Erosion Differences between Dynamic and Ordinary Capabilities:
An ontological continuum perspective of micro-foundational routine characteristics and their implications for the macro-phenomenon of capability erosion
The Dynamic Capability construct has provided valuable insights into performance differences between firms but remained highly disputed specifically in its relations to and separations from related constructs such as Ordinary Capabilities and organizational routines. So far, Dynamic Capability Erosion has not been analyzed despite its potential to provide explanations with respect to both conceptual differences between the different constructs and differences in firm performance. We therefore ask: “Why and how do Ordinary and Dynamic Capabilities erode differently from one another?” By bridging micro-foundational observations on routine characteristics from a practice perspective and their macro-phenomenal capability counterparts from a capability perspective, we propose that when compared to Ordinary Capabilities, Dynamic Capabilities once eroded take a longer time to be restored, their erosion is being noticed significantly later and they follow an irregular erosion pattern. We sustain our propositions by contrasting an innovation and a product development process, therefore not only contributing to the capability and organizational routine literature but also to the field of innovation and product development.