The DOI matches its Crossref record; 99 of the 99 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Organizational agility: ill-defined and somewhat confusing? A systematic literature review and conceptualization
Open accessAbstract
Superior business performance is a central objective of any firm in an unpredictable environment. Organizational agility (OA) constitutes one option for prospering in this environment. Although research confirms a positive effect of OA on business performance, studies show conceptual imprecision. I systematically review and compile previous findings and provide a coherent view of OA. A search in three databases yielded a final sample of 75 articles. From a qualitative analysis, I identify four agility categories: agility drivers, agility enablers, agility capabilities, and agility dimensions. Based on findings from each category, I develop a conceptual map of OA that (i) connects the agility categories and clarifies how they work, and (ii) proposes a framework for the tasks and responsibilities of management within an agile organization. As part of the conceptualization, I also consider the business environment and the impact of an increased OA level. Viewed from a dynamic capability perspective, changing internal and external agility drivers necessitate the development of agility capabilities. These are realized by a specific set of interdependent enablers. Within this concept of an agile organization, management assumes various responsibilities, in particular, engaging in monitoring and decision-making functions. Conceptual clarity of OA at the organizational level facilitates a systematic development of agility research and provides guidance for practitioners. This article contributes to agility research by integrating insights from various research streams on OA. By highlighting the close ties to strategic management and the derivation of a model to agile management, this research also contributes to strategic management research.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Absorptive Capacity: A Review, Reconceptualization, and Extension
Zahra, S. A., & George, G. (2002) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.2002.6587995 · Cited by 10,758
Clarifying the Entrepreneurial Orientation Construct and Linking It to Performance
Lumpkin, G. T., & Dess, G. G. (1996) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.1996.9602161568 · Cited by 10,159
Educational Research: An Introduction
Dale, R. R., & Borg, W. R. (1965) · British Journal of Educational Studies · doi:10.2307/3119062 · Cited by 7,198
Qualitative Inhaltsanalyse : Grundlagen und Techniken
Mayring, P. (2003) · Cited by 6,519
The Handbook of Research Synthesis and Meta-Analysis
(2019) · doi:10.7758/9781610448864 · Cited by 4,553
Market Orientation: The Construct, Research Propositions, and Managerial Implications
Kohli, A. K., & Jaworski, B. J. (1990) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1177/002224299005400201 · Cited by 4,107
Systematic reviews in the social sciences: a practical guide
(2006) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.43-5664 · Cited by 4,089
The Influence of Intellectual Capital on the Types of Innovative Capabilities
Subramaniam, M., & Youndt, M. A. (2005) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.5465/amj.2005.17407911 · Cited by 3,625
Systematic Reviews in the Social Sciences: A Practical Guide
Petticrew, M., & Roberts, H. (2006) · doi:10.1002/9780470754887 · Cited by 3,586
Sambamurthy, V., Bharadwaj, A., & Grover, V. (2003) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/30036530 · Cited by 3,228
Cited by
Co-productive agility and four collaborative pathways to sustainability transformations
Chambers, J. M., Wyborn, C., Klenk, N. L., Ryan, M., Serban, A., Bennett, N. J., Brennan, R., Charli-Joseph, L., Fernández-Giménez, M. E., Galvin, K. A., et al. (2022) · Global Environmental Change · doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2021.102422 · Cited by 292
Khairy, H. A., Baquero, A., & Al-Romeedy, B. S. (2023) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su151914337 · Cited by 61
Metadata
- Authors
- Walter, A.-T.
- Venue
- Management Review Quarterly
- Published
- 2020-04-19
- Volume
- 71
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 343-391
- ISSN
- 2198-1620 (ISSN-L)
- 2198-1639
- OpenAlex
- W3016293050
- Cited by
- 331
- References
- 99
- FWCI
- 4.58
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Organizational agility: ill-defined and somewhat confusing? A systematic literature review and conceptualization. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1007/s11301-020-00186-6
- The paper
- Walter, A.-T. (2021). Organizational agility: ill-defined and somewhat confusing? A systematic literature review and conceptualization. Management Review Quarterly. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11301-020-00186-6
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.