The Cross-Level Antecedents of Dynamic Capabilities Development: The Case of Network Exploitation Capability

  • Francesca Cabiddu
Conference paper


This study will conceptualize antecedents of dynamic capabilities at the individual and organizational level. My focus is on network exploitation capability, defined as the ability of an organization to effectively “orchestrate” the combination of traditional and technology-enabled distribution channels for its product or service. My analysis has allowed me to reach four main results: (1) to distinguish individual antecedents from the organizational ones; (2) to list the individual and organizational antecedents in terms of sensing, seizing and reconfiguring; (3) to underscore the existing relationship between individual and organizational antecedents; to provide a small theoretical contribution to the literature concerning dynamic capabilities1.


Business Model Distribution Channel Dynamic Capability Tangible Asset Business Experience 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.



I’m grateful to Gabriele Piccoli for his helpful comments on earlier drafts of this paper.


  1. 1.
    Teece DJ, Pisano G, Shuen A (1997) Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strateg Manage J 18(7):509–533CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Eisenhardt KM, Martin JA (2000) Dynamic capabilities: what are they? Strateg Manage J Special Issue 21 (10–11):1105–1121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Nelson RR, Winter S (1982) An evolutionary theory of economic change. Harvard University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Felin T, Hesterly WS (2006) The knowledge-based view, heterogeneity, and new value creation: Philosophical considerations on the locus of knowledge. Acad Manage Rev 32(1): 195–218Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Felin T, Foss NJ (2005) Strategic organization: a field in search of Microfoundations. Strateg Organ 3:441–455CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Rothaermel FT, Hess AM (2007) Building dynamic capabilities: innovation driven by individual, firm, and network-level effects. Organ Sci 18(6):898–921CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Teece DJ (2007) Explicating dynamic capabilities: the nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance.Strateg Manage J 28:1319–1350CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bharadwaj A (2000) A resource-based perspective on information technology capability and firm performance: an empirical investigation. MIS Q 2:169–196CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Wade M, Hulland J (2004) The resource-based view and information system research: review, extension and suggestions for future research. MIS Q 28(1):107–142Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bhatt GD, Grover V (2005) Types of information technology capabilities and their role in competitive advantage: an empirical study. J Manage Inf Syst 22(2):253–277Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Winter SG (2003) Understanding dynamic capabilities.Strateg Manage J October Special Issue 24:991–996Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Zollo M, Winter SG (2002) Deliberate learning and the evolution of dynamic capabilities. Organ Sci 13(3):339–351CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Piccoli G, Ives B (2005) Review: IT-dependent strategic initiatives and sustained competitive advantage: a review and synthesis of the literature. MIS Q 29(4): 747–776Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Sambamurthy V, Bharadwaj AS, Grover V (2003) Shaping agility through digital options: reconceptualizing the role of IT in contemporary firms.MIS Q 27(2):237–263Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Pavlou PA, El Sawy O (2006) The nature and role of dynamic capabilities: conceptualization and measurement. Working paper, Anderson School of Management, University of California, RiversideGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Alavi M, Leidner DE (2001) Research commentary: technology-mediated learning. A call for greater depth and breadth of research.Inf Syst Res 12(1):107–136CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Sambamurthy V, Zmud RW (2000) Research commentary: the organizing logic of an enterprise’s IT activities in the digital era. A prognosis of practice and a call for research.Inf Syst Res 11(2):105–114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ross JW, Beath CM, Goodhue D (1996) Develop long-term competitiveness through IT assets. Sloan Manage Rev 38(1):31–45Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Clark CE, Cavanaugh NC, Brown CV, Sambamurthy V (1997) Building change readiness capabilities in the IS organization: Insights from the Bell Atlantic experience MIS Q 21(4):425–455CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Bassellier G, Homer B, Benbasat I (2001) Information technology competence of business managers: a definition and research model.J Manage Inf Syst 17(4):159–182Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Neslin SA, Grewal D, Leghorn R, Shankar V, Teerling ML, Thomas JS, Verhoef PC (2006) Opportunities and challenges in multichannel customer management. J Serv Res 9(2):95–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Balasubramanian S, Raghunathan R, Mahajan V (2005) Consumers in a multichannel environment: product utility, process utility, and channel choice. J Interact Mark 19(Spring):12–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Verhoef PC, Neslin SA, Vroomen B (2007) Multichannel customer management: understanding the research shopper phenomenon. Int J Res Mark 24(2):5129–148CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Sitkin SB, Pablo AL (1992) Reconceptualizing the determinants of risk behavior. Acad Manage Rev 17:9–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Bandura A (1997) Self-efficacy: the exercise of control. WH. Freeman, New YorkGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of CagliariCagliariItaly

Personalised recommendations