Search results

To further the understanding of industrialised house building (IHB) from a temporal, emergent corporate-ability perspective, this study aims to trace the build-up of corporate assets in an IHB company over time. The research draws on dynamic capabilities, acknowledging not only what assets the company have developed and currently are exploiting, but also how these assets were develop and managed (i.e. enhanced, combined, protected and potentially reconfigured) to sustain long-term competitiveness.

A case study design was used to form a narrative that covers the evolution of an IHB company over a 25-year period. Corporate archival material, analysis of original data from a large number of research studies during 1993-2013 and retrospective reflections of owners and managers, including crosschecking interpretations of archival material, developed and triangulated the narrative.

The study presents rich empirical findings on the build-up of corporate assets. Starting from a successive process of exploration and exploitation formation of dynamic capabilities eventually played out into an exponential dynamic capability build-up. The IHB case company displays the ability to not only continuously exploit and renew resources and competences, but also to sense, seize and reconfigure cumulative assets over time. The exponential development of dynamic capabilities resonates to literature on higher-order dynamic capabilities implying that: the accumulated and higher-order dynamic capabilities are difficult to imitate and a (any) company must possess higher-order dynamic capabilities to be able to exploit and/or take up IHB.

The study is complementing and potentially challenging frequent framings of the IHB concept. Previous research has addressed and characterised IHB mainly by encapsulating a moment in time and, thus, characteristics are momentary and represent static views on IHB. However, IHB has seen a strong development over the past 25 years, and the study reflects on this development from the perspective of one of the IHB-forerunner companies in Sweden. By exploring from a company perspective the developments, reconfiguration and capacity to develop/reconfigure over time in a changing environment, the study introduces an alternative understanding of IHB as dynamic capabilities.

This chapter aims to discuss the challenges facing these countries building productive capacity for development. This chapter makes use of data published by international organizations as indicators for measuring the state of development in the Arab region. Several indicators are presented to compare Arab countries with other world regions. The use of data identifies some of the gaps that countries in the Arab region need to close to strengthen capacity building for development and fostering economic growth. The findings from the data presented reveal that the productive structure in most Arab countries remains weak to generate production linkages and provide incentives for investment in nonenergy sectors. The failure of the export-led growth model to diversify output and promote development in energy producing countries has increased the dependence of these countries on global trade. Fluctuations in commodity prices and uncertainty about global demand for energy have influenced the ability of the state to construct strategies for rapid transformation. Except for the energy sector, the productivity of nonoil sectors remains low reflecting inadequate incentives and ineffective entrepreneurial capabilities. The study examines the challenges for building productive capacity in the Arab world. It illustrates the failure of the led-export model and its inability to prompted economic diversification, especially in the Gulf countries. The study contributes to the literature on capacity building in the Arab world so that to encourage researchers and students of development conducting studies concerning the main development challenges facing these countries.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the process of capability building at subsidiary level and the forces preventing such process. The paper discusses and tests three propositions governing this process.

This research is based on multiple case studies. A case study research is most useful when addressing issues about which little prior theory has been developed or empirical evidence collected.

Subsidiaries in Asia operate in a way substantially different from those in the West. Specifically what ways do market specificities in Asian economies serve to either inhibit or positively encourage the development of a subsidiary? What are the circumstances which could induce subsidiaries to outsource production?

Future research should explore the regional effect on MNE subsidiary types and different flexibilities exhibited in the value chain. What are the specific aspects (macro and micro) that explain variations of business strategies at subsidiary levelboth over time and between countries?

Multinational enterprises (MNEs) should be aware of the strong potential for capability development at the subsidiary level. This increased awareness ought to induce consideration in MNEs about how best to encourage such know capability development and how to leverage these capabilities for a better MNE performance.

Managers who knew the host country languages and culture, and have outward-looking attitudes, are in advantageous positions to learn about new opportunities.

The paper offers empirical insights into the state and drivers of subsidiary performance in Asia. Specifically it shows how neglect of external conditions can act to open people’s eyes and foster a capability-building process within subsidiaries.

We examine how a firm’s market-oriented capabilities (in areas such as R&D or marketing) and consumer focus (business-to-business or business-to-consumer) foster its effectiveness in pursuing corporate political activities. We then explore the sustainability of any advantage that firms may gain from their political activities. We develop a conceptual framework to propose that a firm’s political capabilities to implement different political tactics, such as information provision and constituency building, are a product of how related these tactics are to different market-oriented capabilities and to the skills needed to serve different types of customers. Finally, we propose that the integration of market strategies and political strategies provides new insight into the sustainability of the advantages that a firm might gain through political activities.

This chapter argues that organizations are not sustainable if they operate in unsustainable societal and ecological contexts, and that operating in a way that contributes to the health of the larger system requires organizations to develop new capabilities. It demonstrates the role that rich internal and external networks play in developing sustainability capability particularly in providing pathways to generate, import, apply, and disseminate knowledge about how to operate more sustainably.

The case study of the sustainability transition of Cleveland Clinic is based on four years of interviews and archival data collection examining the system’s transformational change that began in 2007. The case focuses on the building of sustainability capability, including an internal infrastructure to focus the organization on this outcome, and building of rich networks for learning and action. The case is framed with capability and network theory.

Guided and catalyzed by a small central group called the Office for a Healthy Environment, Cleveland Clinic has achieved measurable progress in key strategic focuses including waste diversion, energy efficiency, and increasing integration of local foods into its supply chain. To do so, it has developed strong internal networks to disseminate knowledge and accelerate innovation and adoption of sustainable practices. Strong, dynamic external networks have enabled Cleveland Clinic to import knowledge about sustainable practice from its environment, and have enabled it to help build the sustainability capability of its vendors, the community upon which it depends, and the health-care industry.

Starting with the perspective that the sustainability of an organization depends on the sustainability of the ecosystems in which it exists, this chapter focuses not on the design of specific sustainability initiatives, but on the dynamic networks that underpin the capability to simultaneously improve the health of the organization and of the larger ecosystem. This perspective provides insight into new organizing principles.

This paper aims to discuss the importance of building internal capabilities for change. The main elements of building capabilities are highlighted, along with the benefits. In particular, there is focus on building resilience and how it can help people to respond to and cope with changes more effectively and efficiently. The paper concludes by emphasizing that developing resilience takes time but that research shows that it can impact on how individuals engage in organizational change.

The approach taken is a review of the literature. Data are also used from a group of executive MBA students who were asked what capabilities they thought were necessary to lead and manage change.

Findings show that resilience is a key capability for leading and managing organizational change. The components of resilience play a vital role in enabling people to cope with change.

The practical implications are that organizations need to develop the capabilities for change to ensure that change is sustained in organizations. Managers and HR staff should consider ways of building capabilities for change, especially resilience.

The value of this paper is that it emphasizes the importance of building capabilities for change, especially resilience.

The purpose of this paper is to introduce the notion of fitness in production as something different from leanness and show that building fitness puts a factory on a course of developing cumulative capabilities and improving its ability to respond to changing market and business conditions.

The paper examines the process of design, launch, and management of a fitness program in 42 factories of the Hydro Aluminum Extrusion Group on five continents between 1986 and 2001. The design was based on the “sandcone model” proposed by Ferdows and DeMeyer but the sequence of capabilities was modified to improve safety, reduce process variability, codify and share tacit production know‐how, improve responsiveness, and improve labor and machine efficiency.

Most factories showed improvements higher than industry average in these capabilities during the 15 years. Moreover, they improved the capabilities listed earlier in the above sequence faster than those listed later, indicating that they were becoming more fit.

Observations were in only one company and industry, which limits general applicability of the model. However, measurements were taken over a relatively long period, factories were spread on five continents, and the authors had access to the actual data during the 15 years, which together provided a unique opportunity to gain deep insights from this case. Future research should test the applicability of the model in other industries and companies.

A fitness regimen provides a roadmap for improving core capabilities in a factory. It is different from building leanness. Fitness helps the factory become leaner, but the opposite is not always true. A factory can become too lean but never too fit.

This paper is the first, to the authors' knowledge, to introduce the notion of fitness in production in the literature. Results observed in this case suggest that a better understanding of how factories become fitter provides insights into some of the deeply ingrained practices of superior manufacturers, especially those that stay competitive over long periods.

The internationalization of pharmaceutical firms faces major barriers in terms of managing regulatory requirements in various international markets. This paper aims to identify the requirements related to regulations in various markets of the world. It further seeks to identify how the firms develop such capabilities i.e. processes undertaken by the firms to develop regulatory capabilities.

The research is exploratory in nature. Case study method is adopted to study the requirements related to regulations in international markets and processes to build regulatory capabilities.

To manage regulatory requirements firms need knowledge related to plant approval and product registration. Firms have to submit dossiers to the respective country's regulatory authority to get plant approval and product registration. They can simultaneously apply for both to save time to enter the target market. The requirements for each market are unique in terms of format and contents for dossier preparation. Dossier preparation needs data from various departments which calls for good coordination among various functional areas, i.e. production, QA and QC, R&D, purchasing, etc. If the firm has operations in multiple markets and offers multiple products in a single market the regulatory function is separately organized for less regulated, semi‐regulated and regulated markets.

Pharmaceutical firms targeting international markets can get insight into the regulatory requirements and the process to be adopted to build regulatory requirements.

The paper shows that firms use a systematic process to build capabilities for managing regulations. The paper also offers a process model for firms to build regulatory capabilities for internationalization.

Digital servitization concerns how manufacturers utilize digital technologies to enhance their provision of services. Although digital servitization requires that manufacturers possess new capabilities, in contrast to strategic (or dynamic) capabilities, little is known about how they develop the required operational capabilities. The paper investigates the mechanisms for developing operational capabilities in digital servitization.

This paper presents an exploratory study based on 15 large manufacturers operating in Europe engaged in digital servitization.

Three operational capability development mechanisms are set out that manufacturers use to facilitate digital servitization: learning (developing capabilities in-house), building (bringing the requisite capabilities into the manufacturer), and acquiring (utilizing the capabilities of other actors). These mechanisms emphasize exploitation and exploration efforts within manufacturers and in collaborations with upstream and downstream partners. The findings demonstrate the need to combine these mechanisms for digital servitization according to combinations that match each manufacturer’s traditional servitization phase: (1) initial phase - building and acquiring, (2) middle phase - learning, building and acquiring, and (3) advanced phase - learning and building.

This study reveals three operational capability development mechanisms, highlighting the parallel use of these mechanisms for digital servitization. It provides a holistic understanding of operational capability development mechanisms used by manufacturers by combining three theoretical perspectives (organizational learning, absorptive capacity, and network perspectives). The paper demonstrates that digital servitization requires the significant application of building and acquiring mechanisms to develop the requisite operational capabilities.

To study the applicability of capacity building as a technique for developing social enterprises.

Two emerging social enterprises, developed within the WestFocus Partnership, a consortium of seven higher education institutions, were studied in a series of capacity building sessions conducted by Brunel University Business School, UK. Reports the gathering of data for the project using participant observation, questionnaire surveys and focus groups, together with a series of capacity building sessions delivered by specialists, addressing the areas of leadership and human resources, marketing, environmental scanning, stakeholder analysis and business strategy where Session 1 addressed “Management and leadership styles”, Session 2 addressed “Strategic marketing and environmental analysis”, and Session 3 addressed “Strategy (in the widest sense)”.

The results indicated that, although capacity building could not resolve a perceived conflict between social ends and profit‐driven motives, it does play an important role in the development of successful social enterprises, even if the role is limited.

Propose that a capabilities approach provides a useful platform for highlighting important links between corporate social responsibility and corporate governance within social enterprises.