Competitive Strategies And Firm Performance: Case Study On Gaziantep Carpeting Sector/Rekabet Stratejileri Ve Firma Performansi: Gaziantep Hali Sektörü Üzerinde Bir Durum Çalişmasi

Abstract

Abstract

In this paper, the effect of competitive strategies on firm performance is empirically inspected by considering value chain activities in Gaziantep carpeting industrial cluster. The findings of research reveal that there is no significant relationship between competitive strategies and firm performance in Gaziantep carpeting industry. The results of research suggest that in order to improve firm performance and to get sustainable competitive advantage in global markets, competitive strategies should be used resolutely and cost and differentiation strategies implemented simultaneously by decision makers.

Keywords: Competitive strategies, Carpeting, Gaziantep

Özet

Bu çalışmada, Gaziantep halıcılık sektöründe rekabet stratejilerinin işletme performansı üzerindeki etkisi değer zinciri aktiviteleri de gözönüne alınarak ampirik olarak incelenmiştir. Araştırma sonucunda Gaziantep halıcılık endüstrisinde rekabet stratejileri ve firma performasları arasında belirli bir ilişkinin olmadığı ortaya çıkmıştır.Araştırma sonuçlarına göre, firma performansını geliştirmek ve global pazarlarda sürdürülebilir rekabetçi stratejilerin avantajlarını elde edebilmek için karalılıkla kullanılmalı ve maliyet ve farklılaşma stratejileri karar vericiler tarafından birlikte uygulanmalıdır.

Anahtar Sözcükler: Rekabet stratejileri, Halıcılık, Gaziantep

Keywords

• -

References

1. References
2. Ariyawardana, A., 20, 73-90, (2003) “Sources of Competitive Advantage and Tea Producers.” ,[J]Asia Pacific Journal of Management
3. Alpkan, L., Ceylan, A., & Aytekin, M., , 6, 2. (2003) “Performance Impacts of Operations Strategies: A Study on Turkish Manufacturing Firms.” [J] International Journal of Agile Manufacturing
4. Bryman, A., &Cramer, D., (1997) “Quantitative data analysis with SPSS for windows: A guide for social scientists”. [R]London: Routledge
5. Bush, R. J., & Sinclair, S.A., 7 (4), 63, (1992) “Changing strategies in mature industries: Acase study.” [J] The Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing
6. D'Amboise, G., , 11 (1), 8- 17, (1993) “Do Small Businesses Manifest a Certain Strategic Logic? An Approach for Identifying It.” [J] Journal of small Business and Entrepreneurship
7. Day, G.S., and Wensley, R., 52 (July), 1- 20, 1988 “Assessing Advantage: A Framework for Diagnosing Competitive Superiority”, [J] Journal of Marketing
8. Dess, G.G., Lumpkin, G.T., & Covin, J.G., , 18 (9), 677- 695, (1997) “Entrepreneurial Strategy Making and Firm Performance: Tests of Contingency and Configurationally Models.” [J] Strategic Management Journal.

9. Gatewood, R., & Field, S., October, 16- 24, (1987) “A Personnel Selection Programmed for Small Businesses ".” [J]Journal of Small Business Management.
10. Ghemawat, P., 53- 58, (1986). “Sustainable Advantage.” [M] Harvard Business Review, 64 (September/October),
11. Johnson, R.A., & Wichern, D.W. [R] (2002) “Applied Multivariate Statistical Analysis”. (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall Inc.
12. Kalaycı, S., Karataş, A., Coşkun, A., & Kırtaş, A., 10 (1), 103- 125, (2005). “Financial Ratio Classification of Manufacturing Firms in Istanbul Stock Exchange.” [J] The Journal of Entrepreneurial Finance and Business Ventures
13. Kaplinsky, R., & Morris, M., (2000). “Spreading the Gains from Globalization: what can be Learned from Value Chain Analysis”. [R] Retrieved November24,2007,fromhttp://ideas.repec.org/a/mes/prectr/v47y2004i2p74-115.html,
14. Karnani, A., , 5 (4), 367- 380, (1984). “Generic Competitive Strategies: [J]An Analytical Approach.” Strategic Management Journal
15. Kaya, N., Alpkan, L., & Seyrek, H., (2004). “Performance Impacts of Strategic Orientations: Evidence from Turkish Manufacturing Firms”. [C]The Economics and International Business Research Conference Proceedings
16. Miller, D., & Friesen, P.H., 7 (1), 37- 55, ((1980,1986) “Porter's Generic Strategies and Performance: An Empirical Examination with American Data”. [R] Part I: Testing Porter.” Organization Studies,
17. Porter, M.E., (1980). “Competitive Strategy”. New York: [M] The Free Press
18. Porter, M.E., (1985) “Competitive Advantage: Creating and Sustaining Superior Performance”. [M]New York: The Free Press
19. Sekaran, U., (1992). “Research Methods for Business: A Skill Building Approach”. [C] (2nd ed.). John Wiley & Sons, Inc,
20. Thompson, A.A., & Strickland, A.J. [M (1996)] “Strategic Management: Concepts and Cases.” (9th ed.). USA: Irwin McGraw-Hill
21. White, R.E., 7 (3), May-June(1986) “Generic Business Strategies, Organizational Context and Performance: An Empirical Investigation.” [J]Strategic Management Journal
22. Wright, P.A. (1987). “Refinement of Porter's Generic Strategies.” [J] Strategic Management Journal, 8 (1), 93– 101.
23. Wright, P., Kroll, M., T., H., & Helms, M., 2, 57- 65, (1991).“Generic Strategies and Business Performance: An Empirical Study of the Screw Machine Products Industry.” [J] British Journal of Management
24. Yamin, S., Gunasekaran,A.,& Mavondo, F.T., 19, 507-518, (1999). “Relationship between Generic Strategies, Competitive Advantage and Organizational Performance: An Empirical Analysis.” [C]Technovation
25. Zikmund, W.G., (2003)“Business Research Methods”. [C] (7th ed.).Ohio: South Western