In recent years, the enterprise capability theory has become one of the focuses of entrepreneurship research. Meanwhile, scholars have also gradually begun to explore the formation of routines in new ventures. However, most scholars research at a single level of routines, so the conclusion is that due to the conflict between practices, scholars cannot have a dialogue under the same system. At the same time, the formation of routines in new ventures and the relationship between routines and capabilities have not been effectively revealed. Scholars’ studies mostly focus on the relationship between routines at a certain level and capabilities, and the mechanism of action between routines at all levels and capabilities is still unclear. Although scholars have done a lot of work about routines and enterprise capabilities respectively in recent decades, with a large number of research results about the characteristics, connotations, dimensions and related theories of routines emerging, research on the formation and evolution of routines and the relationship between routines and enterprise capabilities are obviously inadequate. The purpose of this paper is to define routines in new ventures and their formation on the one hand, and discriminate the relationship between routines and capabilities through the model of mechanisms on the other hand. After a systematic review of the latest literature at home and abroad, the conceptual paper draws on evidence from the hierarchy theory, the enterprise capability theory and the routine theory to explain the functional mechanisms between routines and capabilities in new ventures. In sum, the model of mechanisms between routines and capabilities in new ventures points out that a new venture firstly forms a single routine and then forms clusters of routines through bundling to clusters to form operational capabilities. When the environment changes, the enterprise forms dynamic capabilities to cope with changes by integrating its operational capabilities with resources and then modifies a single routine to make the routines updated. Firstly, this paper uses the hierarchy theory to explain the formation of routines in new ventures. Secondly, this paper improves the hierarchy theory of capabilities and routines in new ventures. Finally, by distinguishing the relationship between capabilities and routines, this paper answers the question of how dynamic capabilities improve operational capabilities from the perspective of mechanisms, and makes a clear distinction between dynamic capabilities and operational capabilities.
The Formation of Routines in New Ventures and the Relationship between Routines and Capabilities
Foreign Economics & Management Vol. 42, Issue 06, pp. 55 - 68 (2020) DOI:10.16538/j.cnki.fem.20200211.402
 Gao Yang, Ge Baoshan, Jiang Dake. A study about the relationships between organizational learning, organizational routines renewing and competitive advantage-under different levels of environmental uncertainty[J].Studies in Science of Science,2017, (9): 1386-1395.
 Li Bin, Wang Fengbin, Qin Yu. How does the dynamic ability impact on the convention of organization`s operation? A comparative double-case study[J].Management World, 2013, (8): 136-153+188.
 Ma Hongjia, Song Chunhua, Ge Baoshan. Dynamic Capabilities versus Improvisational Capabilities：What Are Their Relationships to Competitive Advantage ?[J].Foreign Economies & Management,2015, (11): 25-37.
 Ma Hongjia, Wu Juan, Lang Chunting.The formation mechanism of improvisation into routines of new ventures: Based on the entrepreneurial learning perspective[J].Foreign Economies & Management,2018,(11): 116-128.
 Mai Yiyuan, Ye Zhuxin, Chen Shuhua.From "Soldiers to the breakwater to soil cover" to the formation of organizational routines：Research on improvisational strategy of new enterprises in transition economy[J].Management World,2015, (8): 147-165.
 Sun Yonglei, Song Jing, Chen Jin.Organization routines: The mainstream research framework exploration and future research trend analysis[J].Science of Science and Management of S.&.T.,2019, (1): 100-112.
 Wang Yongwei, Ma Jie, Wu Xiangfan,et al.The study of relationship among new technology, organizational routines update and enterprise competitiveness: A case study on NOKIA and APPLE comparative[J].Science of Science and Management of S.& T.,2012, (11): 150-159.
 Xu Meng, Cai Li.The Impact of Organizational Learning on routines in New Ventures:The regulating effect of organizational structure[J].Journal of Management Science,2016, (6): 93-104.
 Zhu Zhenduo, Li Xinchun. Growth Strategy for New Ventures: A Literature Review of Resource Bricolage and Prospects[J].Foreign Economies & Management,2016, (11): 71-82.
 Abell P, Felin T, Foss N. Building micro-foundations for the routines, capabilities, and performance links[J]. Managerial and Decision Economics, 2008, 29(6): 489-502.
 Ahmed M U, Kristal M M, Pagell M. Impact of operational and marketing capabilities on firm performance: Evidence from economic growth and downturns[J]. International Journal of Production Economics, 2014, 154(4): 59-71.
 Augier M, Teece D J. Dynamic capabilities and the role of managers in business strategy and economic performance[J]. Organization Science, 2009, 20(2): 410-421.
 Bapuji H, Hora M, Saeed A M. Intentions, intermediaries, and interaction: Examining the emergence of routines[J]. Journal of Management Studies, 2012, 49(8): 1586-1607.
 Barrales-Molina V, Bustinza Ó F, Gutiérrez-Gutiérrez L J. Explaining the causes and effects of dynamic capabilities generation: A multiple‐indicator multiple‐cause modelling approach[J]. British Journal of Management, 2013, 24(4): 571-591.
 D'Adderio L, Feldman M S, Lazaric N, et al. Call for papers-special issue on routine dynamics: Exploring sources of stability and change in organizations[J]. Organization Science, 2012, 23(6): 1782-1783.
 Davies A, Frederiksen L, Cacciatori E, et al. The long and winding road: Routine creation and replication in multi-site organizations[J]. Research Policy, 2018, 47(8): 1403-1417.
 Day M, Lichtenstein S, Samouel P. Supply management capabilities, routine bundles and their impact on firm performance[J]. International Journal of Production Economics, 2015, 164: 1-13.
 Dittrich K, Guerard S, Seidl D. Talking about routines: The role of reflective talk in routine change[J]. Organization Science, 2016, 27(3): 678-697.
 Dittrich K, Seidl D.Emerging intentionality in routine dynamics: A pragmatist view[J].Academy of Management Journal,2018,61(1): 111-138.
 Feldman M S, Pentland B T. Reconceptualizing organizational routines as a source of flexibility and change[J]. Administrative Science Quarterly, 2003, 48(1): 94-118.
 Felin T, Foss N J. The endogenous origins of experience, routines, and organizational capabilities: The poverty of stimulus[J]. Journal of Institutional Economics, 2011, 7(2): 231-256.
 Felin T, Foss N J, Heimeriks K H, et al. Microfoundations of routines and capabilities: Individuals, processes, and structure[J]. Journal of Management Studies, 2012, 49(8): 1351-1374.
 Heimeriks K H, Schijven M, Gates S. Manifestations of higher-order routines: The underlying mechanisms of deliberate learning in the context of postacquisition integration[J]. Academy of Management Journal, 2012, 55(3): 703-726.
 Helfat C E, Winter S G. Untangling dynamic and operational capabilities: Strategy for the (N)ever-changing world[J]. Strategic Management Journal, 2011, 32(11): 1243-1250.
 Hilliard R, Goldstein D. Identifying and measuring dynamic capability using search routines[J]. Strategic Organization, 2019, 17(2): 210-240.
 Hitt M A, Li D, Xu K. International strategy: From local to global and beyond[J]. Journal of World Business, 2016, 51(1): 58-73.
 Jiang W, Mavondo F T, Matanda M J. Integrative capability for successful partnering: A critical dynamic capability[J]. Management Decision, 2015, 53(6): 1184-1202.
 Kortmann S, Gelhard C, Zimmermann C, et al. Linking strategic flexibility and operational efficiency: The mediating role of ambidextrous operational capabilities[J]. Journal of Operations Management, 2014, 32(7-8): 475-490.
 Kremser W, Schreyögg G. The dynamics of interrelated routines: Introducing the cluster level[J]. Organization Science, 2016, 27(3): 698-721.
 Li D Y, Liu J. Dynamic capabilities, environmental dynamism, and competitive advantage: Evidence from China[J]. Journal of Business Research, 2014, 67(1): 2793-2799.
 Lin H F, Murphree M, Li S L. Emergence of organizational routines in entrepreneurial ventures[J]. Chinese Management Studies, 2017, 11(3): 498-519.
 Mariano S, Casey A. The dynamics of organizational routines in a startup: The ereda model[J]. European Management Review, 2016, 13(4): 251-274.
 Nigam A, Huising R, Golden B. Explaining the selection of routines for change during organizational search[J]. Administrative Science Quarterly, 2016, 61(4): 551-583.
 Pavlou P A, El Sawy O A. The “third hand”: IT-enabled competitive advantage in turbulence through improvisational capabilities[J]. Information Systems Research, 2010, 21(3): 443-471.
 Pentland B T, Feldman M S, Becker M C, et al. Dynamics of organizational routines: A generative model[J]. Journal of Management Studies, 2012, 49(8): 1484-1508.
 Pentland B T, Hærem T, Hillison D. Comparing organizational routines as recurrent patterns of action[J]. Organization Studies, 2010, 31(7): 917-940.
 Pentland B T, Hærem T, Hillison D. The (N)ever-changing world: Stability and change in organizational routines[J]. Organization Science, 2011, 22(6): 1369-1383.
 Rerup C, Feldman M S. Routines as a source of change in organizational schemata: The role of trial-and-error learning[J]. Academy of Management Journal, 2011, 54(3): 577-610.
 Stańczyk-Hugiet E, Piórkowska K, Stańczyk S. Demystifying emergence of organizational routines[J]. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 2017, 30(4): 525-547.
 Salvato C, Rerup C. Beyond collective entities: Multilevel research on organizational routines and capabilities[J]. Journal of Management, 2011, 37(2): 468-490.
 Teece D, Peteraf M, Leih S. Dynamic capabilities and organizational agility: Risk, uncertainty, and strategy in the innovation economy[J]. California Management Review, 2016, 58(4): 13-35.
 Teece D J. Dynamic capabilities: Routines versus entrepreneurial action[J]. Journal of Management Studies, 2012, 49(8): 1395-1401.
 Teece D J. The foundations of enterprise performance: Dynamic and ordinary capabilities in an (economic) theory of firms[J]. Academy of Management Perspectives, 2014, 28(4): 328-352.
 Vanpoucke E, Vereecke A, Wetzels M. Developing supplier integration capabilities for sustainable competitive advantage: A dynamic capabilities approach[J]. Journal of Operations Management, 2014, 32(7-8): 446-461.
 Vera D, Nemanich L, Vélez-Castrillón S, et al. Knowledge-based and contextual factors associated with R&D teams’ improvisation capability[J]. Journal of Management, 2016, 42(7): 1874-1903.
 Vromen J J. Routines as multilevel mechanisms[J]. Journal of Institutional Economics, 2011, 7(2): 175-196.
 Wang C L, Senaratne C, Rafiq M. Success traps, dynamic capabilities and firm performance[J]. British Journal of Management, 2015, 26(1): 26-44.
 Witt U. Emergence and functionality of organizational routines: An individualistic approach[J]. Journal of Institutional Economics, 2011, 7(2): 157-174.
 Wilhelm H, Schlömer M, Maurer I. How dynamic capabilities affect the effectiveness and efficiency of operating routines under high and low levels of environmental dynamism[J]. British Journal of Management, 2015, 26(2): 327-345.
 Zahra S A, Wright M, Abdelgawad S G. Contextualization and the advancement of entrepreneurship research[J]. International Small Business Journal: Researching Entrepreneurship, 2014, 32(5): 479-500.
Cite this article
Ma Hongjia, Zhang Bihong, Tang Sisi. The Formation of Routines in New Ventures and the Relationship between Routines and Capabilities[J]. Foreign Economics & Management, 2020, 42(6): 55-68.
Previous: Why do Employees with Overqualification Have Work Disengagement Behaviors? From the Perspective of Self-determination Theory