Search results

The purpose of this paper is to explain the outcomes and role of dynamic capabilities (DCs). To explain the outcomes, the authors study the relationship between new product development (NPD) (an example of DCs) and metaflexibility. To explain the role of DCs, the authors study how human resources and operating routines moderate the role of DCs in achieving adaptation in the firm.

Using data from 200 managers of Spanish firms, the authors apply regression analysis to test the moderating role of human resources and operating routines in the relationship between NPD and metaflexibility.

The results demonstrate that highly qualified and committed workers enhance the effectiveness of NPD, while high frequency in repetition of operating routines significantly damages such effectiveness.

This study is limited to analysing a unique DC (NPD), but future research could explore contributions on other consolidated DCs (e.g. alliance management capability) and compare results. Also, the database on managerial perceptions rather than objective measures.

Managers who must address environmental changes should connect generation of DCs to complementary functional strategies, especially human resources strategy.

This paper suggests additional outcomes derived from DCs, such as metaflexibility. It attempts to understand the complex process by which DCs interact to modify operating routines in order to respond to environmental changes.

This paper aims to propose a model to assess managerial flexibility and its determinants.

The authors perform a literature review to identify the main dimensions of managerial flexibility. Flexibility as a firm capability to co‐align the firm and the business environment permanently is deeply related to the notion of fit. The proposed model integrates different approaches to fit. Based on an empirical, transnational study, the research proposes a model for managerial flexibility.

Three types of flexibility are measured: managerial flexibility, financial flexibility and metaflexibility. Financial flexibility and metaflexibility determine the degree of managerial flexibility, which in turn has positive implications for performance.

The variables included in the model are not exhaustive. The concept of fit implies a static perspective of flexibility.

The results are useful both for researchers and for practitioners. Researchers can benefit from a review of managerial flexibility and a methodology that combines different approaches to fit: matching, covariation and profile deviation. Practitioners can learn that managerial flexibility, articulated in some managerial practices, has positive effects on performance when they are in line with the requirements of the environment. In order to activate these practices, firms should maintain a commitment to learning capabilities and financial resources.

Three contributions are important for research. First, the paper proposes a model for explaining the nature of managerial flexibility. Second, it shows that flexibility and fit are interrelated concepts and that fit improves the measurability of flexibility. Third, managerial flexibility has positive implications for firm performance.

Contends organizations need some possibilities to enable change to survive or exploit shifts and terms of their environments. Highlights, in a panel, the flexibility main points for organizations and uses a Table and Figures for extra explanatory information. States there are three basic flexibilities produced by dynamic management capabilities: organizational design; turbulence; and metaflexibility. Spotlights, in another panel, flexibility changes at KLM Cargo. Notes many organizations combine several of the above methods of pursuing change and continuity ‐ but they are not mutually exclusive.

Flexibility is essential for healthcare organizations to anticipate the increasing internal and external dynamics. Mental healthcare organizations in the Netherlands face major policy reforms made by the government, increasing involvement from municipalities and gradual replacement of clinical care with outpatient care. Top management plays an important strategic role in creating this flexibility because they make important choices, give direction and structure the organization. To create flexibility, managers have to deal with complexity and paradoxes. In this study, the authors aim to contribute to the knowledge on how healthcare managers can create flexibility in their organizations.

This is a qualitative empirical field study. In total, 21 managers of mental healthcare organizations participated in open in-depth interviews. The authors explored flexibility on three perspectives: organizational direction, structure and operations. The COVID-19 pandemic has provided an opportunity to explore flexibility. The authors asked participants to reflect on their organization's response to the pandemic.

Most mental healthcare organizations create flexibility in an implicit way. Flexibility and resilience are closely linked mechanisms. Flexibility ensures a quick response while resilience provides the counterforce and rebound needed to adapt. Adaption ensures that healthcare professionals learn from their experiences and do not return completely to the way things were done before. The primary urge to survive ensured rapid and adequate responses to the COVID-19 pandemic. Whether this is a manifestation of flexibility remains difficult to conclude.

The complexity theory offers some guidance in creating a flexible organization without losing consistency. Flexibility and resilience are closely linked mechanisms that antagonize and protect each other. With this insight, managers in mental healthcare can utilize the qualities and balance them without falling into the various pitfalls.

In this research, the authors are concerned with flexibility as a proactive attitude and capacity of organizations. By looking at the response of organizations to the COVID-19 crisis, the authors find out that responding to a disaster out of survival instinct is something else than flexibility. There is an interesting relationship between flexibility, resilience and adaptability, and they can balance each other.

The purpose of this paper is to analyze whether supply chain (SC) ambidexterity improves supply chain flexibility (SCF) and its impact on SC competence and firm performance. A new measurement instrument for SCF is proposed that takes into account the demands of the environment: SCF fit.

A theoretical model is developed to examine the relationships proposed. The hypotheses are tested with data from 302 manufacturing firms using a structural equations model methodology.

The results show that SC ambidexterity helps to achieve the optimal level of SCF and that supply chain management (SCM) is important to firm performance.

This paper makes three contributions to the SCM literature: first, it develops the conceptual definition of SC ambidexterity and studies its effects at the SC level; second, it develops a new instrument to measure SCF known as SCF fit; third, it studies both the impact of SCF fit on SC competence and the importance of SC in firm performance.

This paper develops a measurement instrument that permits managers to diagnose the level of SCF and the correspondence/gap between current and optimal levels and to establish comparisons between different SC. It also indicates the importance of SCM for firm performance and the need to consider the SC as a whole.

This is one of the first studies to analyze ambidexterity in an organizational network like the SC. It shows that exploitation practices do not jeopardize SCF as long as they are accompanied by exploration practices. That is, high levels of exploration and exploitation are compatible in the SC and lead to the optimal level of SCF.