{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02822085889570552, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.915254237288136, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Dynamic capabilities or positioning ? Integrating environmental and resource-led antecedents of firm performance

The debates in strategic management continue to rage, between “structure-based” and “strategy-based” theorists. According to the former, a firm’s positioning in its industry structure is the primary source of performance heterogeneities. The latter contend that endogenous configuration of firm resources (which lead to dynamic capabilities) are far more important to firm performance than macro, structural indicators. In this paper, we attempt to place the two fields in an integrative framework, arguing that linking the research on the strategic variables with structural research can explicate a number of unexplained facets of positioning, dynamic capabilities, and ultimately, firm performance.