The core notion of the resource‐based view (RBV) is that the possession of certain resources can result in superior performance and, in order for this performance to be sustained, these resources cannot be perfectly mobile. Whereas previous reviews have mainly focused on the relationship between resources and temporary performance, no studies have systematically analyzed the extent to which empirical RBV studies have specifically considered immobility of resources. By analyzing a sample of 218 empirical RBV studies, the authors found that 17% of the studies directly measured some dimension of immobility (by, for example, actually measuring the level of social complexity, unique history, tacitness or tradability). Fewer than 2% of the studies measured the outcome of resource immobility, i.e. sustained performance differences. Based on these results, this paper discusses the consequences of overlooking this key dimension of the RBV (i.e. immobility) and suggests that, and discusses how, future research should consider resource immobility to a greater extent.