5. Discussion
Meta-analytic studies have called for more empirical studies investigating the implications of dynamic capabilities (Wilden et al., 2016). Even though there seems to be a consensus that dynamic capabilities should have a positive relationship with performance outcomes, Pezeshkan et al. (2016) suggested that empirical evidence regarding this relationship is mixed, at best. Given the popularity of dynamic capabilities as a research area, there is significant criticism surrounding this debate (Schilke, 2014). In support of earlier arguments by Teece (2007), we have gathered empirical data to show that, like firm-level dynamic capabilities, dynamic supply chain capabilities exist in clusters of sensing, seizing and transforming capabilities. Specifically, supply chain agility allows firm’s to seize opportunities in the marketplace by providing a short-term supply chain response. Supply chain adaptability allows firms to provide a longer-term response to marketplace changes by transforming the resource base and structure of the supply chain.
Importantly, we found that supply chain agility and adaptability are only necessary if supply chain managers are able to sense market opportunities and threats in the first place. After sensing opportunities and threats, managers can respond in two ways. In the short term, firms develop capabilities that allow them to modify their products and services quickly, and according to customer requirements both in terms of quantity and variety (supply chain agility). In the longer term, firms invest in the process of learning about their ultimate customers, understanding the life cycle of their products and the continuous development of new suppliers (supply chain adaptability). Thus, market sensing not only helps supply chain managers to understand market changes, it also empowers them to improve decision making regarding execution and reconfiguration of their capabilities.
