trade-off model

research indicating that innovation and sustainability are important aspects of operational capabilities (Vickery, et al., 1993; Pisano, 2015). The trade-off model and the cumulative (or sand-cone) model are two common models for the relationship between different capabilities. Some operations capabilities are more strategically important than others in the trade-off model, and they are distinct and developed one at a time (Pisano, 2015). As a result, managers must be selective in where they focus their attention. The trade-off model may become obsolete in today’s business environment, which is characterized by advanced manufacturing technologies and intense global competition, increasing the pressure on firms to excel in multiple capabilities (Pisano, 2015).

The current debate centers on whether these capabilities represent a set of trade-off options that businesses must consider, or whether they can be pursued cumulatively in combination, in a specific sequence, or as a progression. This study makes the crucial assumption that abilities evolve over time. It states that improving one capability can amplify another; it goes without saying that operational capabilities are inextricably linked. When developing operations improvement strategies, the relationship between operational capabilities must be considered. Capabilities and competences are terms that are sometimes used interchangeably. Capabilities enable a company to profitably exploit its resources, and they are created after defining specific priorities or objectives and carrying out specific management actions. As a result, the generation of capabilities has an impact on a firm’s performance. Capabilities are frequently conceptualized in the manufacturing strategy literature as a business unit’s intended or realized competitive performance or operational strengths, and are thus assessed using operational performance measures. High-level routines or bundles of routines are used to identify capabilities (winter, 2003). Routines and capabilities built on routines are more firm-specific and less transferable than resources because they are embedded in the dynamic interaction of multiple knowledge sources.

Manufacturing strategy has adopted the concept of capabilities from strategic management literature, particularly (Hayes and Pisano, 1994). RBV is based on the fact that resources are not distributed uniformly across firms, which creates the possibility of a source of competitive advantage. The resources of a company are assets, routines, practices, and so on that are valuable, rare, imperfectly imitable, and substitutable. According to Hayes and Pisano (1996), a company must differentiate itself from its competitors by providing something valuable to the customer. This is accomplished by leveraging the benefits of various improvement programs or practice bundles, such as Lean manufacturing, “in support of a broader manufacturing strategy that emphasizes