Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-30T19:23:46.407Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
Series:   Elements in Business Strategy

Dynamic Capabilities

History and an Extension

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 July 2022

Bart Nooteboom
Bart Nooteboom
Affiliation:
Tilburg University, The Netherlands

Summary

The development of salient ideas and publications on dynamic capabilities is given, extended by ideas outside the literature of strategic management. Dynamic capability is presented as an interdisciplinary subject to which knowledge is central. Diversity of knowledge is treated in terms of cognitive distance, limited through organisational focus. To deal with diversity, development and uncertainty, evolutionary theory and the notion of entropy are used. The relation between individual and organisational knowledge is modelled with the notion of a script and linguistic ideas. The governance of collaborative relations for innovation is discussed, including trust, which are also dynamic capabilities.
Get access

Keywords

dynamic capabilitiesinnovationstrategic managementlearning
Type
Element
Information
Series: Elements in Business Strategy
Online ISBN: 9781009029025
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication: 11 August 2022

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abelson, R. P. (1976), ‘Script processing in attitude formation and decision making’, in Carroll, J. S. and Payne, J. W. (eds.), Cognition and social behavior, Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, pp. 33–45.Google Scholar
Aldridge, H. (1999), Organizations evolving, London: Sage.Google Scholar
Anderson, P. and Tushman, M. (1990), ‘Technological discontinuities and dominant designs: A cyclical model of technological change’, Administrative Science Quarterly, 35 /4, 604–32.Google Scholar
Argyris, C. and Schön, D. (1974), Theory in practice: Increasing professional effectiveness, San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
Barney, J. B. (2001), ‘Resource-based theories of competitive advantage: A ten-year retrospective on the resource-based view’, Journal of Management, 27, 643–50.Google Scholar
Baum, J. A. C. and Singh, J. V. (1994), ‘Organizational hierarchies and evolutionary processes: Some reflections on a theory of organizational evolution’, in Baum, J. A. C. and Singh, J. V. (eds.), Evolutionary dynamics of organizations, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 3–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bindra, S., Srivastava, S., Sharma, D. and Ongsukal, V. (2020), ‘Reviewing knowledge-based dynamic capabilities through meta analysis’, Journal for Global Business Advancement, 13/3, 273–95.Google Scholar
Bingham, C. B. and Eisenhardt, K. M. (2011), ‘Rational heuristics: The “simple rules” that strategists learn from process experience’, Strategic Management Journal, 32/13, 1437–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boyd, R. and Richerson, P. J. (1985), Culture and the evolutionary process, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Brown, J. S. and Duguid, P. (1996), ‘Organizational learning and communities of practice’, in Cohen, L. and Sproull, L. S. (eds.), Organizational learning, London: Sage, pp. 58–82.Google Scholar
Burgelman, R. A. (1983), ‘Corporate entrepreneurship and strategic management’, Management Science, 29/12, 1349–64.Google Scholar
Chesbrough, H. (2003), Open innovation: The new imperative for creating and profiting from technology, Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.Google Scholar
Child, J. (2002), ‘A configurational analysis of international joint ventures’, Organization Studies, 23/5, 781–815.Google Scholar
Cohen, L. and Sproull, L. S. (eds.) (1996), Organizational learning, London: Sage.Google Scholar
Cohen, M. D. and Levinthal, D. A. (1990), ‘Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning innovation’, Administrative Science Quarterly, 35, 128–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coleman, J. S. (1988), ‘Social capital in the creation of human capital’, American Journal of Sociology, 94 (special supplement), 95–120.Google Scholar
Collis, D. J. (1994), Research note: ‘How valuable are organizational capabilities?’, Strategic Management Journal, 15/510, 143–52.Google Scholar
Copleston, F. (1964), A history of philosophy, vol. 5 part 1, Image.Google Scholar
Crossan, M. and Berdrow, I. (2003), ‘Organizational learning and strategic renewal’, Strategic Management Journal, 24/11, 1087–115.Google Scholar
Damasio, A. R. (2003), Looking for Spinoza, Orlando, FL: Harcourt.Google Scholar
Dawkins, R. (1983), ‘Universal Darwinism’, in Bendall, D. S. (ed.), Evolution from molecules to man, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 403–25.Google Scholar
De Dreu, C., Balliet, D. and Halevy, N. (2014), ‘Parochial cooperation in humans: Forms and functions of self-sacrifice in intergroup conflict’, Advances in Motivation Science 1, 1–47.Google Scholar
Digman, J. M. (1990), Personality structure: Emergence of the five factor model’, Annual Review of Psychology, 41, 417–40.Google Scholar
Edelman, G. M. (1987), Neural Darwinism: The theory of neuronal group selection, New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Eldredge, N. and Gould, S. J. (1972), ‘Punctuated equilibria: An alternative to phyletic gradualism’, in Schopf, T. J. M. (ed.), Models in paleobiology, San Francisco, CA: Freeman, Cooper and Co, pp. 82–115.Google Scholar
Flavell, J. H. (1967), The developmental psychology of Jean Piaget, Princeton, NJ: Van Nostrand.Google Scholar
Foss, N. J. (2002), ‘Edith Penrose: economics and strategic management’, in Pitelis, C. (ed.) The growth of the firm: The legacy of Edith Penrose, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 147–64.Google Scholar
Fukuyama, F. (1995), ‘Social capital and the global economy’, Foreign Affairs, 89.Google Scholar
Garud, R. and Rappa, M. A. (1996), ‘A socio-cognitive model of technology evolution: The case of cochlear implants’, in Meindl, J. R., Stubbart, C. and Porac, J. F. (eds.), Cognition within and between organisations, London: Sage, pp. 441–74.Google Scholar
Gersick, C. J. G. (1991), ‘Revolutionary change theories’, Academy of Management Review, 16/1, 10–36.Google Scholar
Gilsing, V. A., Nooteboom, B., Vanhaverbeke, W. P. M., Duijsters, G. M. and van den Oord, A. (2008), ‘Network embeddedness and the exploration of novel technologies: Technological distance, betweenness centrality and density’, Research Policy, 37, 1717–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gould, S. J. (1989), ‘Punctuated equilibrium in fact and theory’, Journal of Social Biological Structure 12, 117–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Granovetter, M. S. (1973), ‘The strength of weak ties’, American Journal of Sociology, 78/6, 1360–81.Google Scholar
Griliches, Z. (1990), ‘Patent statistics as economic indicators’, Journal of Economic Literature, 28, 1661–707.Google Scholar
Hannan, M. T. and Freeman, J. (1984), ‘Structural inertia and organizational change’, American Sociological Review, 49, 149–64.Google Scholar
Hayek, F. von (1945), ‘The use of knowledge in society’, American Economic Review, 35/4, 519–30.Google Scholar
Henderson, R. M. and Clark, K. (1990), ‘Architectural innovation: The reconfiguration of existing product technologies and the failure of established firms’, Administrative Science Quarterly, 35/1, 9–30.Google Scholar
Hirschman, A. O. (1970), Exit, voice and loyalty, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Hodgson, G. M. (2002b), ‘Darwinism in economics: From analogy to ontology’, Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 12, 259–81.Google Scholar
Hodgson, G. M. and Knudsen, T. (2006), ‘Why we need a generalized Darwinism, and why generalized Darwinism is not enough’, Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 61, 1–19.Google Scholar
Hosking, G. (2019), ‘The decline of trust in government,’ in Sasaki, M. (ed.) Trust in contemporary society, Leiden: Brill, pp. 77–103.Google Scholar
Janow, R. (2003), ‘Shannon entropy applied to productivity of organisations’, IEEE Xplore. IEMC ’03 Proceedings. Managing technologically driven organizations: The human side of innovation and change, 25–29, doi: 10.1109/IEMC.2003.1252225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kahneman, D. and Tversky, A. (1979), ‘Prospect theory: “An Analysis of Decisions under Risk”’, Econometrica, 47/2, 263–91.Google Scholar
Kirzner, I. (1973), Competition and entrepreneurship, Chicago,IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Klein Woolthuis, R., Hillebrand, B. and Nooteboom, B. (2005), ‘Trust, contract and relation development’, Organisation Studies, 26, 813.Google Scholar
Kraaijenbrink, J., Spender, J. C. and Groen, A. (2010), ‘The resource-based view: A review and assessment of its critiques’, Journal of Management, 30/1, 344–72.Google Scholar
Krackhardt, D. (1999), ‘The ties that torture: Simmelian tie analysis in organizations’, Research in the Sociology of Organizations, 16, 183–210.Google Scholar
Lachmann, L. (1978), ‘An Austrian stocktaking: unsettled questions and tentative answers’, in Spadaro, L. (ed.), New directions in Austrian economics, Kansas City, MO: Sheed Andrews and McMeel, pp. 1–18.Google Scholar
Lakatos, I. and Musgrave, A. (1970), Criticism and the growth of knowledge, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lavie, D. (2006), ‘Capability reconfiguration: An analysis of incumbent responses to technological change’, The Academy of Management Review, 31/1, 153–74.Google Scholar
Leman, P., Bremmer, A., Parker, R. D. and Gauvain, M. (2019), Developmental psychology, New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Leonard-Barton, D. (1992), ‘Core capabilities and core rigidities: A paradox in managing new product development’, Strategic Management Journal, 1, 111–25.Google Scholar
Lindenberg, S. (2003), ‘Governance seen from a framing point of view: the employment relationship and relational signalling’ in Nooteboom, B. and Six, F. E. (eds.), The trust process: Empirical studies of the determinants and the process of trust development, Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing, pp. 37–57.Google Scholar
Loasby, B. (2002), ‘The significance of Penrose’s theory for the development of economics’, in Pitelis, C. (ed.), The Growth of the Firm; The Legacy of Edith Penrose, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 45–60.Google Scholar
Malachowski, A. (2013), The Cambridge companion to pragmatism, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
March, J. G. (1991), ‘Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning’, Organization Science, 2/1, 101–23.Google Scholar
McKelvey, W. (1982), Organizational systematics: Taxonomy, evolution, classification, Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Metcalfe, J. S. (1998), Evolutionary economics and creative destruction, London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Mintzberg, H. and Waters, J. A. (1985), ‘Of strategies, deliberate and emergent’, Strategic Management Journal, 6, 237–72.Google Scholar
Mokyr, J. (1990), The lever of riches: Technological creativity and economic progress, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Moseley, R. (2019), Morality: A natural history, Victoria, BC: Friesen Press.Google Scholar
Narayaman, V. K., Lee, L. J. and Kamerer, B. (2011), ‘The cognitive perspective in strategy: An integrative review’, Journal of Management, 37/11, 305–51.Google Scholar
Nelson, R. R. (2008), ‘Economic development from the perspective of evolutionary economic theory’, Oxford Development Studies 36/1, 9–21.Google Scholar
Nelson, R. R. and Winter, S. (1982), An evolutionary theory of economic change, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Nettle, D. (2006), ‘The evolution of personality variation in humans and other animals’, American Psychologist, 11/6, 622–31.Google Scholar
Nooteboom, B. (1994), ‘Innovation and diffusion in small business: Theory and empirical evidence’, Small Business Economics, 6, 327–47.Google Scholar
Nooteboom, B. (2000), Learning and innovation in organisations and economies, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Nooteboom, B. (2004), ‘Competence and governance: How can they be combined?’ Cambridge Journal of Economics, 28/4, 505–25.Google Scholar
Nooteboom, B. (ed.) (2006), Knowledge and learning, Vol. I: Fundamentals of embodied cognition, Vol II: Knowledge and learning in organizations, Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing.Google Scholar
Nooteboom, B. (2009), A cognitive theory of the firm; Learning, governance and dynamic capabilities, Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing.Google Scholar
Nooteboom, B. (2019), ‘Uncertainty and the economic need for trust’, in Sasaki, M. (ed): Trust in contemporary society, Leiden: Brill, pp. 60–76.Google Scholar
Nooteboom, B., van Haverbeke, P. M., Duijsters, G. M., Gilsing, V. A. and Oord, A. van den (2007), ‘Optimal cognitive distance and absorptive capacity’, Research Policy, 36, 1016–34.Google Scholar
Penrose, E. T. (1959), The theory of the growth of the firm, New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Piaget, J. (1970), Psychologie et epistémologie, Paris: Denoël.Google Scholar
Porter, M. (1980), Competitive strategy, New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Radnitzky, G. and Bartley, W. W. III (eds.) (1987), Evolutionary epistemology, theory of rationality, and the sociology of knowledge, La Salle: Open Court, pp. 91–114.Google Scholar
Richardson, G. B. (2002), ‘Mrs. Penrose and neoclassical theory’, in Pitelis, C. (ed.), The growth of the firm; The legacy of Edith Penrose, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 37–44.Google Scholar
Romanelli, E. and Tushman, M. Y. (1994), ‘Organizational transformation as punctuated equilibrium: An empirical test’, Academy of Management Journal, 37/5, 1141–66.Google Scholar
Rosenberg, A. (2000), Darwinism in philosophy, social science and policy, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Saussure, F. de (1979), Course de linguistique générale, Payotèque, Paris: Payot.Google Scholar
Schein, E. H. (1985), Organizational culture and leadership, San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
Schilke, O. and Goerzen, A. (2010), ‘Alliance management capability: An Investigation of the construct and its measurement’, Journal of Management, 36/5, 1192–219.Google Scholar
Schilke, O., Hu, S. and Helfat, C. A. (2018), ‘Quo vadis, dynamic capabilities? A content-analytic review of the current state of knowledge and recommendations for future research’, Academy of Management Journal, 12, 390–439.Google Scholar
Shackle, G. (1961), Decision, order and time in human affairs, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Shank, R. and Abelson, R. (1977), Scripts, plans, goals and understanding, Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Schön, D. and Argyris, C. (1996), Organizational learning, Reading: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
Simmel, G. (1950), The Sociology of Georg Simmel, translation by Kurt Wolff, Glencoe, IL: Free Press.Google Scholar
Six, F. E. (2005), The trouble with trust, the dynamics of interpersonal trust building, Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing.Google Scholar
Smircich, L. (1983), ‘Organization as shared meaning’, in Pondy, L. R., Frost, P. J., Morgan, G. and Dandridge, T. C. (eds.), Organizational symbolism, Greenwich, CT: JAI Press, 55–65.Google Scholar
Smith, P. B. and Bond, M. H. (1993), Social psychology across cultures, London: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Solomon, M. (2006), ‘Group think versus the wisdom of the crowds: The social epistemology of deliberation and dissent’, The Southern Journal of Philosophy, 44, 28–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spender, J. C. (1983), Industry recipes, Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Spender, J. C. (1996a), ‘Making knowledge the basis of a dynamic theory of the firm’, Strategic Management Journal, 17, 45–62.Google Scholar
Spender, J. C. (1996b), ‘Organisational knowledge, learning and memory: Three concepts in search of a theory, Journal of Change Management, 9/11, 63–78.Google Scholar
Spender, J. C. and Grant, R. M. (1996), ‘Knowledge and the firm: Overview’, Strategic Management Journal, 17, 5–9.Google Scholar
Surowiecki, J. (2004), The wisdom of crowds, New York: Anchor Books.Google Scholar
Teece, D. and Pisano, G. (1994), The dynamic capabilities of firms, Laxenburg Austria: International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis.Google Scholar
Teece, D. J., Pisano, G. and Shuen, A. (1997), ‘Dynamic capabilities and strategic management’, Strategic Management Journal, 18/7, 509–33.Google Scholar
Teece, D. (2007), ‘Explicating dynamic capabilities: the nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance’, Strategic Management Journal 28, 1319–50.Google Scholar
Testa, B. and Kier, L. B. (2000), ‘Emergence and dissolvence in the self-organization of complex systems’, Entropy, 2, 1–25.Google Scholar
Theil, H. (1967), Economics and information theory, Chicago, IL: Rand McNally.Google Scholar
Thiel, C. (1965), Sinn und Bedeutung in der Logik Gottlob Frege’s, Meisenheim am Glan, GER: Anton Hain.Google Scholar
Tomasello, M. (2016), A natural history of human morality, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Tsoukas, H. and Chia, R. (2002), ‘On organizational becoming: Rethinking organisational change’, Organization Science, 13/5, 567–82.Google Scholar
Tushman, M. L. and Anderson, P. (1986), ‘Technological discontinuities and organizational environments’, Administrative Science Quarterly, 31, 439–65.Google Scholar
Tushman, M. L. and Romanelli, E. (1985), ‘Organizational evolution: A metamorphosis model of convergence and reorientation’, Research in Organizational Behavior, in: Staw, B. A. and Cummings, L. L., Greenwich Conn.: JAI Press, 171–222.Google Scholar
Weick, K. F. (1995), Sensemaking in organisations, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Weick, K. F. and Roberts, K. H. (1993), ‘Collective mind in organizations’, Administrative Science Quarterly, 39, reprinted in M. D. Cohen and L. S. Sproull (eds.), Organizational learning, 1996, London: Sage, pp. 330–58.Google Scholar
Wernerfelt, B. (1995), ‘The resource‐based view of the firm: Ten years after’, Strategic Management Journal, 16/3, 171–74.Google Scholar
Williamson, O. E. (1975), Markets and hierarchies: Analysis and anti-trust implications, New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Winter, S. G. (2003), ‘Understanding dynamic capabilities’, Strategic Management Journal, 24/10, 991–5.Google Scholar
Witt, U. (2005), ‘The evolutionary perspective on organizational change and the theory of the firm’, in Dopfer, K. (ed.), The Evolutionary Foundations of Economics, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 339–64.Google Scholar
Yamagushi, T. and Yamagushi, M. (1994), ‘Trust and commitment in the United States and Japan’, Motivation and Emotion, 18/2, 129–66.Google Scholar
Zheng, S. A., Zhang, W. and Du, J. (2011), ‘Knowledge-based dynamic capabilities and innovation in networked environments’, Journal of Knowledge Management, 15/6, 1055–151.Google Scholar
Zollo, M. and Winter, S. G. (2002), ‘Deliberate learning and the evolution of dynamic capabilities’, Organization Science, 13/3, 339–51.Google Scholar

Save element to Kindle

To save this element to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Dynamic Capabilities
  • Bart Nooteboom, Tilburg University, The Netherlands
  • Online ISBN: 9781009029025
Available formats
×

Save element to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Dynamic Capabilities
  • Bart Nooteboom, Tilburg University, The Netherlands
  • Online ISBN: 9781009029025
Available formats
×

Save element to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Dynamic Capabilities
  • Bart Nooteboom, Tilburg University, The Netherlands
  • Online ISBN: 9781009029025
Available formats
×