Explore the vast range of titles available.

Purpose Four management capabilities for successfully operationalizing open innovation are: strategy and culture, ecosystem capability, internal capability and technology enablement. Surveying more than 1,000 executives on current open innovation practices and capabilities, IBM IBV was able to identify how the different operating model capabilities interact and complement each other to drive better innovation and business performance. Design/methodology/approach To help organizations build and improve their open innovation capabilities, the IBM Institute for Business Value (IBV) partnered with APQC to develop the Ecosystem-Enabled Innovation Maturity Model (EEIMM) - an open standards model encompassing four domain competencies required for successful open innovation. To assess the maturity and benchmark the performance of organizations’ open innovation capabilities, the IBV, in collaboration with Oxford Economics, used the EEIMM to survey over 1000 leaders responsible for open innovation at their organizations. Findings Four management capabilities for successfully operationalizing open innovation are: strategy and culture, ecosystem capability, internal capability and technology enablement. IBV analysis found that organizations that are more advanced in developing the four building blocks see significantly better performance across key financial and innovation metrics. Practical implications For every dollar of investment, the proportion of direct revenue attributed to open innovation is four times higher than for traditional innovation. Originality/value Leading organizations are embracing open innovation as a critical component of innovation strategy and investment. They recognize that adopting open innovation yields far greater returns than traditional innovation can. Recent research by the IBM Institute for Business Value (IBM IBV) reveals, for example, that as many as 84 percent of executives now view open innovation as important for their organization’s future growth.

The aim of the research developed is to recognize the importance and impact of supply chain dynamic capabilities (SCDC) in the horizontal collaboration as a relevant factor to mitigate the risks in the supply chain, but also to contribute to sustainability in SME’s that are located in emerging economies, even more face to the post-pandemic scenario. The methodology used to analyze the theoretical constructs related to the study was PRISMA declaration. It was applied using several databases (Scopus and Web of Science) and specific search equations investigating several lenses related to supply chain dynamic capabilities (SCDC) as an adjuvant to create and promote horizontal collaborative networks (HCN). It mitigates the risks through collaborative processes between actors in the supply chain, developing resilience. The lenses considered are dynamic capabilities view, supply chain resilience and collaborative networks. The study results reveal that collaborative networks could support the risk management in supply chains that develop this practice. In the same way, supply chain dynamic capabilities (SCDC) can be considered as a relevant factor in stimulating integration between different and exogenous actors of the supply chain in a horizontal collaboration, and also considering the collaboration as one of the most important supply chain dynamic capability (SCDC) to be developed for SME’s as a good way to dynamize their supply chains, avoid the risk and as a good practice to improve the corporate sustainability in emerging markets.

The capabilities approach has largely addressed individual capabilities via a liberal framework common in its literature. However, a growing number of scholars concerned with sustainable human development are analyzing theories and methodologies that are both suitable for human flourishing and display a respect for nature. This paper explores several forms of considering the value of non-animal and non-individual natural entities, such as ecosystems. I first expose some instrumental reasons why we may care about the flourishing of ecosystems and then other reasons based on the assumption that they have integrity and their own capabilities and, therefore, deserve moral consideration. I argue that despite the possible moral conflicts that may emerge between human and ecosystemic autonomy, they could be avoided by adopting an ecological justice virtue. I present this ecological justice characterized by some contributions of decolonial thought and environmental virtue ethics. I propose that if the capabilities approach was not anchored only in an individualistic ontology, it could better assume a multi-level axiology from which the inherent and instrumental value of ecosystems would be interconnected. And, to this end, I find the concept of synergetic flourishing helpful to accept an interdependent and non-human-centered recognition of the capabilities.

The paper investigates which types of capabilities open innovation digital platforms develop for supporting co-creation in open innovation processes, by enabling the shift from knowledge ecosystems to capabilities ecosystems. By examining the literature on the open innovation digital platforms, the paper develops a theoretical framework and advances propositions by underlining the specific required dynamic capabilities—sensing, seizing, scanning, integrating, and transformative—needed to facilitate and support the interactive coupled open innovation processes essential for firm co-creation activities. Research propositions are provided to address scholars toward new research paths on digital platforms, open innovation, and dynamic capabilities. Implications for practitioners involved in open innovation processes by using digital platforms are provided in the conclusion.

We explain why the line between dynamic and operational (or ordinary) capabilities is unavoidably blurry, draw implications for capabilities that promote economically important but seemingly gradual change, and provide recommendations for future research that takes these issues into account.

Purpose This study aims to grounded in the dynamic capability theory and focuses on the dynamic exchange capability framework, encompassing networkbuilding capability and resource integration capability, to explore the relationship between coopetition and resilience, with ecosystem digitalization serving as the boundary condition. Design/methodology/approach This study uses a survey study among 382 B2B startups with second-hand data from the city level. Findings Startups engaged in coopetition activities can build resilience through the mediating effects of network-building capability and resource integration capability. In addition, ecosystem digitalization positively moderates these relationships. Practical implications This study advocates for entrepreneurs to leverage coopetition to enhance resilience by activating network-building capability and resource integration capability and to apply ecosystem digitalization throughout this transformation process. Originality/value Many studies have discussed how to strengthen the resilience of startups, but the role of the entrepreneurial ecosystem in constructing resilience has received little attention. This study contributes to the understanding of the causal relationship between entrepreneurial ecosystem and entrepreneurship, promotes the development of the dynamic exchange capability framework, and sheds light on the flow of resources across borders within ecosystems.

Planning for and implementing multifunctional nature-based solutions can improve urban ecosystems’ adaptation to climate change, foster urban resilience, and enable social and environmental innovation. There is, however, a knowledge gap in how to design and plan nature-based solutions in a nonanthropocentric manner that enhances co-benefits for humans and nonhuman living organisms. To address this gap, we conducted a systematic literature review to explore how an ecological justice perspective can advance the understanding of nature-based solutions. We argue that ecological justice, which builds on the equitable distribution of environmental goods and bads, social–ecological interconnectedness, nature’s agency and capabilities, and participation and inclusion in decisionmaking, provides a transformative framework for rethinking nature-based solutions in and for cities. A qualitative analysis of 121 peer-reviewed records shows a highly human-centred worldview for delivering naturebased solutions and a relationship to social justice with no direct reference to the dimensions of ecological justice. There is, however, an underlying recognition of the importance of nonhumans, ecosystem integrity and wellbeing, and a need to consider their needs and capacities through multispecies nature-based solutions design and planning. We conclude with a discussion of the critical aspects for designing and planning ecologically just cities through nature-based solutions and future research directions to further integrate these fields.

Exploring how people access ecosystem services and revealing the individual capabilities that affect the accessibility of ecosystem services are important for obtaining a clear understanding of the contribution of ecosystem services to human well-being. Previous studies on ecosystem services have incorporated too little empirical research on the accessibility of ecosystem services and on the individual capabilities that affect accessibility. We chose the ecologically fragile and economically underdeveloped Loess Plateau as the research area because local farmers in this area are dependent on ecosystem services. The importance and accessibility of ecosystem services were evaluated on the basis of questionnaire surveys and semistructured interviews. The results showed that crops, meat, and water yield were the most important ecosystem services but were the most difficult to access. In contrast, fruit and soil fertility were easier to access. Furthermore, we determined the individual capabilities of local farmers based on Nussbaum’s capabilities list as well as the actual conditions for local farmers and explored the impact of individual capabilities on the accessibility of ecosystem services. The results showed that local ecological knowledge and the ability to socialize were the key individual capabilities determining whether local farmers can access ecosystem services. Compared with farmers who have a formal education, farmers with rich local ecological knowledge can more easily access to crops and erosion control. The ability to socialize reflects the exchanges or donations of ecosystem services among farmers, which increase the accessibility of fodder and organic fertilizer. Physical health, financial capital, and other individual capabilities also have an impact on the accessibility of certain ecosystem services. Therefore, improving these individual capabilities is of great value for improving farmers’ well-being. In policy-making and community management, the government needs to consider the development of farmers’ individual capabilities in addition to considering poverty alleviation measures.

Agroecology has been criticized for being more labor-intensive than other more industrialized forms of agriculture. We challenge the assertion that labor input in agriculture has to be generally minimized and argue that besides quantity of work one should also consider the quality of work involved in farming. Early assessments on work quality condemned the deskilling of the rural workforce, whereas later criticisms have concentrated around issues related to fair trade and food sovereignty. We bring into the discussion the concept of contributive justice to welcome the added labor-intensity of agroecological farming. Contributive justice demands a work environment where people are stimulated to develop skills and learn to be productive. It also suggests a fairer distribution of meaningful work and tedious tasks. Building on the notion of contributive justice we explore which capabilities and types of social relationships are sustainably promoted and reinforced by agroecological farming practices. We argue that agroecological principles encourage a reconceptualization of farm work. Farmers are continuously stimulated to develop skills and acquire valuable experiential knowledge on local ecosystems and agricultural techniques. Further, generalized ecological studies recognize the significance of the farmer’s observations on natural resources management. This contributes to the development of a number of capabilities and leads to more bargaining power, facilitating self-determination. Hereby farm work is made more attractive to a younger generation, which is an essential factor for safeguarding the continuity of family farms.

Entrants in new industries pursue distinct technologies in hopes of winning the technology competition and achieving sustainable competitive advantage. We draw on the complementary assets framework to predict entrants' technology choices in an emerging industry. Evidence from the global solar photovoltaic industry supports our arguments that entrants are more likely to choose technologies with higher technical performance and for which key complementary assets are available in the ecosystem. However, diversifying entrants are more likely to trade off superior performance for complementary asset availability whereas start‐up entrants are more likely to trade off complementary asset availability for superior performance. This difference is largely due to diversifying entrants with pre‐entry capabilities related to the industry. The study offers a novel illustration of how complementarities and competition shape entry strategies. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.