Industrial Management Journal

Industrial Management Journal

Managing Agility and Efficiency under Uncertainty in Supply Chains: A Dynamic Capabilities Framework Based on Fuzzy Cognitive Maps

Document Type : Original Research Article

Authors
1 Associate Prof., Faculty of Industrial and Technology Management, College of Management, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.
2 Associate Prof., School of Science, Engineering & Environment, the University of Salford, Salford, Greater Manchester, UK.
3 Ph.D., Faculty of Economics and Management, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran.
4 MSc., Department of Performance Management, Faculty of Economic and Management, University of Qom, Qom, Iran.
10.22059/imj.2026.417468.1008328
Abstract
Objective: Information and Communication Technology (ICT) companies operate in highly dynamic environments characterized by rapid technological change and substantial uncertainty. Although organizational agility is widely recognized as an effective response to uncertainty, achieving agility often requires sacrificing efficiency, creating an enduring agility–efficiency tradeoff. This study aims to develop a quantitative framework for analyzing this tradeoff from a dynamic capabilities perspective.
Methodology: A fuzzy cognitive map (FCM) approach was employed to model the causal relationships among dynamic capabilities, organizational agility, and efficiency. Research variables were identified through a comprehensive literature review and refined through expert panels. The FCM was developed based on the judgments of 30 experts from 12 leading Iranian ICT companies, including chief executive officers, marketing managers, technical managers, and senior strategy specialists.
Results: The findings indicate that dynamic capabilities play unequal roles in managing the agility–efficiency tradeoff. Sensing, seizing, and transformation capabilities exert different levels of influence on organizational agility and efficiency. The simulation results further show that alternative capability development strategies lead to different organizational outcomes under conditions of uncertainty.
Conclusion: The proposed FCM-based framework provides a quantitative decision-support tool for understanding and managing the agility–efficiency tradeoff in uncertainty-driven industries. The study contributes to the dynamic capabilities literature by integrating uncertainty management, organizational agility, and efficiency within a unified analytical framework.
Keywords
Subjects

Adler, P. S., Goldoftas, B., & Levine, D. I. (1999). Flexibility versus efficiency? A case study of model changeovers in the Toyota production system. Organization Science, 10(1), 43–68.
Asghar, J., Kanbach, D. K., & Kraus, S. (2025). Toward a multidimensional concept of organizational agility: A systematic literature review. Management Review Quarterly, 76(1), 885–911.
Axelrod, R. (1976). The analysis of cognitive maps. Structure of Decision: The Cognitive Maps of Political Elites, 55.
Chen, Y., Liu, L., Li, W., Xie, Z., & Wei, C. (2023). Microfoundations of dynamic capabilities: a systematic review and a multilevel framework. Management Decision, 61(6), 1717–1753.
Chesbrough, H. W. (2003). Open innovation: The new imperative for creating and profiting from technology. Harvard Business Press.
De Meyer, A., Nakane, J., Miller, J. G., & Ferdows, K. (1989). Flexibility: the next competitive battle the manufacturing futures survey. Strategic Management Journal, 10(2), 135–144.
Dickerson, J. A., & Kosko, B. (1994). Virtual worlds as fuzzy cognitive maps. Presence: Teleoperators & Virtual Environments, 3(2), 173–189.
Ebben, J. J., & Johnson, A. C. (2005). Efficiency, flexibility, or both? Evidence linking strategy to performance in small firms. Strategic Management Journal, 26(13), 1249–1259.
Eisenhardt, K. M., Furr, N. R., & Bingham, C. B. (2010). CROSSROADS—Microfoundations of performance: Balancing efficiency and flexibility in dynamic environments. Organization Science, 21(6), 1263–1273.
Gebauer, J., & Schober, F. (2006). Information system flexibility and the cost efficiency of business processes. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 7(3), 8.
Groumpos, P. P. (2010). Fuzzy cognitive maps: basic theories and their application to complex systems. In Fuzzy cognitive maps: Advances in theory, methodologies, tools and applications (pp. 1–22). Springer.
Hakim, A., & Hakim, H. (2010). A practical model on controlling the ERP implementation risks. Information Systems, 35(2), 204–214.
Han, X., Yue, B., & He, Z. (2023). Thriving in uncertainty: examining the relationship between perceived environmental uncertainty and corporate eco-innovation through the lens of dynamic capabilities. Frontiers in Environmental Science, 11, 1196997.
Hiller, N. J., & Ozgen, S. (2023). Organizational agility and organizational effectiveness. In Senior leadership teams and the agile organization (pp. 24–43). Routledge.
Hobbs, B. F., Ludsin, S. A., Knight, R. L., Ryan, P. A., Biberhofer, J., & Ciborowski, J. J. H. (2002). Fuzzy cognitive mapping as a tool to define management objectives for complex ecosystems. Ecological Applications, 12(5), 1548–1565.
Jørgensen, B., & Messner, M. (2009). Management control in new product development: The dynamics of managing flexibility and efficiency. Journal of Management Accounting Research, 21(1), 99–124.
Kortmann, S., Gelhard, C., Zimmermann, C., & Piller, F. T. (2014). Linking strategic flexibility and operational efficiency: The mediating role of ambidextrous operational capabilities. Journal of Operations Management, 32(7–8), 475–490.
Leelhaphunt, A. (2026). Whether dynamic capabilities can enhance firm innovation performance under the economic uncertainty crisis: Thailand’s manufacturing industry. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications.
Lopez, C., & Salmeron, J. L. (2014). Dynamic risks modelling in ERP maintenance projects with FCM. Information Sciences, 256, 25–45.
Magnusson, M., Boccardelli, P., & Börjesson, S. (2009). Managing the efficiency‐flexibility tension in innovation: strategic and organizational aspects. Creativity and Innovation Management, 18(1), 2–7.
Margolis, J. D., & Walsh, J. P. (2003). Misery loves companies: Rethinking social initiatives by business. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48(2), 268–305.
McGrath, R. G. (1999). Falling forward: Real options reasoning and entrepreneurial failure. Academy of Management Review, 24(1), 13–30.
Momenzadeh, K., Mohammadian, A., & Vares, H. (2026). Mapping the Digital Servitization Journey: A Meta-Synthetic Framework of Antecedents, Processes, and Outcomes in Industry 4.0. Industrial Management Journal, 18(1), 117–135. https://doi.org/10.22059/imj.2026.405896.1008272
Murnighan, J. K., & Conlon, D. E. (1991). The dynamics of intense work groups: A study of British string quartets. Administrative Science Quarterly, 165–186.
Papageorgiou, E. I. (2010). A novel approach on constructed dynamic fuzzy cognitive maps using fuzzified decision trees and knowledge-extraction techniques. In Fuzzy cognitive maps: Advances in theory, methodologies, tools and applications (pp. 43–70). Springer.
Papageorgiou, E. I., Stylios, C. D., & Groumpos, P. P. (2004). Active Hebbian learning algorithm to train fuzzy cognitive maps. International Journal of Approximate Reasoning, 37(3), 219–249.
Peláez, C. E., & Bowles, J. B. (1996). Using fuzzy cognitive maps as a system model for failure modes and effects analysis. Information Sciences, 88(1–4), 177–199.
Rehman, A. ur, & Jajja, M. S. S. (2023). The interplay of integration, flexibility and coordination: a dynamic capability view to responding environmental uncertainty. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 43(6), 916–946.
Ries, E. (2011). How today’s entrepreneurs use continuous innovation to create radically successful businesses. The Lean Startup.
Sadeghi Moghadam, M., Safari, H., Mansouri, T., & Safari, A. (2019). Measuring and Scenario Planning for Business Process Management Maturity Developing Based on Fuzzy Cognitive Maps Technique. Industrial Management Journal, 11(3), 405–426. https://doi.org/10.22059/imj.2019.274321.1007552
Salmeron, J. L. (2010). Fuzzy cognitive maps-based IT projects risks scenarios. In Fuzzy cognitive maps: Advances in theory, methodologies, tools and applications (pp. 201–215). Springer.
Sangbor, M. A., Safi, M. R., Azar, A., & Rabieh, M. (2021). Development a Quantitative Framework for Multilayer Fuzzy Cognitive Maps by combining “Self-Organizing Map” and “Graph Theory and Matrix Approach” (SOM-GTMA). Industrial Management Journal, 13(1), 80–104. https://doi.org/10.22059/imj.2021.308177.1007769
Sarmiento, I., Cockcroft, A., Dion, A., Belaid, L., Silver, H., Pizarro, K., Pimentel, J., Tratt, E., Skerritt, L., & Ghadirian, M. Z. (2024). Fuzzy cognitive mapping in participatory research and decision making: a practice review. Archives of Public Health, 82(1), 76.
Smith, W. K., & Lewis, M. W. (2011). Toward a theory of paradox: A dynamic equilibrium model of organizing. Academy of Management Review, 36(2), 381–403.
Stach, W., Kurgan, L., & Pedrycz, W. (2010). A divide and conquer method for learning large fuzzy cognitive maps. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 161(19), 2515–2532.
Stohl, C., & Cheney, G. (2001). Participatory processes/paradoxical practices: Communication and the dilemmas of organizational democracy. Management Communication Quarterly, 14(3), 349–407.
Su, Z., Yang, D., & Yang, J. (2012). The match between efficiency/flexibility strategy and organisational culture. International Journal of Production Research, 50(19), 5317–5329.
Sun, W., Chen, K., & Mei, J. (2024). Integrating the resource-based view and dynamic capabilities: a comprehensive framework for sustaining competitive advantage in dynamic markets. EPRA International Journal of Economic and Business Review, 12(9), 1–8.
Sundaramurthy, C., & Lewis, M. (2003). Control and collaboration: Paradoxes of governance. Academy of Management Review, 28(3), 397–415.
Swink, M., Narasimhan, R., & Kim, S. W. (2005). Manufacturing practices and strategy integration: effects on cost efficiency, flexibility, and market‐based performance. Decision Sciences, 36(3), 427–457.
Tan, J., & Wang, L. (2010). Flexibility–efficiency tradeoff and performance implications among Chinese SOEs. Journal of Business Research, 63(4), 356–362.
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., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 18(7), 509–533.
Teece, D., & Leih, S. (2016). Uncertainty, innovation, and dynamic capabilities: An introduction. California Management Review, 58(4), 5–12.
Teece, D., Peteraf, M., & Leih, S. (2016). Dynamic capabilities and organizational agility: Risk, uncertainty, and strategy in the innovation economy. California Management Review, 58(4), 13–35.
Thompson, E. P. (2020). Time, work-discipline, and industrial capitalism. In Industrial Work and Life (pp. 9–39). Routledge.
Volberda, H. W. (1996). Toward the flexible form: How to remain vital in hypercompetitive environments. Organization Science, 7(4), 359–374.
Welch, J. A., & Nayak, P. R. (1992). Strategic sourcing: a progressive approach to the make-or-buy decision. Academy of Management Perspectives, 6(1), 23–31.
Xirogiannis, G., Chytas, P., Glykas, M., & Valiris, G. (2008). Intelligent impact assessment of HRM to the shareholder value. Expert Systems with Applications, 35(4), 2017–2031.
Yadollahi, M., Garousi Mokhtarzadeh, N., & Jafarnejad, A. (2025). Dynamic Model of Orchestration Capabilities of Large Companies in the Transition to Open Banking. Industrial Management Journal, 17(1), 131–162. https://doi.org/10.22059/imj.2025.389109.1008225
Yaman, D., & Polat, S. (2009). A fuzzy cognitive map approach for effect-based operations: An illustrative case. Information Sciences, 179(4), 382–403.
Zehir, C., & Vural, S. Ç. (2025). Dynamic capabilities and firm performance: moderated mediation model with product innovation as mediator and technology uncertainty as moderator. Journal of Strategy and Management, 18(2), 326–348.