Developmental and Evolutionary Paths Study of Dynamic Capabilities Based on Co- Citation Analysis

Document Type : Research Paper


1 Faculty member of Allameh Tabataba'i university

2 Faculty Member


The purpose of this study is to investigate the transformative documents in the theoretical domain of dynamic capabilities. Dynamic capabilities, which is one of the key ideas in the field of strategic management and innovation management, seeks to answer the fundamental question why some firms have better innovative performance in terms of competition than the others. The method used in this research is of scientometrics type and it is tried to use co-citation analysis in the first step to extract the burstness rate of different scientific documents and then, using a homogeneous analysis of the documents, the betweenness centrality of each document is measured. Finally, using the Sigma Index, it is attempted to extract transformative documents in this theoretical domain. The results of this research show that 23 documents have the role of transformation and development pivot in this theoretical field. On the other hand, these 23 documents lead to three major schools, ie, supportive theories, developers and the application of theory, which form the most basic and most important scientific documents in this field. The study shows that at least 5 very important theoretical contexts in this knowledge area, namely, "source-based approach to enterprise", "the theory of economical evolution", "knowledge-based approach to enterprise", “the theory of dynamic capabilities”, and "behavioral theory" can be searched



    1. Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of management, 17(1), 99-120.
    2. Barreto, I. (2010). Dynamic capabilities: A review of past research and an agenda for the future. Journal of management, 36(1), 256-280.
    3. Bharadwaj, A. S. (2000). A resource-based perspective on information technology capability and firm performance: an empirical investigation. MIS quarterly, 169-196.
    4. Calantone, R. J., Cavusgil, S. T., & Zhao, Y. (2002). Learning orientation, firm innovation capability, and firm performance. Industrial marketing management, 31(6), 515-524.
    5. Cohen, W. M., & Levinthal, D. A. (1990). Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative science quarterly, 128-152.
    6. Di Stefano, G., Peteraf, M., & Verona, G. (2014). The organizational drivetrain: A road to integration of dynamic capabilities research. The Academy of Management Perspectives, 28(4), 307-327.
    7. Dierickx, I., & Cool, K. (1989). Asset stock accumulation and sustainability of competitive advantage. Management science, 35(12), 1504-1511.
    8. Eisenhardt, K. M., & Martin, J. A. (2000). Dynamic capabilities: what are they?. Strategic management journal, 1105-1121.
    9. Haleblian, J., & Finkelstein, S. (1999). The influence of organizational acquisition experience on acquisition performance: A behavioral learning perspective. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(1), 29-56.
    10. Helfat, C. E., & Raubitschek, R. S. (2000). Product sequencing: co-evolution of knowledge, capabilities and products. Strategic Management Journal, 961-979.
    11. Henderson, R. M., & Clark, K. B. (1990). Architectural innovation: The reconfiguration of existing product technologies and the failure of established firms. Administrative science quarterly, 9-30.
    12. Jaffe, A. B. (1986). Technological opportunity and spillovers of R&D: evidence from firms' patents, profits and market value.
    13. Karim, S., & Mitchell, W. (2000). Path-dependent and path-breaking change: Reconfiguring business resources following acquisitions in the US medical sector, 1978-1995. Strategic management journal, 1061-1081.
    14. Kogut, B., & Zander, U. (1992). Knowledge of the firm, combinative capabilities, and the replication of technology. Organization science, 3(3), 383-397.
    15. Leonard‐Barton, D. (1992). Core capabilities and core rigidities: A paradox in managing new product development. Strategic management journal, 13(S1), 111-125.
    16. Mahoney JT, Pandian JR. 1992. The resource based view within the conversation of strategic management. Strategic Management Journal 13(5): 363–380.
    17. March, J. G. (1991). Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization science, 2(1), 71-87.
    18. Nelson, R. R., & Winter, S. G. (1982). An evolutionary theory of economic change. Harvard University Press.
    19. Penrose, E. T. (1995). The Theory of the Growth of the Firm. Oxford University Press, USA.
    20. Peteraf, M. A. (1993). The cornerstones of competitive advantage: a resource‐based view. Strategic management journal, 14(3), 179-191.
    21. Peteraf, M., Di Stefano, G., & Verona, G. (2013). The elephant in the room of dynamic capabilities: Bringing two diverging conversations together. Strategic Management Journal, 34(12), 1389-1410.
    22. Pindyck, R. S., & Rubinfeld, D. L. (1991). Econometric models and Economic Forecasts, 3.
    23. Podsakoff, P. M., & Organ, D. W. (1986). Self-reports in organizational research: Problems and prospects. Journal of management, 12(4), 531-544.
    24. Porter, M. E. (1980). Competitive strategy: Techniques for analyzing industries and competitors. Simon and Schuster.
    25. Porter, M. E. (1990). The competitive advantage of nations. Harvard business review, 68(2), 73-93.
    26. Roshani, S., Ghazinoori, S., & Tabatabaeian, S. H. (2014). A co-authorship network analysis of Iranian researchers in technology policy and managemen. Journal of science and technology policy, 6 (2), 1-16.
    27. Roshani, S., Soofi, J., Ghazinoori, S., Amiri, M. (2017). Discovering transformative scientific articles based on Sigma Index: Agent based modelling field of study in Social Sciences. Journal of Scientometrics, (article in press).
    28. Storbacka, K., & Nenonen, S. (2011). Scripting markets: From value propositions to market propositions. Industrial Marketing Management, 40(2), 255-266.
    29. Tanriverdi, H. (2005). Tanriverdi, H. (2005). Information technology relatedness, knowledge management capability, and performance of multibusiness firms. MIS quarterly, 311-334.
      1. Teece, D. J. (2007). Explicating dynamic capabilities: the nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance. Strategic management journal, 28(13), 1319-1350.
      2. Teece, D. J., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic management journal, 509-533.
      3. Teece, D., & Pisano, G. (1994). The dynamic capabilities of firms: an introduction. Industrial and corporate change, 3(3), 537-556.
      4. Teece, D., & Pisano, G. (1994). The dynamic capabilities of firms: an introduction. Industrial and corporate change, 3(3), 537-556.
      5. Wernerfelt, B. (1984). A resource‐based view of the firm. Strategic management journal, 5(2), 171-180
      6. Zollo, M., & Winter, S. G. (2002). Deliberate learning and the evolution of dynamic capabilities. Organization science, 13(3), 339-351.

    Zott, C., Amit, R., & Massa, L. (2011). The business model: recent developments and future research. Journal of management, 37(4), 1019-1042.

Volume 6, Issue 2
August 2018
Pages 161-184
  • Receive Date: 09 June 2018
  • Revise Date: 26 December 2018
  • Accept Date: 13 January 2019
  • First Publish Date: 13 January 2019