arbiter
JournalsPricingAccount

How do organisational routines support user-centred design (UCD) innovations?: Dynamic capabilities perspective

Meeta Dasgupta & Priyanka Vallabh

IIMB Management Review2026https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iimb.2025.100641article
ABDC C
Weight
0.50

What the paper says

User-centred design (UCD) innovations are increasingly recognised as a source of competitive advantage in the contemporary business environment. From a dynamic capabilities’ perspective, this study explores the critical routines that support organisational capabilities driving UCD innovations. The study adopts a qualitative approach, and the researchers conduct inductive case studies on four B2C firms in the Indian manufacturing and services industry. The insights gathered suggest that all firms have various user-focused routines for knowledge-gaining, organisation-mobilising, and organisation-alignment that enable managers to initiate and execute UCD innovations. The study proposes a framework illustrating the seamless flow between different routines.

Open paper page →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iimb.2025.100641

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{meeta2026,
  title        = {{How do organisational routines support user-centred design (UCD) innovations?: Dynamic capabilities perspective}},
  author       = {Meeta Dasgupta & Priyanka Vallabh},
  journal      = {IIMB Management Review},
  year         = {2026},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iimb.2025.100641},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

How do organisational routines support user-centred design (UCD) innovations?: Dynamic capabilities perspective

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.

Evidence weight

0.50

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20
M · momentum0.50 × 0.15 = 0.07
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.