BWL: Dynamic Capabilities

Die Menge der Arbeiten aus dem Bereich der Managementlehre, die auf “high velocity” environments verweisen, die Unternehmen dazu zwingen, ihre Strategie und subsidiär ihre Prozesse auf ständigen Wandel und vor allem ständige Anpassung an den vorhandenen Wandel abzustimmen, wird immer größer.

Einer der am häufigsten zitierten Ansätze aus dem Bereich des Managements ist dabei der Ansatz der Dynamic Capabilities, der in die Reihe der Resource-Based Ansätze gehört und vornehmlich mit dem Namen von David J. Teece verbunden ist. Wie immer, wenn große Würfe in der BWL-Welt veröffentlicht werden, stellt sich sehr schnell die Frage danach, was genau das Konzept eigentlich umfasst, was man unter Dynamic Capabilities zu verstehen hat.

Eine Antwort darauf gibt David Teece im mit Mie Augier verfassten dritten Kapitel seines 2009 erschienenen Buches zu “Dynamic Capabilities”:

“As discussed in chapter 1, dynamic capabilities refer to the particular (nonimitability) capacity business enterprises possess to shape, reshape, configure, and reconfigure assets so as to respond to changing technologies and markets and escape the zero-profit condition. Dynamic capabilities relate to the enterprise’s ability to sense, seize and adapt in order to generate and exploit internal and external enterprise-specific competencies, and to address the enterprise’s changing environment (…). As Gollis (1994) and Winter (2003) note, one element of dynamic capabilities is that they govern the rate of change of ordinary capabilities. If an enterprise possesses resources/competences but lacks dynamic capabilities, it has a chance to make a competitive return for a short period, but superior returns cannot be sustained. It may earn Ricardian (quasi-)rents, but such quasi-rents will be competed away rather quickly. It cannot earn Schumpeterian rents because it hasn’t built the capacity to be continually innovative. Nor is it likely to be able to earn monopoly (Porterian) rents since these require exclusive behaviour or strategic manipulation (Teece, 1984).

[…]

The term dynamic capabilities came into the literature with Teece, Pisano and Shuen (1990a, 1990b). At that time clear linkages to the resource-based approach were noted. It was put this way: If control over scarce resources is the source of economic profits, then it follows that such issues as skill acquisition and learning become fundamental strategic issues. It is in this second dimension, encompassing skill acquisition, learning, and capability accumulation that we believe lies the greatest potential for the resource-based perspective to contribute to strategy. We will refer to this as the ‘dynamic capabilities approach’ recognizing of course that it is part of the overall resource-based perspective” (87-89).