Legacy removal as a core dynamic capability for incumbent MNCs facing disruptive change
Abstract
Established multinational companies (MNCs) facing not only strong competition but also disruptive change often die. One key factor is their inability to divest themselves of legacy resources. Kodak is a generic example of this. In spite of sensing, seizing, and even some transformation, it failed because of a failure to remove legacy resources. We view legacy removal as a significant managerial activity and as a critical dynamic capability. In the divestment process, it involves political skills in dealing with affected stakeholders. Employing a case study of the mobile telephony MNC, Telenor, we develop insights into managerial activities intended to ensure legacy removal. In its first period of legacy removal in the 1990s, Telenor was able to evolve from a state-owned domestic operation into an MNC. Digitalization and the need to become a digital services provider means that it is currently engaged in a second period of legacy removal. This second period is under ongoing research.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
References
Adner, R., & Helfat, C.E. (2003). Corporate effects and dynamic managerial capabilities. Strategic Management Journal, 24, 1011–1025.
Anand, J.; Oriani, R., & Vassolo, R.S. (2010). Alliance activity as a dynamic capability in the face of a discontinuous technological change. Organization Science, 21: 1213–1232.
Bolman, L., & Deal, T. (1991). Reframing Organizations. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Cary, C. (2016). Telcos must reform their partner strategy to excel as DSPs. Ovum Consulting. Publication Date: 29 Jan 2016, product code: IT0012-000158.
Christensen, C. (1997). The Innovator’s Dilemma: When New Technologies Cause Great Firms to Fail. Harvard Business School Press.
Dagens Næringsliv (2016). Vi har ikke mye tid. Retrieved from http://www.dn.no/nyheter/naringsliv/2016/04/25/1815/Telekom/-vi-har-ikke-mye-tid Accessed: April 25, 2016.
Dasi, A., Elter, F., Gooderham, P.N., & Pedersen, T. (2017). New business Models in-the-making in extant MNCs: Digital transformation in a telco.
Dhanaraj, C., & Parkhe, A. (2006). Orchestrating innovation networks. Academy of Management Review, 31(3), 659–669.
Drnevich, P.L., & Kriauciunas, A.P. (2011). Clarifying the conditions and limits of the contributions of ordinary and dynamic capabilities to relative firms performance. Strategic Management Journal, 32, 254–279.
Eisenhardt K.M., & Martin J.A. (2000). Dynamic capabilities: What are they? Strategic Management Journal, October–November Special Issue 21, 1105–1121.
Elter, F. (2004). Strategizing in Complex Contexts. (Dr. Oecon Doctoral thesis), Norwegian Business School – BI, Oslo. (Series of Dissertations 7/2004)
Gawer, A., & Cusumano, M. A. (2014). Industry platforms and ecosystem innovation. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 31(3), 417–433.
Girod, S. J., & Whittington, R. (2017). Reconfiguration, restructuring and firm performance: Dynamic capabilities and environmental dynamism. Strategic Management Journal, 38(5), 1121–1133.
Helfat, C.E., & Martin, J.A. (2015). Dynamic Managerial Capabilities: Review and Assessment of Managerial Impact on Strategic Change. Journal of Management, 41(5), 1281–1312.
Helfat, C.E., & Peteraf, M.A. (2015). Managerial cognitive capabilities and the microfoundations of dynamic capabilities. Strategic Management Journal, 36, 831–850.
Kor, Y.Y., & Mesko, A. (2013). Dynamic managerial capabilities: configuration and orchestration of top executives’ capabilities and the firm’s dominant logic. Strategic Management Journal, 34, 233–244.
Leonard‐Barton, D. (1992). Core capabilities and core rigidities: A paradox in managing new product development. Strategic Management Journal, 13(S1), 111–125.
Lessard, D., Teece, D. J. & Leih S. (2016). The dynamic capabilities of meta-multinationals. Global Strategy Journal, 6, 211–234.
Lucas, H. C., & Goh, J. M. (2009). Disruptive technology: How Kodak missed the digital photography revolution. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 18(1), 46–55.
Markides, C. C. (2013). Business model innovation: what can the ambidexterity literature teach us? The Academy of Management Perspectives, 27(4), 313–323.
O'Reilly, C. A., & Tushman, M. L. (2013). Organizational ambidexterity: Past, present, and future. The Academy of Management Perspectives, 27(4), 324–338.
Sheenan, N. T., & Foss, N. J. (2017). Using Porterian activity analysis to understand organizational capabilities. Journal of General Management, 42(3), 41–51.
Sirmon, D.A. & Hitt, M. (2009). Contingencies within Dynamic Managerial Capabilities: Interdependent Effects of Resource Investment and Deployment on Firm Performance Strategic Management Journal, 30, 1375–1394.
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. (2013). David Teece interviewed by Art Gleiner, The dynamic capabilities of David Teece, strategy + business, November 11, 2013, https://www.strategy-business.com/article/00225?gko=d24f3 downloaded June 29, 2017
Teece, D. (2014). A dynamic capabilities-based entrepreneurial theory of the multinational enterprise. Journal of International Business Studies, 45, 8–37.
Teece, D., & Leih, S. (2016). Uncertainty, Innovation, and Dynamic Capabilities. California Management Review, 58(4), 5–12.
Teece DJ, Pisano G, & Shuen A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 18(7), 509–533.
Vahlne, J.-E. & Jonsson, A. (2017) “Ambidexterity as a dynamic capability in the globalization of the multinational business enterprise (MBE): Case studies of AB Volvo and IKEA.” International Business Review, 26(1), 57–70.
Winter S.G. (2003). Understanding dynamic capabilities. Strategic Management Journal, October Special Issue, 24, 991–995.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Copyright
Copyright © 2019 Universitetsforlaget.
History
Published online: 14 November 2019
Issue date: 14 November 2019
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Export citation
Select the format you want to export the citations of this publication.
Crossref Cited-by
- Digital Transformation of Incumbent Service Firms: Legacy Removal Strategies, Beta.
- The Digital Challenge for Multinational Mobile Network Operators. More marginalization or rejuvenation?, Journal of International Management.
- Successful and Unsuccessful Radical Transformation of Multinational Mobile Telephony Companies: The Role of Institutional Context, The Multiple Dimensions of Institutional Complexity in International Business Research.
View Options
Purchase Options
Save for laterJournal Subscription
Get access to the entire journal with a subscription.
VIEW ALL SUBSCRIPTION OPTIONSLogin Options
Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution.