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 language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 2950-2956 |
| Number of pages | 7 |
| Journal | Journal of Business Research |
| Volume | 69 |
| Issue number | 8 |
| DOIs |
|
| State | Published - Aug 1 2016 |
Fingerprint
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 journal › Comment/debate
}
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 -