Authors :
Flora Kisale; Dr. Ambrose Kemboi; Ronald Bonuke
Volume/Issue :
Volume 11 - 2026, Issue 3 - March
Google Scholar :
https://tinyurl.com/9kreamuk
Scribd :
https://tinyurl.com/tnwnubtj
DOI :
https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/26mar644
Note : A published paper may take 4-5 working days from the publication date to appear in PlumX Metrics, Semantic Scholar, and ResearchGate.
Abstract :
This study examined the relationship between dynamic capabilities, organizational resilience, and organizational
ambidexterity among manufacturing firms in Nairobi County, Kenya. The study was motivated by the need to understand
how firms balance exploration and exploitation in dynamic environments. Specifically, it sought to determine the effect of
dynamic capabilities on ambidexterity and the moderating role of organizational resilience. An explanatory research design
was adopted, with data collected from 357 firms and analyzed using correlation and regression techniques. The results
revealed strong positive relationships between dynamic capabilities and ambidexterity (r = .712, p < .01), and between
resilience and ambidexterity (r = .657, p < .01). Regression analysis showed that dynamic capabilities (β = .744, p < .001) and
organizational resilience (β = .418, p < .001) significantly influence ambidexterity, explaining 62.3% of the variance (R² =
.623). However, the moderating effect of resilience was not significant (β = -.033, p > .05). The study concludes that dynamic
capabilities are the primary drivers of organizational ambidexterity, while resilience plays a supportive but non-moderating
role. It recommends that firms invest in innovation, adaptability, and strategic flexibility to enhance ambidextrous
capabilities.
Keywords :
Dynamic Capabilities, Organizational Resilience, Organizational Ambidexterity, Manufacturing Firms.
References :
- Ambrosini, V., & Altintas, G. (2019). Dynamic managerial capabilities. In D. J. Teece & S. Augier (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of dynamic capabilities (pp. 223–244). Oxford University Press.
- Baía, E., & Ferreira, J. J. (2024). Dynamic capabilities and firm performance: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Business Research, 172, 114–128.
- Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99–120.
- Barreto, I. (2010). Dynamic capabilities: A review of past research and an agenda for the future. Journal of Management, 36(1), 256–280.
- Birkinshaw, J. (2023). Strategic management and organizational ambidexterity: Contemporary perspectives. Oxford University Press.
- Birkinshaw, J., & Gibson, C. B. (2004). Building ambidexterity into an organization. MIT Sloan Management Review, 45(4), 47–55.
- Ciasullo, M. V., Montera, R., Douglas, A., & Palumbo, R. (2022). Ready for resilience? A literature review on organizational resilience and digital transformation. Journal of Business Research, 139, 141–155.
- Day, G. S., & Schoemaker, P. J. H. (2016). Adapting to fast-changing markets and technologies. California Management Review, 58(4), 59–77.
- Di Stefano, G., Peteraf, M., & Verona, G. (2010). Dynamic capabilities deconstructed: A bibliographic investigation into the origins, development, and future directions of the research domain. Industrial and Corporate Change, 19(4), 1187–1204.
- Drnevich, P. L., Marino, L., & Withers, M. C. (2020). Dynamic capabilities and organizational ambidexterity: A review and research agenda. Journal of Management, 46(1), 1–34.
- Eisenhardt, K. M., & Martin, J. A. (2000). Dynamic capabilities: What are they? Strategic Management Journal, 21(10–11), 1105–1121.
- Fitriati, R., Purwana, D., & Buchdadi, A. D. (2020). Dynamic capabilities and firm performance: Evidence from manufacturing firms. Management Science Letters, 10(7), 1501–1510.
- Helfat, C. E., & Peteraf, M. A. (2009). Understanding dynamic capabilities: Progress along a developmental path. Strategic Organization, 7(1), 91–102.
- Iftikhar, R., Purvis, L., & Giannoccaro, I. (2021). A meta-analytical review of organizational resilience and firm performance. International Journal of Production Research, 59(21), 1–17.
- Isensee, C., Teuteberg, F., Griese, K. M., & Topi, H. (2023). The role of digitalization in building organizational resilience. Business & Information Systems Engineering, 65(2), 201–219.
- Linnenluecke, M. K. (2017). Resilience in business and management research: A review of influential publications and a research agenda. International Journal of Management Reviews, 19(1), 4–30.
- Liu, Y., Lee, J. M., & Lee, C. (2024). Organizational resilience and dynamic capabilities: Evidence from emerging markets. Journal of Business Research, 170, 114–126.
- March, J. G. (1991). Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization Science, 2(1), 71–87.
- Nedzinskas, S., Pundziene, A., Buoziute-Rafanaviciene, S., & Pilkiene, M. (2013). The impact of dynamic capabilities on SME performance in a volatile environment. Inzinerine Ekonomika-Engineering Economics, 24(4), 376–385.
- O’Reilly, C. A., & Tushman, M. L. (2021). Lead and disrupt: How to solve the innovator’s dilemma (2nd ed.). Stanford University Press.
- Ortiz-de-Mandojana, N., & Bansal, P. (2016). The long-term benefits of organizational resilience through sustainable business practices. Strategic Management Journal, 37(8), 1615–1631.
- Pezeshkan, A., Fainshmidt, S., Nair, A., Frazier, M. L., & Markowski, E. (2016). An empirical assessment of the dynamic capabilities–performance relationship. Journal of Business Research, 69(8), 2950–2956.
- Schad, J., Lewis, M. W., Raisch, S., & Smith, W. K. (2019). Paradox research in management science: Looking back to move forward. Academy of Management Annals, 13(1), 80–103.
- Smith, W. K., & Lewis, M. W. (2011). Toward a theory of paradox: A dynamic equilibrium model. Academy of Management Review, 36(2), 381–403.
- Teece, D. J. (2007). Explicating dynamic capabilities: The nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance. Strategic Management Journal, 28(13), 1319–1350.
- Teece, D. J. (2012). Dynamic capabilities: Routines versus entrepreneurial action. Journal of Management Studies, 49(8), 1395–1401.
- Teece, D. J. (2018). Business models and dynamic capabilities. Long Range Planning, 51(1), 40–49.
- Teece, D. J. (2023). Dynamic capabilities: Theory, strategy, and organization. Oxford University Press.
- Teece, D. J., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 18(7), 509–533.
- Wilden, R., Devinney, T. M., & Dowling, G. R. (2013). The impact of dynamic capabilities on firm performance: Evidence from a global study. British Journal of Management, 24(3), 315–332.
- Williams, T. A., & Shepherd, D. A. (2016). Building resilience or providing sustenance: Different paths of emergent ventures in the aftermath of disaster. Academy of Management Journal, 59(6), 2069–2102.
- Winter, S. G. (2003). Understanding dynamic capabilities. Strategic Management Journal, 24(10), 991–995.
- Zimmermann, A., Raisch, S., & Cardinal, L. B. (2018). Managing persistent tensions on the frontline: A configurational perspective on ambidexterity. Journal of Management Studies, 55(5), 739–769.
- Zollo, M., & Winter, S. G. (2002). Deliberate learning and the evolution of dynamic capabilities. Organization Science, 13(3), 339–351.
This study examined the relationship between dynamic capabilities, organizational resilience, and organizational
ambidexterity among manufacturing firms in Nairobi County, Kenya. The study was motivated by the need to understand
how firms balance exploration and exploitation in dynamic environments. Specifically, it sought to determine the effect of
dynamic capabilities on ambidexterity and the moderating role of organizational resilience. An explanatory research design
was adopted, with data collected from 357 firms and analyzed using correlation and regression techniques. The results
revealed strong positive relationships between dynamic capabilities and ambidexterity (r = .712, p < .01), and between
resilience and ambidexterity (r = .657, p < .01). Regression analysis showed that dynamic capabilities (β = .744, p < .001) and
organizational resilience (β = .418, p < .001) significantly influence ambidexterity, explaining 62.3% of the variance (R² =
.623). However, the moderating effect of resilience was not significant (β = -.033, p > .05). The study concludes that dynamic
capabilities are the primary drivers of organizational ambidexterity, while resilience plays a supportive but non-moderating
role. It recommends that firms invest in innovation, adaptability, and strategic flexibility to enhance ambidextrous
capabilities.
Keywords :
Dynamic Capabilities, Organizational Resilience, Organizational Ambidexterity, Manufacturing Firms.