|Budget Amount *help
¥1,200,000 (Direct Cost : ¥1,200,000)
Fiscal Year 1999 : ¥1,200,000 (Direct Cost : ¥1,200,000)
About the evaluation and the measurement of core competence (the technology and the skill), this study dims to order it from the viewpoint of the business economics. By the way, core competence meant, as Adam Smith says, the skill , the technique, and the judgement of the human being and as for the concept, a system was set as the theory of core competence by G.Hamel & C.K.Prahalad.
Accoding to their definition, in the other company, it makes the business power having to do with a core which provides the value of the one's own company of the imitation which isn't formed to the customer with core competence and "value-added" "the business power" "the point of tact with the customer" is taken up as the factor.
However, the point is argued about from the viewpoint of the strategy theory about what relation these factors are in and how to evaluated and whether or not they measure core competence. How to evaluate and measure core competence isn't argued about at all from the view point of the business economics.
By the meaning, as for this study result, it accomplishes an introduction for the study of the evaluation and the measurement of core competence. By the way, the concept of the performance (the profit and the value-added) is confused at present but can show the distinction and the relation of both as follows.
Now, it is c : the constant capital, v : the variable capital, m1 : the average profit (the interest and the profit of enterprise), m2 : surplus-value, it is possible to show in revenue(c+v+m1+m2) - expense(c+v+m1) = profit(m2), revenue(c+v+m1+m2) - constant capital (c) = value - added(v+m1+m2)
The conclusion of this study is that the one to have taken a surplus value from the viewpoint of the capitalist is a profit, the one to have grasped a surplus value from the process of the production with surplus value and that there is not an essential difference in both.