Dynamic capabilities and strategic management
Summary (3 min read)
1. Introduction
- Accounting for workforce diversity has become a central preoccupation among scholars who wish to explore the financial and non-financial impacts of diversity at a time when businesses have to make difficult strategic choices due to the economic, social and political turbulence that have come to characterise the early parts of the 21st century.
- Yet the results are inconclusive with research demonstrating conflicting diversity outcomes (Jayne & Dipboye, 2004; Joshi & Roh, 2009; Mannix & Neale, 2005).
- Furthermore, the findings highlight mixed outcomes for diversity which can be associated with positive outcomes such as low turnover, higher levels of innovation and creativity and improved performance, as well as negative outcomes such as lower levels of harmony, higher levels of conflict and low morale (Özbilgin & Tatli, 2008).
- The authors examine four distinct approaches to accounting for diversity outcomes in global organisations: Shareholder, stakeholder, regulation and global value chain.
2. Accounting for diversity impact: towards a broader perspective
- It is important to distinguish between studies on workforce diversity and diversity management in accounting for their respective interplay with organisational performance.
- Studies on workforce diversity tend to link differences that exist in the workforce with organisational outcomes (Tatli & Özbilgin, 2012a).
- Third, they often lack contextual assessment, ignoring the historical and geographic specificity of the insights that they make (See Tatli and Özbilgin 2012 for a review).
- Similarly, the impact of gender diversity varies with organisational setting.
- The relationship between team diversity and performance is characterised with complexities and moderated by a number of factors such as task motivation, team learning, and pro-diversity beliefs (Ely et al., 2012; Meyer & Schermuly, 2012; Winkler & Bouncken, 2011).
3. Method
- This paper is informed by semi-structured interviews with heads of diversity or finance and accounting leaders in 22 globally significant organisations.
- The interview schedule is designed to elicit comprehensive evidence on how organisations account for diversity outcomes.
- Seven out of 22 interviews were conducted face-to-face with senior managers working in UK branches.
- With the permission of the respondents, all interviews were taperecorded.
- While the authors adopted Strauss and Corbin’s (1990) coding procedures of open coding, axial coding and selective coding, they were cognizant of the necessity to have flexibility in using these procedures (Walker, and Myrick, 2006).
4. Findings and Analysis
- The authors interviews revealed that organisations accounted for diversity outcomes in narrow or broad ways.
- Organisational framing of diversity outcomes included a wide compliance with law, fairness at work, increased innovation and creativity, higher levels of employee well-being, improved employee engagement, improved customer satisfaction, better market reach, compliance with international standards, capturing the spirit of globalisation, increased competitiveness, and enhanced corporate reputation.
- Yet, their analysis which is reported below proposes ideal types of common approaches that were expressed in the interviews.
4.2. Stakeholder approach to accounting for diversity impact
- It is possible to account for diversity outcomes by focusing on a wider range of interests than shareholder value and profitability.
- That’s a message, it’s like the authors should be very much integrated with the communities they serve.
- And as a result of that, the authors don’t see many people in the workforce with any notable disability.
- The stakeholder approach is similar to the shareholder approach in the sense that workforce diversity is considered as a means to an end, reflecting on a wider range of interests, and it assumes that organisations can freely and voluntarily does not mean that all interests will be integrated in practice in the workplace and work process designs.
- It is not surprising then that stakeholder considerations alone have not been sufficient to tackle entrenched forms of inequality, unfairness and discrimination that plague labour market practices.
4.3. Regulatory approach to accounting for diversity impact
- The relationship between workforce diversity and organisational outcomes is governed by a large number of rules and resources.
- Regulation, i.e. the rules for allocating resources and framing actions, can take many forms, including industry regulation, market regulation, social regulation, legal regulation, all of which may include a mixture of voluntary as well as coercive measures.
- In formulating a regulatory approach to workforce diversity, practitioners consider both voluntary and coercive measures and operate at multiple contexts.
- And I suspect globally, it plays out in the same way in different ways.
- So in a sense, they are creating compulsion to look at it, simply maybe because of funding they will be forced to look at it.
4.4. Global value chain approach to accounting for diversity impact
- Expansion of the accounting repertoire for diversity’s impact to include voluntary and coercive regulation has opened up possibilities for discussing speed and effectiveness of diversity interventions.
- We’re getting used now to being owned from abroad and owned by people of very different backgrounds and cultures, different faith perspectives, different ethnicities and different approaches to cultural prioritisation, different focuses on the value of markets….
- I mentioned Bangladesh is 90% Muslim so you find in my workforce here, I would say is reflective of the 90% of the population, the balance being made up of Hindu and Christian.
- One organisation chose to assert universal standards and values, even when these may conflict with the espoused beliefs of the local branch:.
- If an organisation allows all diversity policies to be locally determined, there can be wide discrepancies and disparities between local settings across which the organisation operates.
5. Discussion and conclusions
- This paper identified four distinct approaches to accounting for diversity’s impact and argued that there is a need to move from narrow framing of diversity’s impact based around shareholder and stakeholder considerations towards a broader framing, which includes coercive regulation and global value chain.
- Yet, there are calls to broaden the frameworks of how the authors account for diversity outcomes in order to strengthen the diversity management practices nationally and these calls by introducing and exploring two approaches that have been previously overlooked.
- Taken together, the four approaches represent a more comprehensive understanding of accounting for diversity to include varied short-term and long-term, direct and indirect, and broad and narrow conceptions of the interplay between diversity management and organisational performance.
- In accounting for diversity management, the authors recognise that global organisations have different starting points and trajectories of development in terms of their approaches.
- They also need to reflect upon the global, regional and national context of political economy in order to assess the challenges and opportunities.
Did you find this useful? Give us your feedback
Citations
13,128 citations
Cites background from "Dynamic capabilities and strategic ..."
...…theoretical framework for understanding how competitive advantage within firms is achieved and how that advantage might be sustained over time (Barney, 1991; Nelson, 1991; Penrose, 1959; Peteraf, 1993; Prahalad and Hamel, 1990; Schumpeter, 1934; Teece, Pisano, and Shuen, 1997; Wernerfelt, 1984)....
[...]
...The literature characterizes dynamic capabilities as complicated routines that emerge from pathdependent processes (Nelson and Winter, 1982; Teece et al., 1997; Zollo and Winter, 1999)....
[...]
11,355 citations
9,400 citations
Cites background from "Dynamic capabilities and strategic ..."
...In Teece and Pisano (1994) and Teece et al. (1997), we proposed three organizational and managerial processes—coordination/integrating, learning, and reconfiguring—as core elements of dynamic capabilities....
[...]
...As noted in Teece et al. (1997), more decentralized organizations with greater local autonomy are less likely to be blindsided by market and technological developments....
[...]
...It involves interpreting available information in whatever form it appears—a chart, a picture, a conversation at a trade show, news of scientific and technological breakthroughs, or the angst expressed by a frustrated customer....
[...]
...In an earlier treatment (Teece et al., 1997: 530) it was noted that ‘we have merely sketched an outline for a dynamic capabilities approach.’...
[...]
...Early statements of the dynamic capabilities framework can be found in Teece, Pisano, and Shuen (1990a, 1990b, 1997) and Teece and Pisano (1994)....
[...]
8,648 citations
6,242 citations
References
[...]
6,065 citations
5,339 citations
"Dynamic capabilities and strategic ..." refers background in this paper
...Accordingly, any assets or entity which are homogeneous and can be bought and (Fama, 1980), then we unequivocally state that the firm about which we theorize cannot be use-sold at an established price cannot be all that strategic (Barney, 1986)....
[...]
...As Barney (1986) points out, unless ain profits, strongly suggesting the importance of firm-specific factors and the relative unimportance firm is lucky, possesses superior information, or both, the price it pays in a competitive factorof industry effects.16 Jacobsen (1988) and Hansen and…...
[...]
...The term ‘dynamic’ refers to the (1959), Williamson (1975, 1985), Barney (1986), Nelson and Winter (1982), Teece (1988), andcapacity to renew competences so as to achiev congruence with the changing business environ- Teeceet al. (1994). ment; certain innovative responses are required when…...
[...]
5,300 citations
"Dynamic capabilities and strategic ..." refers background or methods in this paper
...Competitive success can undoubtedly fiow from both strategizing and economizing,^^ but along with Williamson (1991) we believe that 'economizing is more fundamental than strategizing or put differently, that economy is the best strategy....
[...]
...This is not only because of transaction costs, as Williamson (1975, 1985) decentralized fashion, but with a viable headquarters operation.emphasized, but also because there are many types of arrangements where injecting high-pow- The key point, however, is that the properties of internal…...
[...]
...In this sense, we arebe accomplished merely by using the price system consonant with both Richardson (1960) and Williamson (1975, 1985)....
[...]
...The resource-based perspective is strongly at odds with this conceptualization. kets (Penrose, 1959; Williamson, 1975; Teece, 1980, 1982, 1986a, 1986b; Wernerfelt, 1984)....
[...]
...The term ‘dynamic’ refers to the (1959), Williamson (1975, 1985), Barney (1986), Nelson and Winter (1982), Teece (1988), andcapacity to renew competences so as to achiev congruence with the changing business environ- Teeceet al. (1994). ment; certain innovative responses are required when…...
[...]
4,106 citations
4,055 citations
"Dynamic capabilities and strategic ..." refers background in this paper
...This literature, together with the contestability literature ( Baumol, Panzar, and Willig, 1982 ), has led to a greater appreciation of the role of sunk costs, as opposed to fixed costs, in determining competitive outcomes....
[...]
Related Papers (5)
Frequently Asked Questions (7)
Q2. Why does the capabilities approach tend to steer managers toward creating new sources of value?
Because of imperfect factor markets, or more Unit of analysis and analytic focus precisely the nontradability of ‘soft’ assets like values, culture, and organizational experience, Because in the capabilities and the resources framework business opportunities flow from adistinctive competences and capabilities generally cannot be acquired; they must be built.
Q3. What is the role of benchmarking in facilitating the transfer of practice?
Szulanski also and structured, trial and error and learning-by-doing are necessary, whereas in mature environments where the underly-discusses the role of benchmarking in facilitating the transfer of best practice.
Q4. What is the likely approach to a strategic conflict?
The strategic conflict approach is likelycompanies tend to favor ‘strategic leaps’ while, in contrast, Japanese and German companies tend to be a little more permissive; acquisitions that raise rivals’ costs or enable firms to effectuateto favor incremental, but rapid, improvements.
Q5. What is the role of the local market in determining the competitiveness of firms?
Porter (1990), for example, shows that differencesReplication in local product markets, local factor markets, and institutions play an important role in shapingTo understand imitation, one must first understand replication.
Q6. What does the capabilities approach tell us?
Brittain and Freeman (1980) using population ecology methodologies argued that an organization is 62 Cantwell shows that the technological competence of firmsquick to expand when there is a significant overpersists over time, gradually evolving through firm-specific lap between its core capabilities and those needed learning.
Q7. What is the idea that the understanding of processes is so key to process improvement?
the notion that the understanding of processes, both in production and in management, is theLippman and Rumelt (1992) have argued that some sources of competitive advantage are so key to process improvement.