Building Project Capabilities: From Exploratory to Exploitative Learning

By Tim Brady, Andrew Davies. 2004

760 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Management Science and Operations Research, Strategy and Management

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/ed8d08c8c77dedd0589765fe66ac9da5a7d9dd21

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

Dynamic Capabilities: A Review and Research Agenda (2007, positive): “…support that dynamic capabilities have an impact on the development of new product development capability (Clark and Fujimoto 1991), project capability (Brady and Davies 2004), technology adoption and integration capability (Woiceshyn and Daellenbach 2005) and service capability (Athreye 2005).”
Explicating the dynamics of project capabilities (2016, methodology): “We extended our prior work by locating in the process of project capability building within the theoretical frame of organisational learning (Brady and Davies, 2004).”
Knowledge Beyond the Individual? Making Sense of a Notion of Collective Knowledge in Organization Theory (2012, background): “One source of such shared knowledge is common experience by the members of the bidding team, as for instance gained through former bid preparation activities (e.g., Brady & Davies, 2004; Cacciatori, 2008; Davies & Brady, 2000).”
Information Systems Strategy: Reconceptualization, Measurement, and Implications (2010, background): “Therefore, bottom-up knowledge inflows can be a major source of exploratory learning throughout the vertical hierarchy that allow organizational members to develop, experiment with, and redefine strategic decisions (Brady and Davies 2004; Floyd and Lane 2000).”
Understanding Relations of Individual—Collective Learning in Work: A Review of Research (2008, background): “Brady and Davies (2004) suggest different learning phases (innovation, sharing, routinizing) for different project phases and levels (individual–project, project–project, project–organization).”
Project Networks: Governance Choices and Paradoxical Tensions (2016, background): “…standard operating procedures • Temporal embeddedness refers to whether the parent organizations have worked with one another on previous project ventures in the past, and whether they expect—as is typical of project networks—to do so again (Bakker, Cambré, & Provan, 2009; Brady & Davies, 2004).”
Linking trust and collaboration in project teams to project management success (2018, background): “…Hoegl et al. (2004), Ingram and Baum (2001), LePine et al. (2008), Martín-Rodríguez et al. (2005) Knowledge integration and innovation Ahola (2009), Brady (2004), Dietrich et al. (2010), Dubois and Gadde (2000), Ingram and Baum (2001), Smyth et al. (2010), Yang (2005) Expectations Chiocchio et al.…”
Project success analysis framework: A knowledge-based approach in project management (2015, background): “Lessons learned from projects can lead to far-reaching changes in an organization's strategic focus (Brady and Davies, 2004).”
Projects, paths, and practices: sustaining and leveraging project-based relationships (2011, background): “Project scholars have suggested that developing and exploiting sustainable project capabilities and project-based relationships comes close to a managerial paradox (see e.g. DeFillippi & Arthur, 1998; Sahlin-Anderson & Soederholm, 2002; Brady & Davies, 2004).”