Understanding dynamic capabilities: progress along a developmental path
Abstract
The aim of dynamic capabilities research is ambitious: to understand how firmscan sustain a competitive advantage by responding to and creating environmen-tal change (Teece, 2007). As one of the most central and difficult questionswithin the strategy domain, this might well be characterized as the Holy Grailof strategic management. The topical domain of dynamic capabilities, in conse-quence, is as broad and as complex as any in the field. It spans the domains ofstrategy process and content, and involves multiple levels of analysis, from man-agerial decision-processes, to organizational routines, to competitive inter-actions and environmental change. The complexity of the topic is matched,fittingly, by the complexity of the theoretical underpinnings. Undoubtedly, thishas generated some confusion. It is therefore not surprising that the critique ofArend and Bromiley (A&B) in the preceding essay reflects some of this confu-sion. Here, we address this by clarifying the dynamic capabilities concept, inrelation to its development and the challenges faced.We first survey the development path of dynamic capabilities research, anddiscuss the different theoretical bases of this emerging area of scholarship. Thenwe clarify issues regarding the definition of dynamic capabilities and discuss thelink between dynamic capabilities and firm performance. As part of our analy-sis, we address the two main conclusions of A&B regarding dynamic capabil-ities research. The first is that we should abandon the dynamic capabilitiesapproach if it does not ‘quickly develop a theoretical foundation’. The second isthat regardless of the pace of theory development, we should replace theseefforts with ‘work on strategic change tied to fuller theories of strategic organ-ization’. In what follows, we explain why these conclusions are premature andunwarranted. We also address other issues raised by A&B, focusing on the mainissues raised in the body of their commentary.
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?
Researchers have tended to identify dynamic capabilities post hoc, often equating their existence with successful organizational outcomes.
“Further, researchers have tended to identify dynamic capabilities post hoc, often equating their existence with successful organizational outcomes.”
From On the contingent value of dynamic capabilities for competitive advantage: The nonlinear moderating effect of environmental dynamism (2014) · cites this paper as Helfat and Peteraf, 2009
The practice of identifying dynamic capabilities post hoc makes it difficult to separate the existence of dynamic capabilities from their effects.
“This practice makes it difficult to separate the existence of dynamic capabilities from their effects (Helfat and Peteraf, 2009).”
From On the contingent value of dynamic capabilities for competitive advantage: The nonlinear moderating effect of environmental dynamism (2014) · cites this paper as Helfat and Peteraf, 2009
Cites
Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage
Barney, J. (1991) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/014920639101700108 · Cited by 48,334 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Untangling dynamic and operational capabilities: Strategy for the (N) ever - changing world
Helfat, C. E., & Winter, S. G. (2011) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.955 · Cited by 1,439 · see citing works
Self-citationSchilke, O. (2014) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.2099 · Cited by 1,264 · see citing works
Schilke, O., Hu, S., & Helfat, C. E. (2018) · Academy of Management Annals · doi:10.5465/annals.2016.0014 · Cited by 1,226 · see citing works
Self-citationMikalef, P., Krogstie, J., Pappas, I. O., & Pavlou, P. (2020) · Information & Management · doi:10.1016/j.im.2019.05.004 · Cited by 1,072 · see citing works
“Building on the RBV [26], the dynamic capabilities view [55,61], and the emerging literature on big data analytics [1,5,6], this study proposes an evolutionary fitness view [62], by which a BDAC enables firms to reposition themselves in the face of chancing business environments.”
BackgroundDynamic Managerial Capabilities: Review and Assessment of Managerial Impact on Strategic Change
Helfat, C. E., & Martin, J. A. (2015) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/0149206314561301 · Cited by 1,045 · see citing works
Self-citationBig data analytics capabilities: A systematic literature review and research agenda
Mikalef, P., Pappas, I. O., Krogstie, J., & Giannakos, M. (2018) · Information Systems and e-Business Management · doi:10.1007/s10257-017-0362-y · Cited by 888 · see citing works
Mikalef, P., Boura, M., Lekakos, G., & Krogstie, J. (2019) · British Journal of Management · doi:10.1111/1467-8551.12343 · Cited by 835 · see citing works
Assessing business value of big data analytics in European firms
Côrte-Real, N., Oliveira, T., & Ruivo, P. (2017) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.08.011 · Cited by 538 · see citing works
Akter, S., Bandara, R., Hani, U., Fosso Wamba, S., Foropon, C., & Papadopoulos, T. (2019) · International Journal of Information Management · doi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2019.01.020 · Cited by 193 · see citing works
Chaudhuri, R., Chatterjee, S., Vrontis, D., & Thrassou, A. (2024) · Annals of Operations Research · doi:10.1007/s10479-021-04407-3 · Cited by 164 · see citing works
Antecedents of strategic thinking and its impact on competitive advantage
Dixit, S., Singh, S., Dhir, S., & Dhir, S. (2021) · Journal of Indian Business Research · doi:10.1108/jibr-08-2020-0262 · Cited by 75 · see citing works
Zahoor, N., Khan, H., Khan, Z., & Akhtar, P. (2024) · Asia Pacific Journal of Management · doi:10.1007/s10490-022-09843-8 · Cited by 60 · see citing works
- Authors
- Helfat, C. E., & Peteraf, M. A.
- Affiliations
- Dartmouth College (US)
- Corresponding author
- Helfat, Constance E.
- Peteraf, Margaret A.
- ORCID
- Helfat, Constance E.
- Venue
- Strategic Organization
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2009-02
- Volume
- 7
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 91-102
- ISSN
- 1476-1270 (ISSN-L)
- 1741-315X
- OpenAlex
- W2151780527
- Cited by
- 1,121
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 91 · 2025: 88 · 2024: 96 · 2023: 104 · 2022: 92 · 2021: 90 · 2020: 81 · 2019: 73 · 2018: 84 · 2017: 56 · 2016: 63 · 2015: 52 · 2014: 53 · 2013: 28 · 2012: 39
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Strategic Organization (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 › Strategy and Management › Business Strategies and Innovation
- Keywords
- dynamic capabilities, theory development, competitive advantage, environmental change, firm performance, strategic change, organizational routines, management decision-making
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