An organizational learning perspective on conceptualizing dynamic and substantive capabilities

Abstract

While researchers have conceptualized both dynamic and substantive capabilities in a variety of ways, there are still no established measures for either dynamic or substantive capabilities. Although learning has been referred to as a specific type of process underlying the evolution and development of dynamic capabilities, the deep connection between dynamic capabilities and organizational process research has not yet been adequately explored. There is a need for conceptualization and operationalization of these different aspects of the learning process. In this paper, we address these gaps in the literature by drawing upon concepts from the organizational learning, marketing and strategic management fields to understand better and define dynamic and substantive capabilities concepts. First, we define dynamic and substantive capabilities and form a theoretical foundation for their conceptualization. We then develop and test specific item measures for each construct. Our findings support our conceptualization and measurement of both these important aspects of organizational performance

Determining the antecedents of dynamic supply chain capabilities

“…Other studies in India and Pakistan have not used probability sampling methods for similar reasons (e.g. Ali et al, 2012;Jeswani et al, 2008;Ryan & Tipu, 2013) Similar to these studies, we found data collection in Pakistan to be a challenging affair.…”

“…In total, we received 275 usable responses (8.1% response rate), which is in line with similar studies in emerging economies (e.g. Ali et al, 2012;Jeswani et al, 2008;Ryan & Tipu, 2013):…”

“…Other studies conducted in emerging economies have reported similar issues (e.g. Ahmad et al, 2009;Ali et al, 2012;Dubey & Gunasekaran, 2016;Jeswani et al, 2008;Kureshi et al, 2010;Ryan & Tipu, 2013;Singh et al, 2010). For example, Malik and Kotabe (2009) collected data from seven cities in India and Pakistan using convenience sampling, and could not find an up-to-date list of firms operating in each country.…”

Strategic goal interdependence approach to dynamic capability and the effects of customer integration and market dynamism: evidence from China

“…Hoskisson, Eden, Lau, and Wright (2000) made it clear that there are some issues faced by researchers in the strategy field of emerging countries such as, challenge in investigating subjects randomly, and representatively; difficulty in gaining access to top managers; lack of trust between researchers and respondents. Indeed, many literatures from developing countries, such as Pakistan and India, reported similar results (Ali, Peters, & Lettice, 2012;Aslam, Blome, Roscoe, & Azhar, 2018;Ryan & Tipu, 2013). For example, Aslam et al (2018) who collected data in Pakistan reported that the response rate was only 8.2%.…”

Identifying and assessing the scales of dynamic capabilities: a systematic literature review

“…According to research findings, half of authors (21) have neglected this important step. Getting advices from experts minimizes deviations and misconceptions of measurement items, especially regarding the construct of DCs which is too abstract and difficult to evaluate (Ali et al, 2012;Easterby-Smith et al, 2009). CDS refers to defining what is going to be measured (DeVellis, 2003).…”