The dynamic capabilities framework analyzes the sources and methods of wealth creation and capture by private enterprise firms operating in environments of rapid technological change. The competitive advantage of firms is seen as resting on distinctive processes (ways of coordinating and combining), shaped by the firm's (specific) asset positions (such as the firm's portfolio of difftcult-to- trade knowledge assets and complementary assets), and the evolution path(s) it has aflopted or inherited. The importance of path dependencies is amplified where conditions of increasing retums exist. Whether and how a firm's competitive advantage is eroded depends on the stability of market demand, and the ease of replicability (expanding intemally) and imitatability (replication by competitors). If correct, the framework suggests that private wealth creation in regimes of rapid technological change depends in large measure on honing intemal technological, organizational, and managerial processes inside the firm. In short, identifying new opportunities and organizing effectively and efficiently to embrace them are generally more fundamental to private wealth creation than is strategizing, if by strategizing one means engaging in business conduct that keeps competitors off balance, raises rival's costs, and excludes new entrants. © 1997 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

/pdf/dynamic-capabilities-and-strategic-management-4iyi34iyh6.pdf

Dynamic capabilities and strategic management

This paper focuses on dynamic capabilities and, more generally, the resource-based view of the firm. We argue that dynamic capabilities are a set of specific and identifiable processes such as product development, strategic decision making, and alliancing. They are neither vague nor tautological. Although dynamic capabilities are idiosyncratic in their details and path dependent in their emergence, they have significant commonalities across firms (popularly termed ‘best practice’). This suggests that they are more homogeneous, fungible, equifinal, and substitutable than is usually assumed. In moderately dynamic markets, dynamic capabilities resemble the traditional conception of routines. They are detailed, analytic, stable processes with predictable outcomes. In contrast, in high-velocity markets, they are simple, highly experiential and fragile processes with unpredictable outcomes. Finally, well-known learning mechanisms guide the evolution of dynamic capabilities. In moderately dynamic markets, the evolutionary emphasis is on variation. In high-velocity markets, it is on selection. At the level of RBV, we conclude that traditional RBV misidentifies the locus of long-term competitive advantage in dynamic markets, overemphasizes the strategic logic of leverage, and reaches a boundary condition in high-velocity markets. Copyright © 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

/pdf/dynamic-capabilities-what-are-they-3cn0mb9rpo.pdf

Dynamic capabilities, what are they?

To date, the phenomenon of entrepreneurship has lacked a conceptual framework. In this note we draw upon previous research conducted in the different social science disciplines and applied fields of business to create a conceptual framework for the field. With this framework we explain a set of empirical phenomena and predict a set of outcomes not explained or predicted by conceptual frameworks already in existence in other fields.

The Promise of Entrepreneurship as a Field of Research

世界経済・社会統計 = World development indicators

This paper draws on the social and behavioral sciences in an endeavor to specify the nature and microfoundations of the capabilities necessary to sustain superior enterprise performance in an open economy with rapid innovation and globally dispersed sources of invention, innovation, and manufacturing capability. Dynamic capabilities enable business enterprises to create, deploy, and protect the intangible assets that support superior long- run business performance. The microfoundations of dynamic capabilities—the distinct skills, processes, procedures, organizational structures, decision rules, and disciplines—which undergird enterprise-level sensing, seizing, and reconfiguring capacities are difficult to develop and deploy. Enterprises with strong dynamic capabilities are intensely entrepreneurial. They not only adapt to business ecosystems, but also shape them through innovation and through collaboration with other enterprises, entities, and institutions. The framework advanced can help scholars understand the foundations of long-run enterprise success while helping managers delineate relevant strategic considerations and the priorities they must adopt to enhance enterprise performance and escape the zero profit tendency associated with operating in markets open to global competition. Copyright  2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

/pdf/explicating-dynamic-capabilities-the-nature-and-48rcozomaz.pdf

Explicating dynamic capabilities: the nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance

Renewed interest in the resource-based theory of the firm has focused attention on the role of heterogeneous organizational ‘competence’ in competition. This paper attempts to measure the importance of these effects in the context of pharmaceutical research. We distinguish between ‘component’ and ‘architectural’ competence, and using internal firm data at the program level from 10 major pharmaceutical companies show that together the two forms of competence appear to explain a significant fraction of the variance in research productivity across firms. Our results raise some intriguing questions about the nature of competencies and the ways in which they diffuse over time.

Measuring Competence? Exploring Firm Effects in Pharmaceutical Research

We examine the interface between for-profit and publicly funded research in pharmaceuticals. Firms access upstream basic research through investments in absorptive capacity in the form of in-house basic research and ‘pro-publication’ internal incentives. Some firms also maintain extensive connections to the wider scientific community, which we measure using data on coauthorship of scientific papers between pharmaceutical company scientists and publicly funded researchers. ‘Connectedness’ is significantly correlated with firms’ internal organization, as well as their performance in drug discovery. The estimated impact of ‘connectedness’ on private research productivity implies a substantial return to public investments in basic research.

Absorptive Capacity, Coauthoring Behavior, and the Organization of Research in Drug Discovery

We examine the relationship between firm size and research productivity in the pharmaceutical industry. Using detailed internal firm data, we find that larger research efforts are more productive, not only because they enjoy economies of scale, but also because they realize economies of scope by sustaining diverse portfolios of research projects that capture internal and external knowledge spillovers. In pharmaceuticals, economies of scope in research are important in shaping the boundaries of the firm, and it may be worth tolerating the static efficiency loss attributable to the market power of large firms in exchange for their superior innovative performance.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdfplus/2555791.pdf

Scale, Scope and Spillovers: The Determinants of Research Productivity in Ethical Drug Discovery

Low reproducibility rates within life science research undermine cumulative knowledge production and contribute to both delays and costs of therapeutic drug development. An analysis of past studies indicates that the cumulative (total) prevalence of irreproducible preclinical research exceeds 50%, resulting in approximately US$28,000,000,000 (US$28B)/year spent on preclinical research that is not reproducible—in the United States alone. We outline a framework for solutions and a plan for long-term improvements in reproducibility rates that will help to accelerate the discovery of life-saving therapies and cures.

/pdf/the-economics-of-reproducibility-in-preclinical-research-wfw1ti45ci.pdf

The Economics of Reproducibility in Preclinical Research

This paper examines the stock market's valuation of a firm's innovative activity. We estimate the market's relative valuation of firms' tangible and intangible assets, focusing on knowledge capital in the form of accumulated "stocks" of R&D and patents. We tried to improve upon our estimates of the stock market's valuation of knowledge capital embodied in such "stocks" by bringing in measures of the appropriability environment facing a firm from the Yale Survey on Industrial Research and Development. The responses to Survey questions about the effectiveness of patents as a mechanism for protecting the returns from innovation turn out to be of some use: there is evidence of an interaction between industry level measures of the effectiveness of patents and the market's valuation of a firm's past R&D and patenting performance, as well as its current R&D moves. We find no evidence, however, that other appropriability mechanisms differ enough across industries to leave measurable traces in our data. The structure of the Yale Survey makes it possible to estimate the sampling error in the appropriability measures derived from it. This information was used by us in an errors-in-variables context, but with little success. In the absence of R&D variables, our estimates imply that a two standard deviation increase in our index of patent effectiveness would raise the value of a patent held by our average firm from $0.4 million to $1.0 million. When R&D variables are introduced into the equations, the patents variables become insignificant - R&D expenditures are a better measure of input to the innovative function of firms than patents are of its output - but we estimate that the same experiment would induce changes in q of between 10 and 27 percent for the average firm, approximately doubling the market's valuation of this kind of capital.

/pdf/industry-effects-and-appropriability-measures-in-the-stock-2wuf7yzgl1.pdf

Iain M. Cockburn

Papers

Measuring Competence? Exploring Firm Effects in Pharmaceutical Research

Absorptive Capacity, Coauthoring Behavior, and the Organization of Research in Drug Discovery

Scale, Scope and Spillovers: The Determinants of Research Productivity in Ethical Drug Discovery

The Economics of Reproducibility in Preclinical Research

Industry Effects and Appropriability Measures in the Stock Markets Valuation of R&D and Patents