Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Dynamic capabilities

Dynamic capabilities refer to a firm's ability to integrate, build, and reconfigure internal and external competences to address rapidly changing environments. Introduced in the field of , this concept extends the of the firm by emphasizing processes that enable sustained in turbulent markets, rather than static resources alone. The framework originated from the 1997 seminal work by . Teece, Gary Pisano, and Shuen, which analyzed how enterprises create and capture value amid rapid and market shifts. It posits that in environments of fast-paced innovation, traditional operational capabilities—focused on efficient resource deployment—are insufficient; instead, higher-order dynamic capabilities allow firms to adapt, innovate, and orchestrate assets strategically. Subsequent refinements, particularly by Teece in 2007, delineated the of these capabilities as organizational and managerial processes drawn from behavioral and social sciences, enabling enterprises to sense opportunities, seize them through , and reconfigure assets for long-term . Central to the dynamic capabilities framework are three interconnected processes: sensing, which involves scanning and interpreting environmental changes to identify opportunities and threats; seizing, which entails mobilizing resources and making timely investments to capitalize on those insights; and transforming (or reconfiguring), which focuses on the firm's asset base to maintain competitiveness. These elements underscore the entrepreneurial nature of dynamic capabilities, supporting innovation, ecosystem shaping, and protection of intangible assets like in global, knowledge-intensive economies. Empirical research has linked strong dynamic capabilities to superior firm performance, particularly in industries undergoing disruption or technological upheaval.

Conceptual Foundations

Definition

Dynamic capabilities refer to a firm's ability to integrate, build, and reconfigure internal and external competences to address rapidly changing environments. This concept was initially formulated by David J. Teece, Gary Pisano, and Amy Shuen in their seminal 1997 paper. These capabilities enable organizations to achieve and sustain in volatile, uncertain, and rapidly evolving markets by allowing them to adapt their resource bases and innovate strategically. Specifically, dynamic capabilities reflect a firm's capacity to generate new forms of through processes shaped by its asset positions, evolutionary paths, and organizational routines. As higher-order capabilities, dynamic capabilities orchestrate and modify ordinary capabilities—such as production and operational routines—to align with environmental shifts. They encompass strategic and organizational processes, including /coordination, learning, and reconfiguration/, which collectively support long-term performance in dynamic contexts.

Historical Development

The concept of dynamic capabilities emerged from the (RBV) of the firm, which posits that a firm's stems from its unique bundle of resources and capabilities rather than external market positioning. This perspective traces its roots to Penrose's seminal work, The Theory of the Growth of the Firm (1959), where she described firms as collections of productive resources whose growth depends on the efficient deployment and expansion of these assets, including human knowledge and managerial services. Building directly on Penrose, Birger Wernerfelt's 1984 article, "A Resource-Based View of the Firm," formalized the RBV by advocating an analysis of firms from the resource side, emphasizing how heterogeneous resources enable sustained superior performance. The term "dynamic capabilities" was formally introduced in the 1997 paper "Dynamic Capabilities and " by . Teece, Gary Pisano, and Amy Shuen, published in the Strategic Management Journal. This work extended the RBV to turbulent environments characterized by rapid technological change, defining dynamic capabilities as "the firm's ability to integrate, build, and reconfigure internal and external competences to address rapidly changing environments." The authors drew on prior RBV foundations, such as Penrose's resource bundles and Wernerfelt's focus on resource heterogeneity, while incorporating elements of organizational learning and path dependencies to explain how firms renew competences for . The framework evolved further in Teece's 2007 book, Dynamic Capabilities and Strategic Management: Organizing for Innovation and Growth, which synthesized the concept into a comprehensive approach for fostering adaptability in high-velocity markets. Here, Teece emphasized dynamic capabilities as essential for orchestrating innovation, entrepreneurial action, and long-term growth, positioning them as a counterpoint to static positioning strategies in traditional industrial organization economics. Influences from and Joseph Schumpeter's ideas of profoundly shaped the dynamic capabilities perspective, highlighting the role of innovation in disrupting established competences. , particularly Richard Nelson and Sidney Winter's 1982 analysis of routines as the building blocks of firm behavior, informed the view of capabilities as evolving through path-dependent learning processes. Schumpeter's (1942) concept of —where innovation renders old methods obsolete—underscored the need for firms to continuously reconfigure resources to survive in capitalist dynamics, a theme echoed in Teece et al.'s (1997) emphasis on amid technological upheaval. A key milestone in the early 2000s was the integration of dynamic capabilities with the knowledge-based view (KBV) of the firm, which treats as the most strategically significant . Kathleen Eisenhardt and Jeffrey Martin's 2000 paper, "Dynamic Capabilities: What Are They?" in the Strategic Management Journal, operationalized dynamic capabilities within the RBV/KBV framework as identifiable processes like product development and alliancing that enable resource reconfiguration, particularly through knowledge flows in stable or semi-turbulent settings. This synthesis highlighted how tacit and explicit underpin dynamic capabilities through specific processes such as product development, strategic decision making, and alliancing.

Theoretical Framework

Distinction from Ordinary Capabilities

Ordinary capabilities, often referred to as operational or static capabilities, encompass the routine processes and procedures that organizations use to execute their core activities efficiently within relatively stable conditions. These include functions such as , , and administrative tasks that ensure technical fitness and day-to-day viability. For instance, an optimized for consistent output represents an ordinary capability focused on and operational reliability. However, these capabilities are typically embedded in established routines and are vulnerable to when external environments shift rapidly, as they prioritize over flexibility. Dynamic capabilities differ fundamentally as higher-order, meta-capabilities that orchestrate and modify ordinary capabilities to foster and in volatile settings. They involve the , building, and reconfiguration of internal and external competences to align with evolving demands, enabling firms to create, deploy, and protect intangible assets for sustained performance. Unlike ordinary capabilities, which sustain current operations, dynamic ones act as mechanisms for strategic change, addressing the limitations of static routines in dynamic markets, where they fail to respond to disruptions, leading to competitive erosion. This higher-order nature positions dynamic capabilities as enablers of evolutionary fitness, allowing organizations to reconfigure resources proactively rather than reactively. A practical illustration of this distinction is evident in product development: an ordinary capability might streamline R&D workflows for incremental improvements in a stable market, whereas a dynamic capability would involve reorienting those workflows entirely—such as shifting from to software —during a technological . Theoretically grounded in the , dynamic capabilities resolve the limitations of ordinary ones by emphasizing processes that generate new competitive advantages amid environmental turbulence, rather than merely preserving existing efficiencies.

Related Concepts

Dynamic capabilities build upon the (RBV) of the firm, which posits that sustained arises from unique, valuable, and inimitable resources. Whereas RBV focuses on static resource advantages in stable environments, dynamic capabilities extend this framework by emphasizing the firm's ability to adapt, integrate, and reconfigure resources in response to rapidly changing markets. , defined as a firm's ability to recognize the value of new external information, assimilate it, and apply it to commercial ends, serves as a key microfoundation for the sensing aspect of dynamic capabilities. Introduced by Cohen and Levinthal, this concept highlights how prior related knowledge enables firms to value and exploit external innovations, thereby supporting the dynamic reconfiguration of capabilities in turbulent settings. Organizational complements dynamic capabilities by addressing the tension between exploiting existing assets for efficiency and exploring new opportunities for growth. This balance, often framed as a higher-order capability, allows firms to pursue both short-term performance and long-term adaptability, with enabling the simultaneous management of these demands through structural or contextual mechanisms. Dynamic capabilities integrate with the notion of core competencies, which represent collective learning and skills that provide access to multiple markets and drive . While core competencies focus on enduring strengths, dynamic capabilities evolve these competencies over time by sensing market shifts and reconfiguring them to sustain competitive positioning. The framework of dynamic capabilities draws from evolutionary theory, particularly the work of and Winter, which views firm behavior as guided by routines that evolve through variation, selection, and retention processes. These routines underpin ordinary capabilities, while dynamic capabilities represent meta-routines for modifying them in response to environmental selection pressures.

Key Processes

Sensing

Sensing represents the initial microfoundation of dynamic capabilities, encompassing the processes by which organizations scan, search for, and interpret signals from the to identify and calibrate opportunities and threats. This involves continuous vigilance in turbulent markets, where firms must detect latent changes in customer preferences, technological trajectories, and competitive dynamics to maintain . As the foundational step in the dynamic capabilities framework, sensing provides the intelligence necessary to inform subsequent actions, ensuring that enterprises can adapt proactively rather than reactively to environmental shifts. Key activities within sensing include the systematic gathering of market intelligence, technological scanning, and anticipation of evolving customer needs. Organizations conduct these through exploratory efforts such as investing in (R&D), monitoring industry trends, and analyzing competitor behaviors to uncover potential disruptions or innovations. For example, firms may employ analytics and to interpret ambiguous signals, transforming raw environmental into actionable insights about emerging opportunities. The of sensing rely on organizational designs that promote efficient flows, including boundary-spanning roles and decentralized structures. Boundary spanners, such as cross-functional teams or liaisons with external partners like universities and suppliers, facilitate the collection and synthesis of diverse inputs, while analytical systems help filter noise and update strategic hypotheses. These elements enable rapid learning—through experiential, vicarious, and organizational mechanisms—to embed sensing into the firm's routines. Illustrative examples highlight sensing's practical impact; has exemplified this by actively scanning customer requirements and technological possibilities, enabling the firm to integrate innovations like advanced microprocessors ahead of market shifts. Such cases underscore how effective sensing positions firms to shape their ecosystems and sustain .

Seizing

Seizing refers to the process by which firms mobilize resources to address and capitalize on opportunities identified through sensing, involving investments in development and , technology selection, and design to ensure marketplace acceptance. This step emphasizes entrepreneurial action to convert potential into value, distinguishing it from mere detection by focusing on commitment and execution. Key activities in seizing include evaluating opportunities to determine viable paths, forming alliances with partners for co-specialization and , and acquiring new assets such as external technologies or capabilities. decisions require committing financial and operational to promising initiatives, while choices involve architecting value delivery and profit capture mechanisms tailored to dynamics, such as leasing models or integrations. These activities often entail with complementors and suppliers to mitigate risks in uncertain environments. The of seizing lie in organizational processes that support effective action, including routines that overcome cognitive biases like or over-optimism through disciplined, data-informed judgments. structures, such as decentralized units with aligned incentives, facilitate rapid resource orchestration and protect intellectual assets during execution. Entrepreneurial management provides leadership to challenge inertial routines, fostering in committing to innovations while navigating internal and dynamics. A representative example is Apple's development of the , where the firm seized trends by committing substantial resources to integrate , software, and partnerships, enabling rapid commercialization and market dominance. This involved strategic decisions to orchestrate internal R&D with external suppliers, transforming sensed digital opportunities into a high-margin product . Challenges in seizing arise from the need to balance deep resource commitments with retained flexibility, as excessive dedication to specific paths can lead to lock-in and reduced adaptability in volatile markets. Firms must manage cospecialized assets and decision uncertainties to avoid path dependencies that hinder future responses.

Transforming

The transforming process, also referred to as reconfiguring, represents the renewal mechanism within dynamic capabilities, involving the continuous reconfiguration of an organization's resources, assets, and operational structures to sustain in volatile environments. This process ensures that firms can adapt their internal arrangements to align with evolving external demands, going beyond static to enable ongoing of tangible and intangible assets. Key activities in transforming include the deliberate transformation of existing assets, such as reallocating and toward higher-value applications, alongside organizational to streamline hierarchies and pathways. Learning loops play a central , facilitating iterative mechanisms that refine processes through experimentation and adjustment, thereby embedding adaptability into the firm's core operations. These activities demand proactive to dismantle inefficient elements while fostering integration of novel elements, ensuring the organization remains agile without disrupting ongoing value creation. At the level, transforming relies on processes for unlearning obsolete routines—such as challenging entrenched assumptions and phasing out legacy practices—and integrating new ones through cross-functional and knowledge recombination. These foundational elements, including decision rules for resource orchestration and structural flexibilities like modular designs, enable firms to overcome path dependencies and that could otherwise hinder . A representative example is IBM's strategic pivot in the from a hardware-centric model to a services-oriented , where transforming capabilities facilitated the reconfiguration of its asset base, including divestitures of underperforming divisions and investments in consulting and software solutions, ultimately increasing revenues from 27% to over 50% of total income by the early . This shift involved unlearning hardware manufacturing routines and integrating new competencies in integrated solutions, demonstrating how transforming prevents competence rigidity by enabling sustained internal . Overall, the transforming process plays a pivotal role in ensuring long-term adaptability, allowing organizations to mitigate the risks of technological obsolescence and market shifts while continuously renewing their operational foundations to support enduring performance.

Applications

In Strategic Management

In , dynamic capabilities play a pivotal role in sustaining by enabling firms to innovate and adapt their strategies in rapidly changing environments, where traditional resource-based views may fall short. This framework, as articulated by Teece et al., emphasizes the firm's ability to integrate, build, and reconfigure internal and external competencies to address evolving market conditions, thereby maintaining superior performance over time. Unlike static positioning strategies, dynamic capabilities foster ongoing strategic renewal, allowing organizations to exploit opportunities and mitigate threats proactively. Key applications of dynamic capabilities in include , where firms leverage sensing and reconfiguration to develop new offerings; market entry, involving the orchestration of resources for expansion into new geographies; and reconfiguration, which enhances through adaptive partnerships and adjustments. For instance, in , dynamic capabilities enable the and scaling of new technologies, while in market entry, they support the alignment of operational routines with local demands. applications often involve reconfiguring supplier networks to respond to disruptions, as seen in contexts where in sustains cost leadership. A prominent case example is Teece's of Systems, which utilized dynamic capabilities through an effective acquisition process to assemble a of products and expertise, driving in networking technologies and enabling sustained in a competitive sector. 's approach exemplifies how repeated acquisitions and integration routines—core to transforming capabilities—allowed the firm to adapt to technological shifts, entering new markets and innovating products like routers and switches while maintaining market leadership. Empirical evidence supports the link between dynamic capabilities and firm performance in manufacturing sectors, with studies demonstrating positive correlations through sensing, seizing, and reconfiguration processes. For example, a survey of 271 Kenyan firms found that these capabilities collectively explain 25.9% of performance variance, with reconfiguration showing the strongest direct impact (β = 0.182, p < 0.001), highlighting their role in enhancing and profitability. Similar findings in broader samples indicate that dynamic capabilities indirectly boost performance by improving operational routines, particularly in volatile subsectors like and automotive. Dynamic capabilities integrate with traditional strategic tools such as and Porter's Five Forces by extending their application to dynamic contexts, where static assessments are augmented with adaptive processes to evaluate internal strengths amid changing external forces. In practice, firms use Porter's framework to identify industry threats like supplier power, then apply dynamic capabilities to reconfigure resources accordingly, while incorporates capability-building to turn weaknesses into opportunities for innovation. This enhances by bridging positional analysis with capability orchestration.

In Digital Transformation

In the digital era, dynamic capabilities enable firms to sense emerging technological trends such as (AI) and , which disrupt traditional business models by offering opportunities for enhanced data analytics and secure decentralized operations. Sensing involves continuously scanning the environment for these digital signals, including AI-driven predictive tools and blockchain's potential for transparent supply chains, allowing organizations to identify threats and opportunities ahead of competitors. Seizing these trends requires agile decision-making, often through platform strategies that integrate digital ecosystems, such as adopting cloud-based platforms to scale AI applications or blockchain for collaborative networks. Transforming legacy systems follows, where firms reconfigure outdated infrastructures—replacing siloed IT systems with integrated digital architectures—to sustain amid rapid technological evolution. A prominent example is Netflix's transition from DVD rentals to streaming dominance, leveraging dynamic capabilities to sense shifting consumer preferences toward on-demand in the early 2000s. The company seized this opportunity by investing in proprietary streaming technology and data analytics platforms, which enabled personalized recommendations and acquisition strategies. Transforming its operations involved reconfiguring its entire , from delivery networks to production, resulting in a of approximately $470 billion and over 300 million global subscribers as of November 2025. Recent research from 2023 to 2025 highlights the role of dynamic capabilities in innovation pathways, particularly AI integration, where firms develop ambidextrous routines to balance exploitation of existing assets with exploration of generative AI for new value creation. Studies emphasize how these capabilities facilitate AI-driven processes like and , fostering ecosystems that enhance operational . Challenges in applying dynamic capabilities to arise from the accelerated pace of technological change, necessitating faster such as individual-level skills in data literacy and cross-functional to operationalize sensing and reconfiguring at . This speed often strains organizational structures, requiring investments in upskilling to avoid inertia in legacy-heavy industries. Empirical studies post-2020 demonstrate strong links between dynamic capabilities and maturity, with higher maturity levels correlating to improved firm performance metrics like revenue growth and output. For instance, quantitative analyses of high-tech SMEs show that robust dynamic capabilities mediate the relationship between digital investments and , achieving up to 25% higher performance in digitally mature firms compared to laggards.

Criticisms and Future Directions

Key Critiques

One major critique of the dynamic capabilities framework centers on its conceptual vagueness, which stems from imprecise definitions and boundaries that hinder and empirical testing. Early formulations, such as Teece et al. (1997), described dynamic capabilities as the firm's ability to integrate, build, and reconfigure competences, but critics argued this was tautological and abstract, failing to distinguish them clearly from core competences or routines. Eisenhardt and Martin (2000) addressed this by proposing that dynamic capabilities are specific, stable processes (e.g., product development or strategic ) shaped by context, yet they noted the original view's lack of specificity still posed challenges for measurement and application. Barreto (2010) reinforced this in a comprehensive review, highlighting that the framework's evolving definitions have led to inconsistencies across studies, making it difficult to falsify or compare findings systematically. Another key criticism is the framework's overemphasis on managerial , which downplays the of path dependencies and institutional factors in capability development. The approach portrays managers as proactive orchestrators of change through sensing, seizing, and transforming, but this voluntaristic perspective overlooks how historical trajectories and external constraints limit strategic options. Arend and Bromiley (2009) contended that such a focus assumes excessive control by executives, ignoring structural barriers like lock-in effects from prior investments or regulatory environments that shape resource reconfiguration. This managerialist bias, they argued, renders the theory logically inconsistent with broader , where capabilities emerge incrementally rather than through deliberate action alone. The issue of equifinality further complicates the framework's explanatory power, as multiple pathways can lead to similar competitive outcomes, obscuring between dynamic capabilities and performance. Eisenhardt and Martin (2000) observed that dynamic capabilities exhibit high equifinality—unlike operational routines, diverse processes (e.g., alliances or internal R&D) can achieve equivalent results in turbulent markets—making it challenging to attribute success to specific mechanisms. This multiplicity undermines empirical efforts to establish , as configurations vary widely without clear predictors of effectiveness. Barreto (2010) echoed this concern, noting that equifinality contributes to the framework's abstractness, as it resists straightforward in diverse contexts. Critics also point to the framework's limited generalizability beyond large, established firms to smaller entities or broader ecosystems. Developed primarily from observations of high-tech multinationals, dynamic capabilities assume resource abundance for reconfiguration, which SMEs often lack due to constrained budgets and expertise. Barreto (2010) highlighted that most empirical studies focus on firm-level analysis in dynamic industries, with scant evidence for applicability in stable sectors, SMEs, or inter-firm ecosystems where collaborative rather than internal processes dominate adaptation. Arend and Bromiley (2009) added that this narrow scope limits the theory's universality, as ecosystem-level (e.g., platform governance) require extensions beyond isolated firm actions. In response to these critiques, scholars have refined the framework by distinguishing ordinary (operational) capabilities—stable routines for efficient production—from dynamic ones that enable . Winter (2003) introduced this to clarify boundaries, arguing that ordinary capabilities support day-to-day operations while dynamic ones modify them for change. Helfat and Winter (2011) further elaborated, acknowledging the blurry line between the two but emphasizing that dynamic capabilities involve higher-order routines for strategic , addressing by focusing on repeatable processes rather than actions. These refinements aim to enhance measurability and applicability, though debates persist on their sufficiency.

Recent Developments

Recent research from 2023 to 2025 has increasingly addressed empirical challenges in dynamic capabilities studies, emphasizing the need for more robust methodologies to capture their temporal and contextual nuances. Scholars recommend incorporating longitudinal designs to track capability evolution over time, sector-specific analyses to account for industry variations, and explicit consideration of time lags between capability deployment and performance outcomes. For instance, a 2025 study highlights the importance of clear in measurement, advocating for multi-level constructs that integrate firm and environmental factors to enhance validity in empirical assessments. Advancements in integrating dynamic capabilities with have introduced new models that link these abilities to AI-driven and competitive . Recent frameworks posit that augments sensing and reconfiguring processes, enabling firms to detect market signals faster and adapt resources dynamically in volatile digital ecosystems. from 2025 demonstrates how ambidexterity—balancing and —strengthens dynamic capabilities, fostering pathways that improve in digital contexts. Additionally, studies show that digital adaptability mediates the relationship between adoption and enhanced , with continuous effects on market responsiveness. Extensions of dynamic capabilities theory have applied it to strategic planning and global supply chains, revealing performance outcomes in disrupted environments. A 2025 analysis conceptualizes dynamic capabilities as key drivers in planning, where sensing global risks and seizing reconfiguration opportunities lead to superior and financial results. In supply chain contexts, critical capabilities such as and have been shown to mitigate disruptions, with empirical models confirming their role in enhancing overall performance amid geopolitical shifts. These applications underscore how dynamic capabilities enable firms to navigate complexity in operations. Looking ahead, future directions in dynamic capabilities research emphasize incorporating and perspectives to address broader societal imperatives. Emerging work integrates dynamic capabilities, where reconfiguring for eco-innovations mediates performance through resource optimization and . Studies from 2024-2025 advocate for an adapting-shaping view that positions capabilities within environmental nexuses, promoting circular that balance economic and ecological goals. This trajectory highlights the potential for dynamic capabilities to orchestrate multi-actor initiatives, such as in innovations. Key publications driving these developments include works in leading journals like the Management Review Quarterly on open innovation enhancements to dynamic capabilities and the Journal of Enterprise Information Management on AI-innovation linkages, alongside contributions in Production & Manufacturing Research exploring resilience applications. These 2025 pieces in outlets such as Emerald Insight and Springer provide foundational empirical validations for digital and sustainable pathways.

References

  1. [1]
    Dynamic Capabilities - David J. Teece
    Dynamic capability is the firm's ability to integrate, build, and reconfigure internal and external competences to address rapidly changing environments.
  2. [2]
    Dynamic Capabilities - Cambridge University Press & Assessment
    Dynamic capabilities help enable an enterprise to profitably build and renew resources, reconfiguring them as needed to innovate and respond to (or bring about) ...
  3. [3]
    The Theory of the Growth of the Firm - Oxford University Press
    Free delivery 25-day returnsOriginally published in 1959, The Theory of the Growth of the Firm has illuminated and inspired thinking in strategy, entrepreneurship, knowledge creation, and ...Missing: citation | Show results with:citation
  4. [4]
    [PDF] A Resource-Based View of the Firm Birger Wernerfelt Strategic ... - MIT
    May 25, 2007 · The idea of looking at firms as a broader set of resources goes back to the seminal work of Penrose (1959), but, apart from Rubin (1973), has ...
  5. [5]
    None
    Summary of each segment:
  6. [6]
    Dynamic Capabilities and Strategic Management - David J. Teece
    Free delivery 25-day returnsThis book is the clearest and most succinct statement of the core ideas of dynamic capabilities. Teece explains their genesis, application, and how they offer ...
  7. [7]
    [PDF] Evolutionary Economics, Routines, and Dynamic Capabilities
    Evolutionary economics has been a key influence on strategic management and especially on the dynamic capabilities framework, where it is a foundational pillar.
  8. [8]
    [PDF] Dynamic Capabilities, Absorptive Capacity and Knowledge Sharing
    Apr 1, 2010 · ABSORBTIVE CAPACITY AS A DYNAMIC CAPABILITY. Cohen and Levinthal‟s (1990) seminal work encapsulated a firm‟s ability to recognise the value ...<|separator|>
  9. [9]
    The Core Competence of the Corporation
    The Core Competence of the Corporation. How companies cultivate the skills and resources for growth. by C.K. Prahalad and Gary Hamel · From the Magazine ( ...
  10. [10]
    (PDF) The Relations between Dynamic Capabilities and Core ...
    Oct 16, 2025 · This article deals with the relationship between dynamic capabilities and core competencies of companies. Both categories extend the resource-based view of the ...
  11. [11]
    [PDF] Evolutionary economics, routines, and dynamic capabilities
    Nov 27, 2023 · Evolutionary economics has been a key influence on strategic management, and especially on the dynamic capabilities framework, where it is a ...
  12. [12]
    The Transformation of the Business Structure of Apple Computer Inc ...
    Sep 30, 2025 · This study examines how Apple's dynamic capabilities (DC) drove its business transformation and rapid growth and how these attributes ...
  13. [13]
    Dynamic Capabilities at IBM: Driving Strategy into Action
    Aug 6, 2025 · The IBM transformation illustrates the ideas behind dynamic capabilities, showing how the company has been able to sense changes in the marketplace.
  14. [14]
    Business models and dynamic capabilities - ScienceDirect.com
    Dynamic capabilities, which are underpinned by organizational routines and managerial skills, are the firm's ability to integrate, build, and reconfigure ...
  15. [15]
    (PDF) Dynamic capabilities and innovation in supply chains
    Innovation capacity both in firms and in supply chains is also integral to responding to dynamic markets and customer needs. This explorative research examines ...
  16. [16]
    [PDF] DYNAMIC CAPABILITIES: WHAT ARE THEY?
    Cisco Systems has, for example, a very effective acquisition process by which man- agers have assembled a changing array of prod- ucts and engineering know ...
  17. [17]
    [PDF] Strategic Management of Open Innovation: A Dynamic Capabilities ...
    Cisco is an example of a firm that used open innovation through acquisi- tions. Whatever technology the company needed, it acquired from the outside ...
  18. [18]
    Dynamic capabilities and their indirect impact on firm performance
    Aug 30, 2011 · Empirical findings suggest that dynamic capabilities impinge on operational capabilities which in turn have a significant effect on performance.
  19. [19]
    Dynamic Capabilities and Related Paradigms
    Sep 3, 2025 · Dynamic capabilities are the factors that, if strong, allow an organization to create and deliver value to customers, outcompete rivals, and reap financial ...<|control11|><|separator|>
  20. [20]
    Dynamic capabilities in the upstream oil and gas sector: Managing ...
    The Dynamic Capabilities Framework is being used to capture opportunities and mitigate strategic risks in Upstream Oil and Gas Exploration and Production (E&P).
  21. [21]
    Leveraging dynamic capabilities for digital transformation: Exploring ...
    This research aims to explore how digital dynamic capabilities (digital sensing, digital capturing, and digital transforming capability) enable digital ...
  22. [22]
    The Impact of Blockchain Technology and Dynamic Capabilities on ...
    Blockchain enhances detection capability by providing real-time, transparent data that banks can use to monitor market trends and regulatory developments.2.1. Blockchain Technology... · Innovation Capacity · Detection Capability
  23. [23]
    (PDF) Dynamic capabilities for digital transformation - ResearchGate
    Jul 25, 2025 · The purpose of this paper is to identify sensing, seizing and reconfiguring routines of dynamic capabilities that enable digital transformation in firms.
  24. [24]
    Netflix: Dynamic Capabilities for Global Success - ResearchGate
    This case study documents the firm's phenomenal rise from uncertain beginnings in DVD rentals to online streaming and original content.Missing: transformation | Show results with:transformation
  25. [25]
    Netflix: Dynamic Capabilities for Global Success
    Dec 21, 2022 · This case study documents the firm's phenomenal rise from uncertain beginnings in DVD rentals to online streaming and original content.Missing: transformation | Show results with:transformation<|control11|><|separator|>
  26. [26]
    [PDF] DATA-DRIVEN DYNAMIC CAPABILITIES - DiVA portal
    Jun 4, 2020 · ... case study of Netflix and its dynamic capabilities, where digital innovations transformed its capabilities and business strategy. The ...
  27. [27]
    Dynamic capabilities and digital innovation: pathways to competitive ...
    This study empirically validates the relationship between dynamic capabilities (digital orientation, digital capability, and willingness to change), ...
  28. [28]
    Digital Maturity, Dynamic Capabilities and Innovation Performance ...
    Sep 27, 2025 · In emphasizing that digital maturity must be supported by dynamic capabilities to produce innovations that have an impact on organizational ...
  29. [29]
    Dynamic Capabilities & Digital Transformation: A quantitative study ...
    The results show a significant positive effect of dynamic capabilities on digital maturity, and of both concepts on competitive advantage, with digital maturity ...
  30. [30]
    Dynamic Capabilities: What Are They? - jstor
    This paper focuses on dynamic capabilities and, more generally, the resource-based view of ... J., 21: 1105-1121 (2000). Page 10. 1114 K. M. Eisenhardt and J. A. ...
  31. [31]
    Dynamic Capabilities: A Review of Past Research and an Agenda ...
    In this study, the author reviews the diverse research streams on dynamic capabilities, identifies main limitations and challenges, suggests a new ...
  32. [32]
    Assessing the dynamic capabilities view: spare change, everyone?
    Assessing the dynamic capabilities view: spare change, everyone? Richard J. Arend and Philip BromileyView all authors and affiliations. Volume 7, Issue 1.
  33. [33]
    Not all roads lead to Rome: non-equifinality in dynamic capabilities ...
    Aug 16, 2022 · Equifinality means multiple paths to the same result, while non-equifinality means only one path. This article argues that dynamic capabilities ...
  34. [34]
    (PDF) Dynamic capabilities facilitating innovative strategies in SMEs
    Aug 9, 2025 · In this study we present dynamic capabilities that facilitate innovative strategies (proactive-creativity strategy and growth-risk orientation) in Small-and ...
  35. [35]
    Untangling Dynamic and Operational Capabilities: Strategy for the ...
    Aug 11, 2011 · We explain why the line between dynamic and operational (or ordinary) capabilities is unavoidably blurry, draw implications for capabilities ...
  36. [36]
    Unlocking dynamic capabilities: Pathways for empirical research
    Feb 24, 2025 · This article addresses these concerns by offering key recommendations for empirical research in this domain.
  37. [37]
    (PDF) Measuring Dynamic Capabilities: A Construct-Level Analysis ...
    Aug 6, 2025 · HOW SHOULD DYNAMIC CAPABILITIES BE OPERATIONALIZED? The growing popularity of the DCV and the increased number of empirical studies using this.
  38. [38]
    Artificial intelligence and innovation capability: A dynamic ...
    This study is based on the theory of dynamic capabilities, exploring the mediating role of digital adaptability and its continuous mediating role with market ...
  39. [39]
    the role of dynamic capabilities in digital innovation ecosystems
    Sep 8, 2025 · Harnessing AI ambidexterity for competitive advantage: the role of dynamic capabilities in digital innovation ecosystems Available.<|control11|><|separator|>
  40. [40]
    Dynamic Capability Drivers and Performance Outcomes of Strategic ...
    Jun 16, 2025 · This study conceptualizes and tests the role of dynamic capabilities as drivers and business performance as an outcome of effective strategic import planning.
  41. [41]
    Full article: Supply chain resilience and critical dynamic capabilities
    This study explores the critical dynamic capabilities (DC) needed to ensure supply chain resilience during large-scale disruptions.
  42. [42]
    The role of dynamic capabilities in the development of eco-innovations
    Dynamic capabilities, including sensing, seizing, and transforming, are critical for eco-innovations, which are essential for firms to thrive in the post- ...
  43. [43]
    Green dynamic capability and sustainability performance: the roles ...
    Sep 29, 2025 · This study investigates the influence of green dynamic capability on sustainability performance through the mediating role of green ...
  44. [44]
    Refocusing on the Dynamic Capabilities–Environment Nexus
    Feb 26, 2025 · This collection reveals the potentials of an adapting–shaping view of dynamic capabilities and a renewed focus on the dynamic capabilities–environment nexus.
  45. [45]
    A dynamic capabilities framework for building circular ecosystems ...
    Our study demonstrates how focal firms harness circular innovations and learning processes to foster knowledge exchange, optimize resources, and co-create value ...A Dynamic Capabilities... · 4. Results And Discussion · 4.2. Dynamic Capabilities...
  46. [46]
    enhancing firms' dynamic capabilities through open innovation
    May 5, 2025 · This article analyses how firms enhance their dynamic capabilities through open innovation activities.
  47. [47]
    A dynamic capability perspective on the impact of big data analytics ...
    Oct 8, 2024 · To the best of our knowledge, this research is the first attempt toward DC-based BDAC conceptualization, empirical validation of first-order ...