The DOI matches its Crossref record; 85 of the 85 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Digital transforming capability and performance: a microfoundational perspective
Open accessAbstract
Purpose: Drawing on the literature on dynamic capabilities and digital transformation, this paper conceptualises and investigates the relevant antecedents of an essential capability for digital transformation – the digital transforming capability – and its effect on the competitive advantage of firms. Design/methodology/approach: A framework with individual and organisational microfoundations of the digital transforming capability is proposed based on previous research. The digital transforming capability is conceptualised as a second-order construct. The model is tested using data from a broad spectrum of large US companies. Structural equation modelling (SEM) is applied to test the proposed framework. Findings: The study identifies three main microfoundations that, when combined, build a digital transforming capability (digital-savvy skills, digital intensity and context for action and interaction); in addition, the study tests the relationship between digital transforming capability and firm performance. The results validate the proposed theoretical framework. In addition to proposing relevant microfoundations of the digital transforming capability, we advance knowledge on the performance effects of those microfoundations. Originality/value: The paper contributes to advancing the understanding of the digital transformation phenomenon by revealing the role of the primary components underlying the digital transforming capability. Yet the mechanisms by which the micro-level aspects are important for digital transformation and organisational outcomes are only suggested by anecdotal evidence. The paper also contributes to ongoing calls for further investigation to extend the understanding of the microfoundations of dynamic capabilities. Finally, by drawing on archival data, this study also contributes to calls to broaden the toolkit used in dynamic capabilities 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
Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.1177/002224378101800104 · Cited by 109,190
Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach
Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.103.3.411 · Cited by 41,941
Comparative fit indexes in structural models.
Bentler, P. M. (1990) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.107.2.238 · Cited by 25,266
Pls-Sem: indeed a silver bullet
Hair, J. F., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2011) · Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice · doi:10.2753/mtp1069-6679190202 · Cited by 21,631
Teece, D. J. (2007) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.640 · Cited by 16,825
Schermelleh-Engel, K., Moosbrugger, H., & Müller, H. (2003) · Department of Psychology - University of Koblenz-Landau · doi:10.23668/psycharchives.12784 · Cited by 8,975
Understanding digital transformation: A review and a research agenda
Vial, G. (2019) · The Journal of Strategic Information Systems · doi:10.1016/j.jsis.2019.01.003 · Cited by 7,337
A Reliability Coefficient for Maximum Likelihood Factor Analysis
Tucker, L. R., & Lewis, C. (1973) · Psychometrika · doi:10.1007/bf02291170 · Cited by 7,330 · cited 5×
“An RMSEA value of less than 0.08 is reasonable (Byrne, 2001), and values over 0.90 are acceptable for the GFI, TLI, IFI and CFI (Byrne, 2001).”
BackgroundInfluentialDigital Business Strategy: Toward a Next Generation of Insights
Bharadwaj, A., El Sawy, O. A., Pavlou, P. A., & Venkatraman, N. (2013) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.25300/misq/2013/37:2.3 · Cited by 4,392
A Conceptual Model of Entrepreneurship as Firm Behavior
Covin, J. G., & Slevin, D. P. (1991) · Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice · doi:10.1177/104225879101600102 · Cited by 3,904
Cited by
Belhadi, A., Kamble, S., Gunasekaran, A., & Mani, V. (2022) · Supply Chain Management: An International Journal · doi:10.1108/scm-04-2021-0152 · Cited by 259
Alabdali, M. A., & Salam, M. A. (2022) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su141912269 · Cited by 64
Growing with smart products: Why customization capabilities matter for manufacturing firms
Schulz, C., Kortmann, S., Piller, F. T., & Pollok, P. (2023) · Journal of Product Innovation Management · doi:10.1111/jpim.12680 · Cited by 49
Kulichyova, A., Kazantsev, N., White, L., & Islam, N. (2025) · International Journal of Management Reviews · doi:10.1111/ijmr.12395 · Cited by 38
Metadata
- Authors
- Sousa-Zomer, T. T., Neely, A., & Martinez, V.
- Venue
- International Journal of Operations & Production Management
- Publisher
- Emerald
- Published
- 2020-05-29
- Volume
- 40
- Issue
- 7/8
- Pages
- 1095-1128
- ISSN
- 0144-3577 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W3032673941
- Cited by
- 417
- References
- 85
- FWCI
- 37.06
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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: Digital transforming capability and performance: a microfoundational perspective. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1108/ijopm-06-2019-0444
- The paper
- Sousa-Zomer, T. T., Neely, A., & Martinez, V. (2020). Digital transforming capability and performance: a microfoundational perspective. International Journal of Operations & Production Management. https://doi.org/10.1108/ijopm-06-2019-0444
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.