When Do Organizational Capabilities Matter Most? Environmental Dynamism as a Boundary Condition in an Emerging-Market Telecommunications Sector
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.59413/ajocs/v7.i5.20Keywords:
Organisational Capabilities, Environmental Dynamism, Financial Performance, Non-Financial Performance, Contingency Theory, Dynamic CapabilitiesAbstract
Organizational capabilities are widely recognized as key drivers of firm performance; however, their value depends on the environmental conditions in which they are deployed. This study considers environmental dynamism as a boundary condition that influences the relationship between organizational capabilities and organizational performance in an emerging-market telecommunications sector. This research is grounded mainly in Contingency Theory, with further insights from Dynamic Capabilities Theory. It views organizational capabilities as encompassing marketing, learning, innovation, and integrative dimensions. In examining organizational performance, the study distinguishes explicitly between financial and non-financial outcomes. To gather data, the study conducted a cross-sectional survey targeting managers from four leading telecommunications operators in Nigeria. Of the 364 questionnaires distributed, 289 were returned and deemed usable, yielding a robust response rate of 79.4%. The hypotheses were tested using Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM), incorporating 5,000 bootstrap resamples to ensure statistical rigor. Results indicate that organizational capabilities are positively associated with financial performance (β = .40, p < .001) and non-financial performance (β = .47, p < .001). Environmental dynamism is also positively associated with both financial (β = .28, p < .001) and non-financial performance (β = .30, p < .001). Notably, environmental dynamism positively moderates the relationships between organizational capabilities and both financial (β = .17, p < .001) and non-financial performance (β = .19, p = .001). Simple-slope analysis shows that the strength of capability–performance relationships increases as environmental dynamism intensifies. These findings demonstrate that the performance relevance of organizational capabilities is context-dependent and becomes more pronounced under dynamic environmental conditions.
Downloads
References
Barney, J. B. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99–120. https://doi.org/10.1177/014920639101700108
Donaldson, L. (2001). The contingency theory of organizations. SAGE Publications.
Ferreira, J., & Coelho, A. (2020). Dynamic capabilities, innovation and branding capabilities and their impact on competitive advantage and SME's performance in Portugal: The moderating effects of entrepreneurial orientation. International Journal of Innovation Science, 12(3), 255–286. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJIS-10-2018-0108
Forliano, C., Ferraris, A., Bivona, E., & Couturier, J. (2022). Pouring new wine into old bottles: A dynamic perspective of the interplay among environmental dynamism, capabilities development, and performance. Journal of Business Research, 142, 448–463. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.12.065
Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., Sarstedt, M., Danks, N. P., & Ray, S. (2022). Partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) using R: A workbook. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-80519-7
Hair, J. F., Risher, J. J., Sarstedt, M., & Ringle, C. M. (2019). When to use and how to report the results of PLS-SEM. European Business Review, 31(1), 2–24. https://doi.org/10.1108/EBR-11-2018-0203
Helfat, C. E., & Peteraf, M. A. (2003). The dynamic resource-based view: Capability lifecycles. Strategic Management Journal, 24(10), 997–1010. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.332
Helfat, C. E., & Winter, S. G. (2011). Untangling dynamic and operational capabilities: Strategy for the (n)ever-changing world. Strategic Management Journal, 32(11), 1243–1250. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.955
Henseler, J., & Chin, W. W. (2010). A comparison of approaches for the analysis of interaction effects between latent variables using partial least squares path modeling. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 17(1), 82–109. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705510903439003
Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43(1), 115–135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8
Jansen, J. J. P., Van den Bosch, F. A. J., & Volberda, H. W. (2006). Exploratory innovation, exploitative innovation, and performance: Effects of organizational antecedents and environmental moderators. Management Science, 52(11), 1661–1674. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1060.0576
Kock, N. (2015). Common method bias in PLS-SEM: A full collinearity assessment approach. International Journal of e-Collaboration, 11(4), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.4018/ijec.2015100101
Kumar, N., Stern, L. W., & Anderson, J. C. (1993). Conducting interorganizational research using key informants. Academy of Management Journal, 36(6), 1633–1651. https://doi.org/10.2307/256824
Morgan, N. A., Vorhies, D. W., & Mason, C. H. (2009). Market orientation, marketing capabilities, and firm performance. Strategic Management Journal, 30(8), 909–920. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.764
Morgan, N. A., Whitler, K. A., Feng, H., & Chari, S. (2019). Research in marketing strategy. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 47(1), 4–29. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-018-0598-1
Park, B. I., & Xiao, S. (2020). Is exploring dynamic capabilities important for the performance of emerging market firms? The moderating effects of entrepreneurial orientation and environmental dynamism. International Studies of Management & Organization, 50(1), 57–73. https://doi.org/10.1080/00208825.2019.1703378
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J.-Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879–903. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879
Schilke, O. (2014). On the contingent value of dynamic capabilities for competitive advantage: The nonlinear moderating effect of environmental dynamism. Strategic Management Journal, 35(2), 179–203. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2099
Schilke, O., Hu, S., & Helfat, C. E. (2018). Quo vadis, dynamic capabilities? A content-analytic review of the current state of knowledge and recommendations for future research. Academy of Management Annals, 12(1), 390–439. https://doi.org/10.5465/annals.2016.0014
Shmueli, G., Sarstedt, M., Hair, J. F., Cheah, J.-H., Ting, H., Vaithilingam, S., & Ringle, C. M. (2019). Predictive model assessment in PLS-SEM: Guidelines for using PLSpredict. European Journal of Marketing, 53(11), 2322–2347. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJM-02-2019-0189
Teece, D. J. (2007). Explicating dynamic capabilities: The nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance. Strategic Management Journal, 28(13), 1319–1350. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.640
Teece, D. J. (2014). The foundations of enterprise performance: Dynamic and ordinary capabilities in an (economic) theory of firms. Academy of Management Perspectives, 28(4), 328–352. https://doi.org/10.5465/amp.2013.0116
Teece, D. J. (2018). Business models and dynamic capabilities. Long Range Planning, 51(1), 40–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2017.06.007
Teece, D. J., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 18(7), 509–533. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199708)18:7%3C509::AID-SMJ882%3E3.0.CO;2-Z
Wilden, R., & Gudergan, S. P. (2015). The impact of dynamic capabilities on operational marketing and technological capabilities: Investigating the role of environmental turbulence. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43(2), 181–199. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-014-0380-y
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Emmanuel IBORIDA, Prof. Uduji Joseph Ikechukwu, Dr. Ewuzie Cajetan (Author)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
