SourceFocus more onArguments/evidence forMission/main findingMethodRegion(s)
PrioCapaCumulTrade-offSequence (if applicable)
Amoako-Gyampah and Meredith (2007)  xx Qual – Cost – Deliv – FlexSequence is different in developing countriesSurveyDeveloping
Boyer and Lewis (2002) x  xHalo effects may impede measurement of trade-offs among priosSurveyDeveloped
Chung and Swink (2009)  xx Technology use promotes all capabilities but not costs – four different performance groups emergeSurveyDeveloped
Ferdows and De Meyer (1990) xxx Qual – Deliv – Flex – CostSuggests the cumulative “sand cone” model as a new theorySurveyDeveloped
Ferdows et al. (1986)  xx Qual – Deliv – Flex – CostProjects developments of industries based on the cumulative modelSurveyDeveloped
Ferdows and Thurnheer (2011)  xx Safety – Variability - Codify know-how – Responsiveness - EfficiencySuggests “fitness” (building capa) as more appropriate concept vis a vis leannessField/caseBoth
Flynn and Flynn (2004)  xx SeveralThe sequence depends on contingencies like country and industrySurveyDeveloped
Größler and Grübner (2006)  xx Qual – Deliv – Flex and CostFlex and cost are exclusive/simultaneous depending on the practices appliedSurveyBoth
Hallgren et al. (2011)  xx Qual – Deliv – Cost and Flex (parallel)Cost and flex do not build on each other, they need a “balanced” co-developmentSurveyDeveloped
Kathuria (2000) x x Small manufacturers that focus on all capas achieve higher customer satisfactionSurveyDeveloped
Kortmann et al. (2014)  xx(x)Costs and flex face a trade-off that can be resolved via ambidextrous investmentsSurveyBoth
Longoni and Cagliano (2015)  xx Sustainability behaves cumulative to other capas and focusing on all is advisableSurveyBoth
Martín-Peña and Díaz-Garrido (2008) x x Prios seem to behave cumulative in a particular strategy aiming at “excellence”SurveyDeveloped
Miller and Roth (1994) (x)x (x)Flex – Qual and Productivity – ?Maps different emphasis of strategies along the product lifecycleSurveyDeveloped
Noble (1997)  xx  Firms addressing multiple capas are performing better than their competitorsSurveyDeveloped
Noble (1995)  xx Qual – Deliv – Cost – Flex - InnovationSupport for cumulative model and emphasis of the central relevance of qualitySurveyDeveloped
Pagell et al. (2000)  x xIndicating trade-offs in three companies that are successful in their industryField/caseDeveloped
Peng et al. (2011) xx  Examines fit between innovation and improvement capas and priosSurveyDeveloped
Rosenzweig and Easton (2010) xxxxTrade-offs exist among prios and among management choices, not among capasArchival/metaBoth
Rosenzweig and Roth (2004)  xx Qual – Deliv – Flex – CostEvidence for cumulative, yet job shops may imitate the constraints of an asset frontierSurveyBoth
Schmenner and Swink (1998)  xxxProposes that theories of trade-offs and cumulative capas are not in conflictConceptualn.a.
Safizadeh et al. (2000)  xxxDifferentiates the trade-off discussion with process types – some show them, others notSurveyDeveloped
Schoenherr et al. (2012)  xx Capas are more inter-linked and related to performance in developing countriesSurveyBoth
Squire et al. (2006)  xxxFull customization reveals trade-offs and partial customization can resolve themSurveyDeveloped
Vastag (2000)  xx Argues for the higher relevance of the operating frontier based on the RBVConceptualn.a.
Ward and Duray (2000) x x Examines capas and performance – only quality affects performanceSurveyDeveloped
White (1996)  xx Performance improvement works primarily via costs, which are affected by other capasArchival/metaBoth
Note(s): x: set membership; (x): implicit/partial set membership; Prio: Competitive priorities; Capa: Competitive capabilities; Cumul: Cumulative model; Qual: Quality; Deliv: Delivery (or dependability); Flex: Flexibility

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal