Open access

Introductory Chapter: Strategic Management - A Dynamic Approach

Written By

Okechukwu Lawrence Emeagwali and Hasan Yousef Aljuhamni

Submitted: April 1st, 2019 Published: November 13th, 2019

DOI: 10.5772/intechopen.88196

Chapter metrics overview

1,054 Chapter Downloads

View Full Metrics

1. Introduction

Schumpter [1] and D’Aveni [2] persistently declared that industries irrespective of their nature, (static or dynamic) are experiencing and will continue to experience increasing levels of competition. Decades later evidence abounds in support of their postulations [3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13]. Latching on to this realization that irrespective of the traditional nature of industries, advances in technology are spurring increasing levels of industry competition, a lot of scholars have examined the antecedents of succeeding in this era for both organizations competing in traditionally turbulent or hypercompetitive industries as well as for organizations operating in traditionally static industries.

A review of extant literature reveals that some key antecedents for succeeding in the face of increasing levels of industry competition irrespective of industry nature include the development and use of dynamic strategies, dynamic leadership and dynamic capabilities-including organizational learning capabilities through transactive memory systems and general knowledge management as well as dynamism in strategic decision making [14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30].

The purpose of this edited volume is to sensitize readers on the state of current research on the role of dynamism in the strategy discourse.


2. On dynamic strategies

A vast body of current literature inextricably linking dynamism to success in traditionally dynamic and hypercompetitive markets exists in literature. This volume contains chapters which provide support to the continuous relevance of dynamism in this regard. This body of literature collectively examines the continuous relevance of the recommendation that dynamic strategy, capabilities and competences are pivotal for success in turbulent and hypercompetitive markets. Its collective findings signify that conscious choices regarding the deployment of dynamic strategies made by top management determine differentials in dynamic capabilities and competences observable among competing firms in hypercompetitive industries, and this in turn, determine the adaptability and flexibility differentials observable among such firms—a necessary and existential condition for survival and succeeding in such industries.

While the above findings naturally apply to organizations competing in highly competitive industries and markets, a second body of literature also represented in this volume reveals that the same can be said of organizations which operate in traditionally static or stable markets. In particular, this second but related body of literature found links between dynamic strategy approaches and organizational performance in traditionally static environments in line with the early postulations about the increasing levels of competitive rivalries currently being experienced by all types of industries by Schumpeter [1] and D’Aveni [2] as well as other prominent competitive dynamics scholars [10, 17, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37].

Interestingly, while this finding implies that even organizations competing in traditionally static industries such as higher education need to develop dynamic capabilities, latest research within this sub-domain also points to the fact that even static industries operating in the least competitive regions of the world such as Africa also need to become nimble and dynamic to stay ahead in their industries.

In other words, readers will come to the conclusion after reading this volume, that irrespective of the nature of an industry or the economic region within which it is situated, there is need for the development and deployment of advanced strategic thinking competences at the corporate governance level in a bid to develop unique dynamic strategies, capabilities and competencies which then confer upon organizations the strategic flexibility for increased adaptability to rapidly increasing changes in otherwise static industries such as the higher education industry [323336, 37].


3. On dynamic capabilities

Diving deeper to the firm level of analysis, this volume also lends itself to studying individual capabilities and competencies which contribute to the strategic agility necessary for survival and succeeding in increasingly hypercompetitive markets, further contributing to the dynamic capabilities literature by providing a diverse perspective particularly emanating from the context of emerging and developing economies.

Readers should expect to find contributions to the theoretical underpinnings of the dynamic capabilities’ literature such as agency and stewardship theories among others; as well as a reiteration of the importance of other non-tangible capabilities such as corporate identity and reputation during strategy development and competitive interactions. Most importantly, readers would find empirical evidence that newer capabilities emanating from exponential technologies such as artificial intelligence are increasingly changing the dynamic capabilities landscape introducing novel capabilities that engender speed and flexibility within firms and dictate new competitive rules within industries, irrespective of type.


4. Conclusions

All in all, the mission of this edited volume is to present current empirical evidence for the continued relevance of dynamism in the strategy discourse. It finds that dynamism in the development and execution of strategies and its dependence on dynamic capabilities is still very relevant in today’s business environment, irrespective of whether these environments are hypercompetitive in nature or relatively stable. It also finds that irrespective of whether firms operate in highly competitive geographic regions or less competitive ones—typically characteristic of most developing economies, strategic dynamism is of equal importance and relevance.

The findings of this volume is important and significant because the randomness with which the constituent chapters were selected and the diverse nature of the study backgrounds involved, give credence to the role that dynamism continues to play within the field of strategic management.


  1. 1. Schumpeter J. Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy. 3rd ed. New York, NY: Harper; 1950
  2. 2. D’Aveni RA. Waking up to the new era of hypercompetition. The Washington Quarterly. 1998;21(1):183-195
  3. 3. Baum JAC, Korn HJ. Competitive dynamics of interfirm rivalry. Academy of Management Stable. 2019;39(2):255-291
  4. 4. Chen M, Miller D. Competitive attack, retaliation and performance: An expectancy-valence framework. Competitive Attack, Retaliation and Strategic Management Journal. 1994;15(2):85-102
  5. 5. Emeagwali OL, Çalicioǧlu C. Competitive interaction: Nature, volume and patterns of generic competitive actions executed by the three largest mobile telecommunication network operators in Turkey. Problems and Perspectives in Management. 2014;12(1):181-190
  6. 6. Chen M, Miller D. Reconceptualizing competitive dynamics. The Academy of Management Annals. 2012;6(434):1-83
  7. 7. Turgay T, Emeagwali OL. Hypercompetition: The driving force behind successful business innovations? A critical review of literature. Investment Management and Financial Innovations. 2012;9(3):111-119
  8. 8. Ferrier WJ. Navigating the competitive landscape: The drivers and consequences of competitive aggressiveness. The Academy of Management Journal. 2001;44(4):858-877
  9. 9. Jacobson R. The “Austrian” School of Strategy. Academy of Management Review. 1992;17(4):782-807. Available from:
  10. 10. Mohammad Alzoubi A, Lawrence Emeagwali O. Do generic strategies impact performance in higher educational institutions? A SEM-based investigation. Business and Economic Horizons. 2017;12(2):42-52
  11. 11. Emeagwali OL, Çalıcıoğlu C. Industry-specific competitive actions within the Turkish mobile telecommunications network operating industry. International Journal of Business and Social Sciences. 2014;5(5)
  12. 12. Young G, Smith KG, Grimm CM, Science SO, Issue S, Young G, et al. “Austrian” and industrial organization perspectives on firm-level competitive activity and performance. Organization Science. 1996;7(3):243-254
  13. 13. Emeagwali OL, Çalicioǧlu C. Mapping the generic competitive action types peculiar to the Turkish mobile telecommunications network operating industry. Problems and Perspectives in Management. 2014;12(1):51-59
  14. 14. Bradshaw R, Chebbi M, Oztel H. Leadership and knowledge sharing. Asian Journal of Business Research. 2015;4(3):1-20
  15. 15. Carmeli A, Atwater L, Levi A. How leadership enhances employees’ knowledge sharing: The intervening roles of relational and organizational identification. The Journal of Technology Transfer. 2011;36(3):257-274
  16. 16. Emeagwali OL. In: Emeagwali OL, editor. Corporate Governance and Strategic Decision Making [Internet]. Rijeka: IntechOpen; 2017. Available from:
  17. 17. Elrehail H, Emeagwali OL, Alsaad A, Alzghoul A. The impact of Transformational and Authentic leadership on innovation in higher education: The contingent role of knowledge sharing. Telematics and Informatics [Internet]. 2018;35(1):55-67. Available from:
  18. 18. Alzghoul A, Elrehail H, Emeagwali OL, AlShboul MK. Knowledge management, workplace climate, creativity and performance: The role of authentic leadership. Journal of Workplace Learning. 2018;30(8):592-612
  19. 19. Alshanty AM, Emeagwali OL, Ibrahim B, Alrwashdeh M. The effect of market-sensing capability on knowledge creation process and innovation evidence from SMEs in Jordan. Management Science Letters. 2019;9:727-736
  20. 20. Alshanty AM, Emeagwali OL. Market-sensing capability, knowledge creation and innovation: The moderating role of entrepreneurial-orientation. Journal of Innovation & Knowledge [Internet]. 2019. DOI: 10.1016/j.jik.2019.02.002
  21. 21. Al-Tal MJY, Emeagwali OL. Knowledge-based HR practices and innovation in SMEs. The Organ. 2019;52(1):6-21
  22. 22. Alatailat M, Elrehail H, Emeagwali OL. High performance work practices, organizational performance and strategic thinking: A moderation perspective. International Journal of Organizational Analysis. 2019
  23. 23. Gumusluoglu L, Ilsev A. Transformational leadership, creativity, and organizational innovation. Journal of Business Research. 2009;62(4):461-473. DOI: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2007.07.032
  24. 24. Hmieleski KM, Cole MS, Baron RA. Shared authentic leadership and new venture performance. Journal of Management. 2012;38(5):1476-1499
  25. 25. RS-J L. The relationships between transformational leadership, knowledge sharing, trust and organizational citizenship behavior. International Journal of Innovation, Management and Technology. 2014;5(3):3-6
  26. 26. Lin HF. Knowledge sharing and firm innovation capability: An empirical study. International Journal of Manpower. 2007;28(3-4):315-332
  27. 27. Reiter-Palmon R, Illies JJ. Leadership and creativity: Understanding leadership from a creative problem-solving perspective. The Leadership Quarterly. 2004;15(1):55-77
  28. 28. López B, Monfort A. Creating shared value in the context of sustainability: The communication strategy of MNCs. In: Emeagwali OL, editor. Corporate Governance and Strategic Decision Making. 2017. pp. 119-135
  29. 29. Aykan E. Gaining a competitive advantage through green human resource management. In: Emeagwali OL, editor. Corporate Governance and Strategic Decision Making. 2017
  30. 30. Wang GY. Taking corporate social responsibility as growth strategy. In: Emeagwali OL, editor. Corporate Governance and Strategic Decision Making. 2017. pp. 105-117
  31. 31. Jarrar Y, Emeagwali L, Awobamise A. Attracting younger millennials: Lifting bond out of a transitional sinkhole. Dirasat: Human and Social Sciences. 2019;46(1):115-123
  32. 32. Resnick DP. Innovative universities: When, why and how? International Journal of Educational Planning & Administration. 2012;XXVI(2):331-341
  33. 33. Silver H. Managing to innovate in higher education. British Journal of Educational Studies. 1999;47(2):145-156
  34. 34. Brown R. Higher education and the market. Journal of Higher Education. 2011;(2014):1-231
  35. 35. Emeagwali OL, Naghdipour B. Exploring the usage and user-perception of interactive white boards in higher education in North Cyprus. The Procedia—Social and Behavioral Sciences. 2013;83:272-276. DOI: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.06.053
  36. 36. Gaspar D, Mabic M. Creativity in higher education. Universal Journal of Educational Research. 2015;3(9):598-605
  37. 37. Brennan J, Ryan S, Ranga M, Broek S, Durazzi N, Kamphuis B. Study on innovation in higher education: Final report. In: Originally available from European Commission Directorate for Education and Training Study on Innovation in Higher Education [Internet]. 2014. Available from:

Written By

Okechukwu Lawrence Emeagwali and Hasan Yousef Aljuhamni

Submitted: April 1st, 2019 Published: November 13th, 2019