Dynamic capabilities are widely regarded to be critical to ensure the growth and survival of firms in an uncertain environment. Recently, the concept of compositional capability has been proposed which is described as the ability to skillfully integrate disparate resources to develop unique value propositions for the target market. Scholars regard compositional capability as a form of dynamic capability. The present study investigates the impact of compositional capability on a firm’s performance. Furthermore, it has been hypothesized that this effect is likely to improve in an uncertain environment. To test the conceptual model, data was collected from a cross-section of 185 retail stores located in Lahore, Pakistan through the survey. The collected data was later analyzed through Structural Equation Modelling. Results of the study reveal that compositional capability is positively associated with a firm’s performance. Also, compositional capability leads to superior firm performance under a highly uncertain environment. The paper discusses these findings and concludes with implications for future research.
Ab HamidMRSamiWSidekMM (2017) Discriminant validity assessment: use of Fornell and Larcker criterion versus HTMT criterion. Journal of Physics Conference Series890(1): 012163.
2.
AhmadNHWilsonCKummerowL (2011) Assessing the dimensionality of business success: the perspectives of Malaysian SME owner-managers. Journal of Asia-Pacific Business12(3): 207–224.
3.
AndersonJCGerbingDW (1988) Structural equation modelling in practice: a review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin103(3): 411–423.
4.
AnwarM (2018) Business model innovation and SMEs performance—Does competitive advantage mediate?International Journal of Innovation Management22(07): 1850057.
5.
BasitAAArshadR (2016) The role of needs-supplies fit and job satisfaction in predicting employee engagement. Jurnal Pengurusan (UKM Journal of Management)47: 3–12.
6.
BennettNLemoineGJ (2014) What a difference a word makes: understanding threats to performance in a VUCA world. Business Horizons57(3): 311–317.
7.
BresslerMS (2012) How small businesses master the art of competition through superior competitive advantage. Journal of Management and Marketing Research11(1): 1–12.
8.
BurtonRM (2015) Extraordinary survival from ordinary resources–how so?Management and Organization Review11(3): 413–417.
9.
ButtnerEHMooreDP (1997) Women’s organizational exodus to entrepreneurship: self-reported motivations and correlates with success. Journal of Small Business Management35: 34–46.
10.
ChandlerGNHanksSH (1993) Measuring the performance of emerging businesses: a validation study. Journal of Business Venturing8(5): 391–408.
11.
DangelicoRMPujariDPontrandolfoP (2017) Green product innovation in manufacturing firms: a sustainability‐oriented dynamic capability perspective. Business Strategy and the Environment26(4): 490–506.
12.
DarMSAhmedSRaziqA (2017) Small and medium-size enterprises in Pakistan: definition and critical issues. Pakistan Business Review19(1): 46–70.
13.
DarcyCHillJMcCabeTJ, et al. (2014) A consideration of organisational sustainability in the SME context: a resource-based view and composite model. European Journal of Training and Development38(5): 398–414.
14.
del Rosario Reyes-SantiagoMSánchez-MedinaPSDíaz-PichardoR (2019) The influence of environmental dynamic capabilities on organizational and environmental performance of hotels: evidence from Mexico. Journal of Cleaner Production227: 414–423.
15.
EisenhardtKMMartinJA (2000) Dynamic capabilities: what are they?Strategic Management Journal21(10–11): 1105–1121.
16.
EverittBS (1975) Multivariate analysis: the need for data, and other problems. British Journal of Psychiatry126: 237–240
17.
FalahatMTehseenSHorneCV (2018) Entrepreneurial innovativeness and its impact on SMEs’ performances. International Journal of Entrepreneurship22(3): 1–9.
18.
FernandezAILaraPRUgaldeMC, et al. (2018) Distinctive competencies and competency-based management in regulated sectors: a methodological proposal applied to the pharmaceutical retail sector in Spain. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services42: 29–36.
19.
FornellCLarckerDF (1981) Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research18(1): 39–50.
20.
HaarhausTLieningA (2020) Building dynamic capabilities to cope with environmental uncertainty: the role of strategic foresight. Technological Forecasting and Social Change155: 120033.
21.
HairJFBlackWCBabinBJ, et al. (2010) Multivariate Data Analysis: A Global Perspective. 7th edtion. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Education.
22.
HenselerJRingleCMSarstedtM (2015) A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance based structural equation modeling. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science43(1): 115–135.
23.
HinterhuberA (2013) Can competitive advantage be predicted? Towards a predictive definition of competitive advantage in the resource-based view of the firm. Management Decision51(4): 795–812.
24.
HomburgCKlarmannMSchmittJ (2010) Brand awareness in business markets: when is it related to firm performance. International Journal of Research in Marketing27(3): 201–212.
25.
HorneyNPasmoreBO’SheaT (2010) Leadership agility: a business imperative for a VUCA world. People and Strategy33(4): 32–38.
26.
HuLTBentlerPM (1999) Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal6(1): 1–55.
27.
JaccardJWanCKTurrisiR (1990) The detection and interpretation of interaction effects between continuous variables in multiple regression. Multivariate Behavioral Research25(4): 467–478.
28.
JenningsPBeaverG (1997) The performance and competitive advantage of small firms: a management perspective. International Small Business Journal15(2): 63–75.
29.
JohansenBEuchnerJ (2013) Navigating the VUCA world. Research-Technology Management56(1): 10–15.
30.
KiyaboKIsagaN (2020) Entrepreneurial orientation, competitive advantage, and SMEs’ performance: application of firm growth and personal wealth measures. Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship9(1): 1–15.
31.
KraaijenbrinkJSpenderJ-CGroenAJ (2010) The Resource-Based View: A Review and Assessment of Its Critiques. Journal of Management36(1): 39–372.
32.
KristalMMHuangXRothAV (2010) The effect of an ambidextrous supply chain strategy on combinative competitive capabilities and business performance. Journal of Operations Management28(5): 415–429.
33.
KumpBEngelmannAKesslerA, et al. (2019) Toward a dynamic capabilities scale: measuring organizational sensing, seizing, and transforming capacities. Industrial and Corporate Change28(5): 1149–1172.
34.
LamLW (2012) Impact of competitiveness on salespeople’s commitment and performance. Journal of Business Research65(9): 1328–1334.
35.
LiuT-CWuL-W (2007) Customer retention and cross-buying in the banking industry: An integration of service attributes, satisfaction and trus. Journal of Financial Services Marketing12(2): 132–145.
36.
LuoYChildJ (2015) A composition-based view of firm growth. Management and Organization Review11(3): 379–411.
37.
MarshHWWenZHauK-T (2004) Structural equation models of latent interactions: evaluations of alternative estimation strategies and indicator construction. Psychological Methods9(3): 275–300.
38.
MillikenFJ (1987) Three types of perceived uncertainty about the environment: state, effect, and response uncertainty. Academy of Management Review12(1): 133–143.
39.
MousaviSBossinkBvan VlietM (2019) Microfoundations of companies’ dynamic capabilities for environmentally sustainable innovation: case study insights from high‐tech innovation in science‐based companies. Business Strategy and the Environment28(2): 366–387.
40.
NewbertSL (2007) Empirical research on the resource‐based view of the firm: an assessment and suggestions for future research. Strategic Management Journal28(2): 121–146.
41.
NewbertSL (2008) Value, rareness, competitive advantage, and performance: a conceptual‐level empirical investigation of the resource‐based view of the firm. Strategic Management Journal29(7): 745–768.
42.
NewkirkHELedererAL (2006) Incremental and comprehensive strategic information systems planning in an uncertain environment. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management53(3): 380–394.
43.
OgreanCHerciuMBelascuL (2009) Competency-based management and global competencies–challenges for firm strategic management. International Review of Business Research Papers5(4): 114–122.
44.
OngJWIsmailHYeapPF (2018) Competitive advantage and firm performance: the moderating effect of industry forces. International Journal of Business Performance Management19(4): 385–407.
45.
PenroseEG (1959) The Theory of the Growth of the Firm. New York: Wiley.
46.
PervanMCurakMPavic KramaricT (2018) The influence of industry characteristics and dynamic capabilities on firms’ profitability. International Journal of Financial Studies6(1): 4.
47.
PodsakoffPMOrganDW (1986) Self-reports in organizational research: problems and prospects. Journal of Management12(4): 531–544.
48.
PodsakoffPMMacKenzieSBLeeJ-Y, et al. (2003) Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology88(5): 879–903.
49.
PriemRLButlerJE (2001a) Is the resource-based “view” a useful perspective for strategic management research?Academy of Management Review26(1): 22–40.
50.
PriemRLButlerJE (2001b) Tautology in the resource-based view and the implications of externally determined resource value: further comments. Academy of Management Review26(1): 57–66.
51.
RayGBarneyJBMuhannaWA (2004) Capabilities, business processes, and competitive advantage: choosing the dependent variable in empirical tests of the resource‐based view. Strategic Management Journal25(1): 23–37.
52.
SarkerSPalitM (2015) Strategic orientation and performance of small and medium enterprises in Bangladesh. International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Small Business24(4): 572–586.
53.
SchilkeOHuSHelfatCE (2018) Quo vadis, dynamic capabilities? A content-analytic review of the current state of knowledge and recommendations for future research. Academy of Management Annals12(1): 390–439.
54.
SchoemakerPJDayGS (2020) Determinants of organizational vigilance: leadership, foresight, and adaptation in three sectors. Futures and Foresight Science2(1): e24.
55.
SchoemakerPJHeatonSTeeceD (2018) Innovation, dynamic capabilities, and leadership. California Management Review61(1): 15–42.
56.
SchwarzJORohrbeckRWachB (2020) Corporate foresight as a microfoundation of dynamic capabilities. Futures and Foresight Science1(3–4): 1–16.
57.
SchumpeterJA (1934) The Theory of Economic Development. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.
58.
SemkeLMTiberiusV (2020) Corporate foresight and dynamic capabilities: an exploratory study. Forecasting2(2): 180–193.
59.
TeeceDJ (2007) Explicating dynamic capabilities: the nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance. Strategic Management Journal28(13): 1319–1350.
60.
TeeceDJ (2018) Business models and dynamic capabilities. Long Range Planning51(1): 40–49.
61.
TeeceDLeihS (2016) Uncertainty, innovation, and dynamic capabilities: an introduction. California Management Review58(4): 5–12.
62.
TeeceDPeterafMLeihS (2016) Dynamic capabilities and organizational agility: risk, uncertainty, and strategy in the innovation economy. California Management Review58(4): 13–35.
63.
TehseenSAhmedFUQureshiZH, et al. (2019a) Entrepreneurial competencies and SMEs’ growth: the mediating role of network competence. Asia-Pacific Journal of Business Administration11(1): 2–29.
64.
TehseenSMughalSADurstS, et al. (2019b) Composition-based view of the firm as a promising approach to studying small businesses. Production29:1–14.
65.
TehseenSQureshiZHRamayahT (2018) Impact of network competence on firm’s performances among Chinese and Indian entrepreneurs: a multigroup analysis. International Journal of Entrepreneurship22(2): 1–14.
66.
VecchiatoR (2012) Environmental uncertainty, foresight and strategic decision making: an integrated study. Technological Forecasting and Social Change79(3): 436–447.
67.
VolberdaHWKaraliE (2015) Reframing the compositional capability: a resource-based view on ‘a composition-based view of firm growth’. Management and Organization Review11(3): 419–426.
68.
WildenRDevinneyTMDowlingGR (2016) The architecture of dynamic capability research identifying the building blocks of a configurational approach. Academy of Management Annals10(1): 997–1076.
69.
WildenRGuderganSPNielsenBB, et al. (2013) Dynamic capabilities and performance: strategy, structure and environment. Long Range Planning46(1–2): 72–96.
70.
YasaNGiantariIGAKSetiniM, et al. (2020) The role of competitive advantage in mediating the effect of promotional strategy on marketing performance. Management Science Letters10(12): 2845–2848.
71.
YaylaAAHuQ (2012) The impact of IT-business strategic alignment on firm performance in a developing country setting: exploring moderating roles of environmental uncertainty and strategic orientation. European Journal of Information Systems21(4): 373–387.
72.
YuWJacobsMAChavezR, et al. (2019) Dynamism, disruption orientation, and resilience in the supply chain and the impacts on financial performance: a dynamic capabilities perspective. International Journal of Production Economics218: 352–362.
73.
YucelIMcMillanARichardOC (2014) Does CEO transformational leadership influence top executive normative commitment?Journal of Business Research67(6): 1170–1177.
74.
ZahraSASapienzaHJDavidssonP (2006) Entrepreneurship and dynamic capabilities: a review, model and research agenda. Journal of Management Studies43(4): 917–955.
75.
ZhuQSarkisJ (2007) The moderating effects of institutional pressures on emergent green supply chain practices and performance. International Journal of Production Research45(18–19): 4333–4355.
