An empirical assessment of the dynamic capabilities-performance relationship

Amir Pezeshkan, Stav Fainshmidt, Anil Nair, Michael Lance Frazier, Edward Markowski

Research output: Contribution to journalComment/debate

18 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Despite a plethora of empirical studies on dynamic capabilities (DCs) and convergence in the literature about core theoretical tenets, the contribution of DCs to competitive advantage and firm performance remains unclear. In this study, we take stock of the empirical DC literature by conducting a systematic, vote-count assessment of the level of empirical support for the DC view. Our analysis shows that the DC view received 60% support in empirical testing, which is higher than a previous, similar examination of the resource-based view. However, results also point to substantive and methodological variability in the level of empirical support. Importantly, support levels differ depending on the type and nature of the DC, the type of performance metric employed, whether DCs were examined independently or in interaction with contextual or organizational variables, and research design characteristics. We discuss the implications of this empirical assessment for future research on DCs.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)2950-2956
Number of pages7
JournalJournal of Business Research
Volume69
Issue number8
DOIs
StatePublished - Aug 1 2016

Fingerprint

Dynamic capabilities
Empirical study
Performance metrics
Organizational research
Interaction
Firm performance
Resource-based view
Vote
Testing
Organizational variables
Research design
Competitive advantage

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Marketing

Cite this

An empirical assessment of the dynamic capabilities-performance relationship. / Pezeshkan, Amir; Fainshmidt, Stav; Nair, Anil; Frazier, Michael Lance; Markowski, Edward.

In: Journal of Business Research, Vol. 69, No. 8, 01.08.2016, p. 2950-2956.

Research output: Contribution to journalComment/debate

Pezeshkan, Amir ; Fainshmidt, Stav ; Nair, Anil ; Frazier, Michael Lance ; Markowski, Edward. / An empirical assessment of the dynamic capabilities-performance relationship. In: Journal of Business Research. 2016 ; Vol. 69, No. 8. pp. 2950-2956.
@article{a978be8d29c94f2789c82d170c315139,
title = "An empirical assessment of the dynamic capabilities-performance relationship",
abstract = "Despite a plethora of empirical studies on dynamic capabilities (DCs) and convergence in the literature about core theoretical tenets, the contribution of DCs to competitive advantage and firm performance remains unclear. In this study, we take stock of the empirical DC literature by conducting a systematic, vote-count assessment of the level of empirical support for the DC view. Our analysis shows that the DC view received 60{\%} support in empirical testing, which is higher than a previous, similar examination of the resource-based view. However, results also point to substantive and methodological variability in the level of empirical support. Importantly, support levels differ depending on the type and nature of the DC, the type of performance metric employed, whether DCs were examined independently or in interaction with contextual or organizational variables, and research design characteristics. We discuss the implications of this empirical assessment for future research on DCs.",
author = "Amir Pezeshkan and Stav Fainshmidt and Anil Nair and Frazier, {Michael Lance} and Edward Markowski",
year = "2016",
month = "8",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.10.152",
language = "English",
volume = "69",
pages = "2950--2956",
journal = "Journal of Business Research",
issn = "0148-2963",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",
number = "8",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - An empirical assessment of the dynamic capabilities-performance relationship

AU - Pezeshkan, Amir

AU - Fainshmidt, Stav

AU - Nair, Anil

AU - Frazier, Michael Lance

AU - Markowski, Edward

PY - 2016/8/1

Y1 - 2016/8/1

N2 - Despite a plethora of empirical studies on dynamic capabilities (DCs) and convergence in the literature about core theoretical tenets, the contribution of DCs to competitive advantage and firm performance remains unclear. In this study, we take stock of the empirical DC literature by conducting a systematic, vote-count assessment of the level of empirical support for the DC view. Our analysis shows that the DC view received 60% support in empirical testing, which is higher than a previous, similar examination of the resource-based view. However, results also point to substantive and methodological variability in the level of empirical support. Importantly, support levels differ depending on the type and nature of the DC, the type of performance metric employed, whether DCs were examined independently or in interaction with contextual or organizational variables, and research design characteristics. We discuss the implications of this empirical assessment for future research on DCs.

AB - Despite a plethora of empirical studies on dynamic capabilities (DCs) and convergence in the literature about core theoretical tenets, the contribution of DCs to competitive advantage and firm performance remains unclear. In this study, we take stock of the empirical DC literature by conducting a systematic, vote-count assessment of the level of empirical support for the DC view. Our analysis shows that the DC view received 60% support in empirical testing, which is higher than a previous, similar examination of the resource-based view. However, results also point to substantive and methodological variability in the level of empirical support. Importantly, support levels differ depending on the type and nature of the DC, the type of performance metric employed, whether DCs were examined independently or in interaction with contextual or organizational variables, and research design characteristics. We discuss the implications of this empirical assessment for future research on DCs.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84949009362&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84949009362&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.10.152

DO - 10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.10.152

M3 - Comment/debate

VL - 69

SP - 2950

EP - 2956

JO - Journal of Business Research

JF - Journal of Business Research

SN - 0148-2963

IS - 8

ER -