The dynamic resource-based view: capability lifecycles

By Constance E. Helfat, Margaret A. Peteraf. 2003

4,538 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Management Science and Operations Research, Strategy and Management

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/0e1b66ff4495fe7db0e1c16a34e12b62c50cdd4b

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Management Science and Operations Research

In Strategy and Management

Citations in the corpus

The impact of IT capabilities on firm performance: The mediating roles of absorptive capacity and supply chain agility (2013, neutral): “Dynamic capability is regarded as a higher-level routine that is used to adapt operational routines and capabilities to develop new value-creating strategies [12,20,29,57,83].”
On the Contingent Value of Dynamic Capabilities for Competitive Advantage: The Nonlinear Moderating Effect of Environmental Dynamism (2014, background): “The dynamic capabilities view may be regarded as an extension of the resource-based view (RBV); while the RBV primarily addresses a firm's existing resources, the dynamic capabilities view emphasizes the reconfiguration of these resources (Helfat and Peteraf, 2003).”
Structural Differentiation and Ambidexterity: The Mediating Role of Integration Mechanisms (2008, neutral): “The implementation or deployment of such combinations and the achievement of ambidexterity requires new organizing logics and collective patterns of interaction (Helfat and Peteraf 2003).”
Toward a Model of Strategic Outsourcing (2007, neutral): “Other scholars have claimed that capabilities represent how firms manage resources (e.g. Dutta et al., 2005; Helfat and Peteraf, 2003) or that capabilities represent a unique combination of resources that enable firms to pursue specific actions that create value (Sirmon et al. in press).”
Resource-Based Theory and Corporate Diversification (2011, background): “The concept of dynamic capabilities (Helfat & Peteraf, 2003; Makadok, 2001; Teece, Pisano, & Shuen, 1997) had significant implications for research on diversification that emerged in the late 1990s and early 2000s.”
Corporate foresight: An emerging field with a rich tradition (2015, background): “Firms choosing the latter option should build dynamic capabilities (Teece et al., 1997; Helfat and Peteraf, 2003).”
Speed of SME Internationalization and Performance (2015, neutral): “These findings go hand in hand with arguments from the resource-based view of strategy theory, which emphasizes that a firm’s growth and performance can be traced to its experiential knowledge base (Helfat and Peteraf 2003; Wernerfelt 1984).”
The dynamic impact of innovative capability and inter-firm network on firm valuation: A longitudinal study of biotechnology start-ups (2010, background): “While there are some conceptual studies which argue that the timing of capability development has performance implications (e.g. Helfat and Peteraf, 2003), to our knowledge, this is the first empirical study to document a truly dynamic scenario of capabilities and its effects.”
Understanding opportunity discovery and sustainable advantage: the role of transaction costs and property rights (2008, neutral): “The distinctive contribution of this work is to proffer new answers informed by the EPR and the RBV to these important research questions.”