Introduction Resource Based View is an essential part of strategic management. It lays emphasis on the fact that the internal capabilities of a firm make it competitive, mainly entailing the firm’s capabilities and different resources. Indeed, it is the utilization of these resources that adds value to the firm. Despite its appealing nature, the Resource Based Approach has faced a lot of criticism from diverse scholars globally. The views of the critics mainly focus on the conceptual and practical difficulties that plague this theory at the implementation stage. The purpose of this work is to bring out both the conceptual and practical difficulties in implementing it. Such difficulties include sidelining the vital external environment, failure to meet the criterion for operational validity, being boundary limited, and static, among others. Meaning of the Resource Based View The resource-based view is founded on various concepts. First, inputs into the production process are determined by resources, which form the fundamental units of analysis (Royer, 2005, p. 95; Jones and Tilley, 2003, p. 124). The most common categories in which resources are grouped include the Human Resource, fiscal resources, technology related resources, reputation based resources, and organizational ones. Most resources offer a very weak competitive value when applicable on their own. Thus, both collaboration and coordination of resources from different categories are required to obtain a competitive and productive activity. Strategic capabilities can result from bundles of resources. What an organization can do effectively and better compared to its competitors is what constitutes its capabilities (Lengnick-Hall, 2003, p. 168). Capabilities are embedded in cumulative skills and knowledge that are practiced through organizational process to enable a firm not only to coordinate its functions, but also to utilize its assets. The capabilities of a firm are based on its resources. A firm’s main competitive advantage is founded on its resources (Remenyi, 2008, p. 80; Birkinshaw, 2000, p.103) To attain long-term success, most firms are supposed to be excellent in several aspects of value creation such as having developing insight in the dynamic client needs, responding promptly to advancement in technology, designing products with an innovative touch, being efficient and responding to problems quickly. A focus on the dynamics of a firm’s behaviors has replaced the logic of strategy fro products and positions. This has been brought about due to the need for both versatility and excellence. This implies that processes that orchestrate assets and resources to obtain capabilities constitute the most imperative component of strategy. Firms that succeed invest strategically in infrastructure and in those processes that bridge together resources and rise above usual functional partitions (Lengnick-Hall, 2003, p. 169). The longer the period and intricacy required transforming a collection of resources into capabilities, the more unlikely it becomes for competitors to copy the accomplishments that result. On the other hand, it is more challenging to transfer or achieve a capability within an organization that developed it if the capability is too complex. Moreover, there is also core competence. This encompasses some aspects that form an exceptional contribution to the value of customers. Th