J-STAGE Home  >  Publications - Top  > Bibliographic Information

Annals of Business Administrative Science
Vol. 15 (2016) No. 3 p. 139-148

Language:

http://doi.org/10.7880/abas.0160213a


Since the development of the idea of dynamic capabilities by Teece, Pisano, and Shuen (1997), it has been broadly discussed. However, there is no general view regarding the types of competencies that can be called dynamic capabilities. Teece et al. (1997) asserted that dynamic capabilities are one of the roles of organizational processes. Moreover, they asserted that organizational processes include static concepts, such as integration and coordination. This fact caused some confusion. Helfat and Winter (2011) contrasted the two concepts of operational and dynamic capabilities. They noted that the source of confusion was the fact that some competencies possess the nature of both concepts. In other words, three types of capabilities exist: pure operational, pure dynamic, and hybrid capabilities possessing both features. Helfat and Winter (2011) presented the example of corporate growth, such as an expansion in retail stores, an area where pure dynamic capabilities without any operational capabilities can be observed. Therefore, if pure dynamic capabilities are the pure competencies necessary for corporate growth, it is highly likely that these are the same competencies posited by Penrose (1959), who differentiated between economies of growth and economies of size. Takahashi (2015) conjectured that competencies that become resources unused for anything but growth are, more specifically, “competencies for start-up experts.”

Article Tools

Share this Article