Information technology-enabled dynamic capabilities and their indirect effect on competitive performance: Findings from PLS-SEM and fsQCA

By Patrick Mikalef, Adamantia G. Pateli. 2017

990 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Management of Technology and Innovation, Sociology and Political Science, Strategy and Management

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/be8630b1a48ff46836cafdc817063fb749535152

How researchers see this paper

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

In Management of Technology and Innovation

In Sociology and Political Science

In Strategy and Management

Citations in the corpus

Big Data Analytics Capabilities and Innovation: The Mediating Role of Dynamic Capabilities and Moderating Effect of the Environment (2019, positive): “In the broader domain of IT-business value research, there is a growing consensus that IT enables firms to generate business value through intermediate organizational capabilities (Benitez, Castillo, Llorens, & Braojos, 2017; Mikalef & Pateli, 2017; Schryen, 2013).”
Big data analytics capabilities: a systematic literature review and research agenda (2017, background): “In the context of IS literature, several studies have examined how IT infused in organizational capabilities can help ﬁrms renew or reconﬁgure their existing mode of operating (Pavlou and El Sawy 2006; Wang et al. 2012; Mikalef et al. 2016a, b; Mikalef and Pateli 2017).”
How Does Financial Literacy Promote Sustainability in SMEs? A Developing Country Perspective (2019, methodology): “When objective data is not available researchers are encouraged to base their research on self-reported data, so we indexed SMEs’ performance according to the CFO’s assessment of the business’s performance using the measurement scale developed by Mikalef and Pateli [100].”
When do Dynamic Capabilities Lead to Competitive Advantage? The Importance of Strategic Fit (2018, positive): “…responses a given scale invokes, set calibration of survey data with Likert-type scales does not always follow an adherence to the ‘natural’ anchors such scales intuitively provide (e.g., Emmenegger et al., 2014; Fiss, 2011; Ho et al., 2016; Meijerink and Bondarouk, 2018; Mikalef and Pateli, 2017).”