How dynamic can organizational capabilities be? Towards a dual-process model of capability dynamization

By Georg Schreyögg, Martina Kliesch-Eberl. 2007

1,032 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Management Science and Operations Research, Strategy and Management

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/10470127f412aee16624d42564801411b8ecc448

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

Competitive dynamics, strategic consistency, and organizational survival (2009, background): “…earlier related concepts such as convergence (Tushman and 4 Romanelli, 1985), momentum (Miller and Friesen, 1980), inertia (Miller and Chen, 1994) or path dependence (Schreyögg and Kliesch-Eberl, 2007) our study is the first that aims at an evolutionary conceptualization of strategic consistency.”
What are Dynamic Capabilities and are They a Useful Construct in Strategic Management (2009, neutral): “In their original work, Teece et al. (1997) explained that dynamic capabilities are processes shaped by positions and paths.”
The Mixed Blessings of Technological Innovativeness for the Commercial Success of New Products (2011, background): “Furthermore, organizations have difficulties with changes as they are locked into historical paths that constitute self-reinforced processes (Schreyögg and Kliesch-Eberl, 2007).”
Organizational Ambidexterity: Balancing Exploitation and Exploration for Sustained Performance (2009, background): “Several researchers have pointed to the need for top management teams to ensure integration across differentiated units (Tushman and O’Reilly 1996, Smith and Tushman 2005).”
Leveraging fitness and lean bundles to build the cumulative performance sand cone model (2015, background): “These findings are related to the literature on capabilities (Lee and Kelley, 2008, Leonard-Barton, 1992,Rothaermel and Hess, 2007, Schreyogg and Kleisch-Eberl, 2007, Teece et al., 1997 and Wu et al., 2010), which describes how the development of capabilities is idiosyncratic and path dependent,…”
Exploitation or exploration in service business development? : Insights from a dynamic capabilities perspective (2010, background): “The side effects can be linked with the literature on path dependence theory to explain the drivers of developments that cause the run of events (e.g. Schreyögg and Kliesch-Eberl, 2007; Sydow et al., 2009).”
The Path of Most Persistence: An Evolutionary Perspective on Path Dependence and Dynamic Capabilities (2011, background): “A path-dependent dynamic capability cannot monitor itself reflexively to avoid lock-in — a higher-order process is then required (Schreyögg & Kliesch-Eberl, 2007).”
Dynamic capabilities and trans-generational value creation in family firms: The role of organizational culture (2010, background): “The static component of capabilities lies in the ‘inability of organizations to change their familiar “ways of doing” when confronted with new developments’ (Schreyögg and Kliesch-Eberl, 2007: 916).”
Is innovation always beneficial? A meta-analysis of the relationship between innovation and performance in SMEs (2011, background): “However, reconfiguring the organizational setting in long-established SMEs can be expected to provemore timedemanding and costly than in new firms which do not have engrained routines (Schreyögg and Kliesch-Eberl, 2007).”
Organizational Ambidexterity: Antecedents, Outcomes, and Moderators (2008, background): “Dynamic capabilities comprise and integrate both static and dynamic components—the interaction of exploitation and exploration is thus assumed to become a full-blown dynamic capability over time (Schreyoegg & Kliesch-Eberl, 2007).”