市場(chǎng)中，中小企業(yè)的生存和增長可能很難;客戶要求更好，更便宜的產(chǎn)品，更高的服務(wù)水平，更多的產(chǎn)品品種和更快的交付[4,5]。在最合適的時(shí)間以最低的成本向合適的客戶提供正確的產(chǎn)

60、品和服務(wù)可能是一個(gè)真正的</p><p><b>　　基于資源的視圖</b></p><p>　　RBV的靜態(tài)視圖假定公司的資源基礎(chǔ)是競(jìng)爭(zhēng)優(yōu)勢(shì)的前提[7]。從本質(zhì)上講，RBV是基于企業(yè)擁有異構(gòu)資源的假設(shè)[8]，資源隨著時(shí)間的推移仍然不完全移動(dòng)[7]。此外，當(dāng)企業(yè)資源的這四個(gè)屬性得到滿足時(shí)，可持續(xù)的競(jìng)爭(zhēng)優(yōu)勢(shì)得以實(shí)現(xiàn)：有價(jià)值，稀有性，不可替代性和不可模仿性[7,9]。首先

61、，資源必須是有價(jià)值的，以允許公司利用機(jī)會(huì)或抵消其外部環(huán)境中的威脅。其次，資源必須很少，競(jìng)爭(zhēng)對(duì)手企業(yè)難以獲得。第三，資源必須是不完全可模仿的，其他公司不能輕易發(fā)展。模仿不完美的公司資源是由于一個(gè)原因或三個(gè)原因的結(jié)合而產(chǎn)生的：（a）公司獲取資源的能力取決于獨(dú)特的歷史條件; （b）公司資源與其競(jìng)爭(zhēng)優(yōu)勢(shì)之間的關(guān)系因果關(guān)系模糊;或（c）公司創(chuàng)造競(jìng)爭(zhēng)優(yōu)勢(shì)的資源是基于知識(shí)或社會(huì)復(fù)雜的。最后，資源是不可替代的，沒有戰(zhàn)略等價(jià)物。這意味著必須沒有戰(zhàn)略上等同

62、的寶貴資源，這些資源本身要么不稀罕，要么不可模仿[7,10]。企業(yè)資源的關(guān)鍵屬性與持續(xù)競(jìng)爭(zhēng)優(yōu)勢(shì)之間的關(guān)系如圖1所示。.</p><p>　　圖1：企業(yè)資源與持續(xù)競(jìng)爭(zhēng)優(yōu)勢(shì)之間的關(guān)系[7]</p><p>　　在激烈的市場(chǎng)競(jìng)爭(zhēng)和業(yè)務(wù)驅(qū)動(dòng)下，質(zhì)量好，成本低;這種環(huán)境要求企業(yè)擁有無法模仿和不可替代的競(jìng)爭(zhēng)優(yōu)勢(shì)。為了獲得可持續(xù)競(jìng)爭(zhēng)優(yōu)勢(shì)的能力，它必須是不可替代的，無法模仿的，依賴于路徑并且隨著時(shí)間的推移

63、而發(fā)展[11]。不可模仿性是公司RBV的核心[12]，它提供了企業(yè)實(shí)現(xiàn)可持續(xù)競(jìng)爭(zhēng)優(yōu)勢(shì)的理解[13]。防止公司能力被模仿的一個(gè)重要因素是因果模糊[7]，其中公司競(jìng)爭(zhēng)優(yōu)勢(shì)的來源未被競(jìng)爭(zhēng)對(duì)手識(shí)別[14]。</p><p>　　根據(jù)施羅德等人的說法[11]，實(shí)踐不足以推動(dòng)更好的績效和提高利潤，因?yàn)槟７鲁晒?shí)踐的競(jìng)爭(zhēng)對(duì)手的影響沒有在實(shí)踐 - 績效關(guān)系中得到解決。因此，定制和專有實(shí)踐對(duì)于保持企業(yè)在競(jìng)爭(zhēng)對(duì)手中的競(jìng)爭(zhēng)優(yōu)勢(shì)非常重要

64、。但是，實(shí)踐是標(biāo)準(zhǔn)化的，如果許多組織采用相同的做法，它們?nèi)绾尾拍軒砜沙掷m(xù)的競(jìng)爭(zhēng)優(yōu)勢(shì)？如果通用的最佳實(shí)踐可以輕松復(fù)制并且同樣有益，那么它們?nèi)绾文軌驇沓志玫睦婺兀吭撀暶魈峁┝艘粋€(gè)廣泛的框架，用于論證將供應(yīng)鏈實(shí)踐和運(yùn)營能力相關(guān)聯(lián)以解釋業(yè)務(wù)績效的重要性。在這項(xiàng)研究中，爭(zhēng)論的焦點(diǎn)是，如果企業(yè)利用供應(yīng)鏈實(shí)踐來推動(dòng)運(yùn)營能力，那么他們的競(jìng)爭(zhēng)對(duì)手就無法復(fù)制戰(zhàn)略，因?yàn)樗鼈儠?huì)產(chǎn)生因果模糊，因此無法復(fù)制。此外，如果資源是基于知識(shí)或社會(huì)復(fù)雜的，那么因果歧義

65、將成為模仿的主要障礙[14,15]?；谥R(shí)的資源是RBV的核心要素[16]，RBV表明業(yè)務(wù)績效是基于異構(gòu)的資源束開發(fā)公司特定的能力[8]。</p><p><b>　　新制度理論</b></p><p>　　從新制度理論的角度來看，個(gè)別組織的理性策略在被大量組織采用時(shí)可能并不合理[17]。這是因?yàn)橹贫韧瑯?gòu)的概念是一個(gè)約束過程，迫使一個(gè)單位類似于面對(duì)同一組環(huán)境條件的其

66、他單位。隨著時(shí)間的推移，規(guī)范同構(gòu)推動(dòng)組織采用通用實(shí)踐。規(guī)范同構(gòu)是指“組織變革是對(duì)與同行組織和專業(yè)協(xié)會(huì)交流的回應(yīng)”[18]。因此，這些做法將失去其經(jīng)濟(jì)和競(jìng)爭(zhēng)力?？梢暂p松識(shí)別，傳播，傳播和復(fù)制供應(yīng)鏈實(shí)踐。這意味著其他公司可以迅速遵循和采用這些做法，并且沒有長期可持續(xù)性。事實(shí)上，這種情況類似于Hayes和Wheelwright的[19]第二階段與第四階段。在第二階段，一個(gè)組織將其制造過程與其競(jìng)爭(zhēng)對(duì)手進(jìn)行對(duì)比，以實(shí)現(xiàn)與行業(yè)規(guī)范的平等;在第四階段

67、，制造業(yè)是組織競(jìng)爭(zhēng)優(yōu)勢(shì)和世界級(jí)制造業(yè)的基礎(chǔ)，以推動(dòng)業(yè)務(wù)戰(zhàn)略超越客戶期望。</p><p><b>　　運(yùn)營能力</b></p><p>　　運(yùn)營包括公司針對(duì)生產(chǎn)產(chǎn)品或提供服務(wù)的活動(dòng)的所有方面。這些活動(dòng)包括但不限于規(guī)劃，安排，績效衡量，委派和監(jiān)督工作，SCM，采購，采購，物流/倉儲(chǔ)等。[27]。從運(yùn)營中發(fā)展而來的資源和能力是企業(yè)盈利的基礎(chǔ)，也是定義企業(yè)身份的方向源，因?yàn)?/p>

68、它們是獲得競(jìng)爭(zhēng)優(yōu)勢(shì)的商業(yè)戰(zhàn)略的基礎(chǔ)[28]。能力是協(xié)調(diào)，部署和分配資源的一種優(yōu)越而獨(dú)特的方式[29]。企業(yè)需要整體運(yùn)營的能力，包括合作，響應(yīng)，定制，改進(jìn)，重新配置和創(chuàng)新[17,30]。必要的能力使企業(yè)能夠應(yīng)對(duì)不確定性并通過供應(yīng)鏈響應(yīng)能力獲得競(jìng)爭(zhēng)優(yōu)勢(shì)。例如，操作能力需要相應(yīng)的制造系統(tǒng)在設(shè)備，材料和勞動(dòng)力方面變得高度響應(yīng)[27]。然而，大多數(shù)現(xiàn)有框架 - 供應(yīng)鏈實(shí)踐與績效之間的關(guān)系[4,6,10,23,31] - 缺乏解釋其“內(nèi)部決定因素

69、”和“外部要求”之間和之內(nèi)的相互依賴性來觸發(fā)新產(chǎn)品在整個(gè)供應(yīng)鏈中更快速地存儲(chǔ)并存儲(chǔ)應(yīng)該首先使用的較舊的“舊”產(chǎn)品[32]，從而更快地滿足客戶需求并有助于提高組織績效。這兩個(gè)結(jié)構(gòu)非常重要，涵蓋了“內(nèi)部決定因素”，例如供應(yīng)鏈集成實(shí)踐和運(yùn)營能力，這些能夠?qū)崿F(xiàn)供應(yīng)鏈的響應(yīng)能力，其次是“外部需求”，這些因素需要供應(yīng)鏈的響應(yīng)能力，包括供應(yīng)鏈</p><p>　　相比之下，由于難以捉摸和獨(dú)特的性質(zhì)，能力是持久的。運(yùn)營能力是公司

70、特定的一系列慣例，技能和流程，通過長期日常運(yùn)作中的各種活動(dòng)和實(shí)踐在內(nèi)部發(fā)展[5]。能力緊密地嵌入組織過程中，圍繞著轉(zhuǎn)型，學(xué)習(xí)和協(xié)調(diào)[20]。這些能力從組織面臨的問題演變?yōu)檫m應(yīng)實(shí)踐，再到其獨(dú)特的歷史[21]，并根據(jù)環(huán)境配置資源[4]。能力被視為一種機(jī)制，通過定制過程將同類實(shí)踐轉(zhuǎn)變?yōu)楫悩?gòu)的資源部署方式：調(diào)整實(shí)踐以反映公司的歷史[21]和文化;它們既包含顯性元素又包含隱性元素，以處理公司的問題[5];并協(xié)調(diào)實(shí)踐，以創(chuàng)造獨(dú)特的，公司特定的互動(dòng)和

71、互補(bǔ)[22]。</p><p><b>　　結(jié)論</b></p><p>　　由于供應(yīng)鏈實(shí)踐不具備成為競(jìng)爭(zhēng)優(yōu)勢(shì)來源（易于替代和模仿）的必要特征，因此似乎有一種培育作為競(jìng)爭(zhēng)優(yōu)勢(shì)來源的運(yùn)營能力的手段。因此，組織必須能夠同時(shí)通過供應(yīng)鏈實(shí)踐提高效率，并通過運(yùn)營能力進(jìn)行創(chuàng)新。能力一旦建立就難以識(shí)別，表達(dá)和解碼，并且往往會(huì)對(duì)性能產(chǎn)生長期影響。因此，運(yùn)營能力可以作為一個(gè)關(guān)鍵的中介因

72、素，更好地將供應(yīng)鏈實(shí)踐的雄心傳遞到組織績效上。</p><p>　　一項(xiàng)實(shí)證研究為運(yùn)營能力調(diào)節(jié)運(yùn)營實(shí)踐與運(yùn)營績效之間關(guān)系的觀點(diǎn)提供了支持[6]。從本質(zhì)上講，實(shí)踐被認(rèn)為可以為企業(yè)提供卓越的績效;然而，這與能力有關(guān)，并且受到能力的幫助。因此，供應(yīng)鏈實(shí)踐可能會(huì)對(duì)運(yùn)營能力產(chǎn)生影響，進(jìn)而影響績效。這一鏈意味著供應(yīng)鏈實(shí)踐與績效之間的間接聯(lián)系。盡管存在爭(zhēng)議，但運(yùn)作文獻(xiàn)已經(jīng)說明了生產(chǎn)能力理論中運(yùn)作能力與績效之間的正相關(guān)關(guān)系[23

73、,24]。</p><p><b>　　參考文獻(xiàn)</b></p><p>　　[1] J. T. Mentzer, Supply Chain Management, Sage Publications, Inc., United States of America, 2001.</p><p>　　[2] S. C. L. Koh, M. De

74、mirbag, E. Bayraktar, E. Tatoglu, S. Zaim, The Impact of Supply Chain Management Practices on Performance of SMEs, Industrial Management & Data Systems.</p><p>　　107(2007) 103-124.</p><p>　　

75、[3] S. Boon-itt, C. W. Wong, The Moderating Effects of Technological and Demand Uncertainties on the Relationship Between Supply Chain Integration and Customer Delivery Performance, International Journal of Physical Dist

76、ribution & Logistics Management. 41(2011) 253-276.</p><p>　　[4] G. Schreyogg, M. Kliesch-Eberl, How Dynamic Can Organizational Capabilities Be? Towards a Dual-Process Model of Capability Dynamization, St

77、rategic Management Journal. 28(2007) 913-</p><p><b>　　933.</b></p><p>　　[5] S. J. Wu, S. A. Melnyk, B. B. Flynn, Operational Capabilities: The Secret Ingredient. Decision Sciences. 4

78、1(2010) 721-754.</p><p>　　[6] S. J. Wu, Exploring the Direct versus Indirect Linkages Among Operations Practices, Operations Capabilities and Operations Performance: Does Competitive Context Moderate the Key

79、 Relationships? Doctoral of Philosophy, Michigan State University, USA, 2007.</p><p>　　[7] J. B. Barney, Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage, Journal of Management.</p><p>　　17(19

80、91) 99-120.</p><p>　　[8] T. T. Coates, C. M. McDermott, An Exploratory Analysis of New Competencies: A Resource Based View Perspective, Journal of Operations Management. 20(2002) 435-450.</p><p>

81、;　　[9] I. Dierickx, K. Cool, Asset Stock Accumulation and Sustainability of Competitive Advantage, Management Science. 35(1989) 1504-1511.</p><p>　　[10] M. A. Hitt, R. D. Ireland, R. E. Hoskisson, Strategic

82、Management: Competitiveness and Globalization: Concepts, ninth ed., Cengage Learning, Canada, 2011.</p><p>　　[11] R. G. Schroeder, K. A. Bates, M. A. Junttila, A Resource-Based View of Manufacturing Strategy

83、 and the Relationship to Manufacturing Performance, Strategic Management Journal.</p><p>　　23(2002) 105-117.</p><p>　　[12] J. R. Bryson, M. Taylor, Competitiveness by Design and Inimitability th

84、rough Service: Understanding the Dynamics of Firm-Based Competition in the West Midlands Jewellery and Lock Industries, The Service Industries Journal. 30(2010) 583-596.</p><p>　　[13] J. C. Spender, R. M. Gr

85、ant, Knowledge and the Firm: Overview, Strategic Management Journal. 17(1996) 5-9.</p><p>　　[14] M. A. Peteraf, The Cornerstones of Competitive Advantage, Strategic Management Journal.</p><p>　　

86、14(1993) 179-191.</p><p>　　[15] J. T. Mahoney, J. R. Pandian, The Resource-Based View within the Conversation of Strategic Management, Strategic Management Journal. 15(1992) 363-380.</p><p>　　[1

87、6] K. Conner, C. K. Prahalad, A Resource-Based Theory of the Firm: Knowledge versus Opportunism, Organization Science. 7(1996) 477-501.</p><p>　　[17] P. J. Dimaggio, W. Powell, The Iron Cage Revisited. Insti

88、tutional Isomorphism and Collective Rationality in Organizational Fields, American Sociological Review, 48(1983) 147-160.</p><p>　　[18] B. Caemmerer, M. Marck, The Impact of Isomorphic Pressures on the Devel

89、opment of Organisational Service Orientation in Public Services, Australian and New Zealand Marketing Academy. 30 November - 2 December 2009, Melbourne, Australia: ANZAM, pp. 1-7, 2009.</p><p>　　[19] R. H. H

90、ayes, S. C. Wheelwright, Restoring our Competitive Edge: Competing Through Manufacturing, Wiley, New York, 1984.</p><p>　　[20] J. B. Harreld, C. A. O’reilly, M. L. Tushman, Dynamic Capabilities at IBM: Drivi

91、ng Strategy into Action, California Management Review. 49(2007) 21-43.</p><p>　　[21] D. J. Teece, G. Pisano, A. Shuen, Dynamic Capabilities and Strategic Management, Strategic Management Journal. 18(1997) 50

92、9-533.</p><p>　　[22] R. Amit, P. J. H. Schoemaker, Strategic Assets and Organizational Rent, Strategic Management Journal. 14(1993) 33-46.</p><p>　　[23] S. K. Vickery, C. Droge, R. E. Markland,

93、Production Competence and Business Strategy: Do They Affect Business Performance? Decision Sciences. 24(1993) 435-455.</p><p>　　[24] R. W. Schmenner, G. Vastag, Revisiting the Theory of Production Competence