Hello,
Several days ago I sent out a message looking for strategy capabilities measure and now I have received many kind responses. Thank you all for helping me to find so many valuable resources. As a few of you have requested a summary of the responses and others may also be interested in this topic, I am attaching the references that I got so far. Thanks!
Best wishes,
Ying
Bhattacharya, M., Gibson, D. E., & Doty, D. H. 2005. The Effects of Flexibility in Employee Skills, Employee Behaviors, and Human Resource Practices on Firm Performance. Journal of Management, 31(4): 622-640.
Carmeli, A., & Schaubroeck, J. 2005. How leveraging human resource capital with its competitive distinctiveness enhances the performance of commercial and public organizations. Human Resource Management, 44(4): 391-412.
Carmeli, A., & Tishler, A. 2004a. THE RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN INTANGIBLE ORGANIZATIONAL ELEMENTS AND ORGANIZATIONAL PERFORMANCE. Strategic Management Journal, 25(13): 1257-1278.
Carmeli, A., & Tishler, A. 2004b. Resources, Capabilities, and the Performance of Industrial Firms: A Multivariate Analysis. Managerial & Decision Economics, 25(6/7): 299-315.
Danneels, E. 2007. ORGANIZATIONAL ANTECEDENTS OF SECOND-ORDER COMPETENCES. Strategic Management Journal.
According to dynamic capability theory some firms are better able than others at altering their resource-base by adding, reconfiguring, and deleting resources or competences. This study focuses on the first form of dynamic capability: the competence to build new competences. Two such second-order competences are studied: the abilities to explore new markets and to explore new technologies, called marketing and R&D second-order competences, respectively. Using two wave panel data on a sample of <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">U.S.</st1:place></st1:country-region> public manufacturing firms, five organizational antecedents of these second-order competences are examined: willingness to cannibalize, constructive conflict, tolerance for failure, environmental scanning, and resource slack. Willingness to cannibalize, constructive conflict, scanning, and slack have contemporaneous effects, while scanning also has a lagged effect and slack has a U-shaped lagged effect on marketing and R&D second-order competences.
Drnevich, P., & Kriauciunas, A. 2007. Examining the Role of Capabilities and Heterogeneity in Firm Performance. Paper presented at the <st1:placetype w:st="on">Academy</st1:placetype> of <st1:placename w:st="on">Management</st1:placename>, <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:city w:st="on">Philadelphia</st1:city>, <st1:state w:st="on">PA.</st1:state></st1:place>
Dutta, S., Narasimhan, O., & Rajiv, S. 2005. CONCEPTUALIZING AND MEASURING CAPABILITIES: METHODOLOGY AND EMPIRICAL APPLICATION. Strategic Management Journal, 26(3): 277-285.
Eisenhardt, K. M., & Martin, J. A. 2000. Dynamic capabilities: What are they? Strategic Management Journal, 21: 1105-1121.
Hung, R. Y., Lien, B. Y., & Yang, B. 2006. How dynamic capability influence organizational performance: An empirical investigation. Paper presented at the <st1:placetype w:st="on">Academy</st1:placetype> of <st1:placename w:st="on">Management</st1:placename> (AoM), <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:city w:st="on">Atlanta</st1:city>, <st1:state w:st="on">GA.</st1:state></st1:place>
Jansen, J. J. P., Van Den Bosch, F. A. J., & Volberda, H. W. 2005. MANAGING POTENTIAL AND REALIZED ABSORPTIVE CAPACITY: HOW DO ORGANIZATIONAL ANTECEDENTS MATTER? <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:placetype w:st="on">Academy</st1:placetype> of <st1:placename w:st="on">Management</st1:placename></st1:place> Journal, 48(6): 999-1015.
Khatri, N. 2006. Building IT capability in health-care organizations. Health Services Management Research, 19: 73-79.
Khatri, N. 2006. Building HR capability in health-care organizations. Health Care Management Review, 31: 45-54.
Lawler, E. E. 1992. The Ultimate Advantage: Creating the High - Involvement Organization: Jossey-Bass.
McGrath, R. G., & MacMillan, <st1:place w:st="on">I.</st1:place> C. 1995. Defining and developing competence: A strategic process paradigm. Strategic Management Journal, 16(4): 251-275.
McGrath, R. G., & Tsai, M.-H. 1996. Innovation, Competitive Advantage and Rent: A Model and Test. Management Science, 42(3): 389-403.
Nadkarni, S., & Narayanan, V. K. 2007. Strategic schemas, strategic flexibility, and firm performance: the moderating role of industry clockspeed. Strategic Management Journal, 28(3): 243-270.
Newbert, S. L. 2007. Empirical research on the resource-based view of the firm: an assessment and suggestions for future research. Strategic Management Journal, 28(2): 121-146.
Rothaermel, F. T., & Hess, A. M. 2007. Building Dynamic Capabilities: Innovation Driven by Individual, Firm, and Network Level Effects. Organization Science.
Abstract
Following the dynamic capabilities perspective, we suggest that antecedents to innovation can be found at the individual, firm, and network level. Thus, we challenge two assumptions common in prior research: (1) that significant variance exists at the focal level of analysis, while other levels of analysis are assumed to be homogeneous, and (2) that the focal level of analysis is independent from other levels of analysis. Accordingly, we advance a set of hypotheses to simultaneously assess the direct effects of antecedents at the individual, firm, and network level on innovation output. We then investigate whether a firm's antecedents to innovation lie across different levels. To accomplish this, we propose two competing interaction hypotheses. We juxtapose the hypothesis that the individual, firm, and network-level antecedents to innovation are substitutes versus the proposition that these innovation mechanisms are complements. We test our multi-level theoretical model using an unusually comprehensive and detailed panel dataset that documents the innovation attempts of global pharmaceutical companies within biotechnology over a 22-year time period (1980-2001). We find evidence that the antecedents to innovation lie across different levels of analysis and can have compensating or reinforcing effects on firm-level innovative output.
Key words: dynamic capabilities; organizational learning; innovation; multi-level theory; longitudinal panel data; pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries
frank.rothaermel@mgt.gatech.edu
Ulrich, D., & Smallwood, N. 2004. Capitalizing on Capabilities. Harvard Business Review, 82(6): 119-127.
Winter, S. G. 2003. UNDERSTANDING DYNAMIC CAPABILITIES. Strategic Management Journal, 24(10): 991-995.
Zahra, S. A., & George, G. 2002. ABSORPTIVE CAPACITY: A REVIEW, RECONCEPTUALIZATION, AND EXTENSION. <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:placetype w:st="on">Academy</st1:placetype> of <st1:placename w:st="on">Management</st1:placename></st1:place> Review, 27(2): 185-203.
Zollo, M., & Singh, H. 2004. Deliberate learning in corporate acquisitions: Post-acquisition strategies and integration capability in U.S. bank mergers. Strategic Management Journal, 25: 1233-1256.