How dynamic can organizational capabilities be? Towards a dual‐process model of capability dynamization
Abstract
The recent discussion in the field of strategic management broadly favors the idea of dynamic capabilities in order to overcome potential rigidities of organizational capability building. The major question addressed in this paper is whether capabilities can actually be conceived as being in flux—and if so, to what extent and in which way? After briefly recapitulating the distinguishing features of organizational capabilities, path dependency, structural inertia, and commitment are identified as the main capability‐rigidity drivers causing a managerial dilemma. In the search for a resolution of this dilemma different approaches of dynamic capabilities are identified and discussed. The analysis shows that the approaches suffer from inherent conceptual contradictions: the dynamization runs the risk of dissolving the original idea and strength of organizational capability building. Ultimately, capabilities would lose the strategic power attributed to them in the resource‐based view. The last section of this paper therefore aims to develop an alternative approach, which aims at preserving the original merits of organizational capability and solving the rigidity issue not by integrating a dynamic dimension into the capability construct but rather by establishing a separate function (‘capability monitoring’). The suggestions mount up to a tier solution. Its logic builds on the dynamics of countervailing processes and second‐level observation. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Routine-based dynamic capabilities are not always an adequate means of change, even if there is a significant need for resource configurations.
“Another group of researchers has stressed that routine-based dynamic capabilities are not always an adequate means of change, even if there is a significant need for resource configurations (Eisenhardt and Martin, 2000;Schreyögg and Kliesch-Eberl, 2007).”
From On the contingent value of dynamic capabilities for competitive advantage: The nonlinear moderating effect of environmental dynamism (2014) · cites this paper as Schreyögg and Kliesch-Eberl, 2007
The routines underlying dynamic capabilities are path dependent and based on interpretations and outcomes of past actions.
“An important feature of the routines underlying dynamic capabilities is that they are path dependent and therefore based on interpretations and outcomes of past actions (Schreyögg and Kliesch-Eberl, 2007).”
From On the contingent value of dynamic capabilities for competitive advantage: The nonlinear moderating effect of environmental dynamism (2014) · cites this paper as Schreyögg and Kliesch-Eberl, 2007
The inertia problem can pertain not only to an organization's zero-order capabilities but to its dynamic capabilities as well, since routine-based organizational change tends to favor local adaptations.
“Importantly, it can pertain not only to an organization's zero-order capabilities but to its dynamic capabilities as well, since routine-based organizational change tends to favor local adaptations (Collis, 1994;Levinthal, 1997;Schreyögg and Kliesch-Eberl, 2007).”
From On the contingent value of dynamic capabilities for competitive advantage: The nonlinear moderating effect of environmental dynamism (2014) · cites this paper as Schreyögg and Kliesch-Eberl, 2007
This finding appears to contradict Eisenhardt and Martin's (2000) and Schreyögg and Kliesch-Eberl's (2007) argument that dynamic capabilities do not confer a competitive advantage in highly dynamic settings.
“This finding appears to contradict Eisenhardt and Martin's (2000) and Schreyögg and Kliesch-Eberl's (2007) argument that dynamic capabilities do not confer a competitive advantage in these settings.”
From On the contingent value of dynamic capabilities for competitive advantage: The nonlinear moderating effect of environmental dynamism (2014) · cites this paper as Schreyögg and Kliesch-Eberl, 2007
Another position raises doubts about the effectiveness of dynamic capabilities in highly dynamic environments.
“while the other raises doubts about their effectiveness in highly dynamic environments (Eisenhardt and Martin, 2000;Schreyögg and Kliesch-Eberl, 2007).”
From On the contingent value of dynamic capabilities for competitive advantage: The nonlinear moderating effect of environmental dynamism (2014) · cites this paper as Schreyögg and Kliesch-Eberl, 2007
Rule-based, experiential routines may be inappropriate to deal with the unfamiliar situations and abrupt change typical of highly dynamic environments.
“as well as the familiarity/discontinuity argument (Eisenhardt and Martin, 2000;Schreyögg and Kliesch-Eberl, 2007), which implies that rulebased, experiential routines may be inappropriate to deal with unfamiliar situations and abrupt change typical for highly dynamic environments.”
From On the contingent value of dynamic capabilities for competitive advantage: The nonlinear moderating effect of environmental dynamism (2014) · cites this paper as Schreyögg and Kliesch-Eberl, 2007
Cites
Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage
Barney, J. (1991) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/014920639101700108 · Cited by 48,334 · see citing works
A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance
Festinger, L. (1957) · doi:10.1515/9781503620766 · Cited by 24,241 · see citing works
Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning
March, J. G. (1991) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.2.1.71 · Cited by 21,942 · see citing works
A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Knowledge Creation
Nonaka, I. (1994) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.5.1.14 · Cited by 17,809 · see citing works
The Framing of Decisions and the Psychology of Choice
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1981) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.7455683 · Cited by 17,604 · see citing works
Knowledge of the firm, combinative capabilities, and the replication of technology
Kogut, B., & Zander, U. (1992) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.3.3.383 · Cited by 12,939 · cited 1× · see citing works
“These acts focus primarily on finding all the relevant resources needed and combining them effectively (Kogut and Zander, 1992).”
BackgroundOrganizational Learning: A Theory of Action Perspective
Argyris, C., & Schön, D. A. (1997) · Reis · doi:10.2307/40183951 · Cited by 11,113 · cited 1× · see citing works
“…into question the 'theories-in-use' which guide performance through selection and linking processes (capability ) where the 'certain way of doing things' is made the subject of extraordinary reflection and thereby opened up to changes responding to discontinuous events (Argyris and Schön, 1978).”
BackgroundStrategic assets and organizational rent
Amit, R., & Schoemaker, P. J. H. (1993) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.4250140105 · Cited by 8,425 · see citing works
Core capabilities and core rigidities: A paradox in managing new product development
Leonard-Barton, D. (1992) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.4250131009 · Cited by 6,477 · see citing works
Human Cognitive Abilities: A Survey of Factor-Analytic Studies
Carroll, J. B. (1993) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511571312 · Cited by 4,121 · see citing works
Knee-deep in the big muddy: a study of escalating commitment to a chosen course of action
Staw, B. M. (1976) · Organizational Behavior and Human Performance · doi:10.1016/0030-5073(76)90005-2 · Cited by 2,061 · see citing works
Mussweiler, T., Strack, F., & Pfeiffer, T. (2000) · Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin · doi:10.1177/01461672002611010 · Cited by 556 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Schilke, O. (2014) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.2099 · Cited by 1,264 · see citing works
Closing the Marketing Capabilities Gap
Day, G. S. (2011) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1509/jmkg.75.4.183 · Cited by 1,079 · see citing works
Petricevic, O., & Teece, D. J. (2019) · Journal of International Business Studies · doi:10.1057/s41267-019-00269-x · Cited by 501 · see citing works
Market-oriented sustainability: A conceptual framework and propositions
Crittenden, V. L., Crittenden, W. F., Ferrell, L. K., Ferrell, O. C., & Pinney, C. C. (2011) · Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science · doi:10.1007/s11747-010-0217-2 · Cited by 409 · see citing works
Operational capabilities: the secret ingredient
Wu, S. J., Melnyk, S. A., & Flynn, B. B. (2010) · Decision Sciences · doi:10.1111/j.1540-5915.2010.00294.x · Cited by 263 · see citing works
Dynamic Capabilities in Public Organizations: A literature review and research agenda
Piening, E. P. (2013) · Public Management Review · doi:10.1080/14719037.2012.708358 · Cited by 270 · see citing works
Graham, S. (2018) · International Journal of Production Economics · doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2018.01.005 · Cited by 79 · see citing works
- Authors
- Schreyögg, G., & Kliesch‐Eberl, M.
- Affiliations
- Freie Universität Berlin (DE)
- Corresponding author
- Schreyögg, Georg
- Venue
- Strategic Management Journal
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2007-04-03
- Volume
- 28
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 913-933
- ISSN
- 0143-2095 (ISSN-L)
- 1097-0266
- OpenAlex
- W2002133919
- Cited by
- 1,036
- References
- 12
- Citations by year
- 2026: 23 · 2025: 27 · 2024: 43 · 2023: 65 · 2022: 59 · 2021: 65 · 2020: 54 · 2019: 52 · 2018: 47 · 2017: 63 · 2016: 64 · 2015: 55 · 2014: 76 · 2013: 82 · 2012: 73
- FWCI
- 120.21
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Strategic Management Journal (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Innovation and Knowledge Management
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Management and Organizational Studies
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Management of Technology and Innovation › Organizational Management and Leadership
- Keywords
- dynamic capabilities, organizational capabilities, path dependence, structural inertia, organizational commitment, dual-process models, resource-based view
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
