Founded on dynamic capabilities
David Teece’s argument is precise: knowledge is now abundant, and it is nearly free. The scarce resource is judgment — the capacity to sense what matters in an ambiguous environment, seize an opportunity before it closes, and reconfigure an organization’s assets and routines before they become liabilities. Firms that cannot do all three at reasonable speed do not merely underperform. Over a strategic horizon, they fail.
That argument has a corollary the Institute takes seriously: education built around content delivery cannot teach judgment. A curriculum that is stable enough to record and archive is, by definition, a curriculum about the past. The scholars whose work underpins this Institute did not write case studies about obvious decisions. They wrote about the conditions under which good decisions are hard — Knightian uncertainty, where the probabilities themselves cannot be known.
Source-faithful AI twins of named scholars make possible something a recorded lecture cannot: a faculty member who asks you back. Who knows which module you finished last Tuesday and what gap your reflection exposed. Who can frame the sensing–seizing diagnostic against your specific industry context, not against a composite fictional firm. The Institute chose this approach not because it is novel, but because it is the only approach that makes judgment teachable at scale without diluting what judgment means.
Teece and Heaton’s Dynamic Universities thesis holds that universities themselves must become dynamic organizations — sensing shifts in what knowledge is valuable, seizing moments to restructure their curricula, reconfiguring the assets they use to deliver education. The Institute was built to embody that argument, not merely to teach it. A campus would be a fixed asset. A cohort of 500 would be a factory. Neither is consistent with the thesis.
Leadership
Three named individuals — not a governing committee, not an advisory board acting as management. Accountability is specific.
Executive Director
Leads the Institute’s academic operations and the human faculty-of-record governance that supervises every AI-faculty interaction. She owns program design, admissions, and the standards that keep the Institute a place of judgment rather than content delivery.
Executive Chairman
Originator of the dynamic capabilities framework and author of the 1986 work that defined how firms profit from innovation. He chairs the Institute and serves as faculty of record for its flagship programs — among the most-cited scholars in economics and management.
Chief Executive Officer
Founder and chief executive of Dynamic Experts Inc. A veteran software entrepreneur, he leads the Institute’s commercial strategy and the platform that makes a living, source-faithful faculty possible.
Academic advisors
The advisors are described by what they built — not by where they sit.
Advisor
A foremost scholar of organizational ambidexterity and executive leadership, and co-architect of the congruence model of organizational alignment. His work explains how established firms exploit today’s business while exploring tomorrow’s.
Advisor
Author of Good Strategy / Bad Strategy and The Crux, and originator of the strategy kernel — a tight diagnosis of the challenge, a guiding policy, and coherent action. Widely regarded as among the most influential strategists of his generation.
A good strategy is not a goal or a mission statement. It is a coherent set of actions that addresses a diagnosed challenge. Most organizations have goals. Very few have strategy.— Richard P. Rumelt, The Crux (2022)
There is no recorded-lecture library. A library of recorded lectures is a catalog of past judgments, curated by someone who cannot know the question you need answered today. It is a useful product. It is not a mechanism for developing judgment.
There are no completion-only badges — credentials issued for finishing, not for demonstrating. Every certificate the Institute issues is signed by a named human faculty-of-record who has reviewed the participant’s written work against a published rubric. The credential attests to demonstrated capacity, not attendance.
There are no AI-generated syllabi. The curriculum was authored by the scholars whose work it draws on, and it is reviewed by the same scholars before each cohort. Our AI faculty operate within the scope of that authored curriculum. They do not generate it.
There are no cohorts of 500. A cohort of 500 is a broadcast channel with a quiz at the end. The deliberate experiment that constitutes a well-run cohort requires participants whose situations are sufficiently varied to make peer learning productive, and sufficiently similar to make it relevant. That number is 24, not 500.
You are interacting with an AI instructor.
The instructor in this experience is an AI digital twin — not a human in real time. The course curriculum is authored and supervised by a named human PhD faculty-of-record.
The voice, video, text, and feedback you see and hear from the instructor in this program are generated by our AI. You are not speaking with a real person in real time.
The underlying course curriculum, learning objectives, rubrics, and grading standards are authored and supervised by a named human PhD faculty-of-record. Your Certificate of Completion is issued under their supervision.
Our AI may produce inaccurate, incomplete, or outdated information. Treat the instructor’s answers as a starting point for your own thinking, not as professional legal, medical, financial, tax, or investment advice.
Conversations with the AI instructor and your study-buddy AI are recorded, transcribed, and may be reviewed by the human faculty-of-record for quality assurance and academic supervision. See the program privacy notice for details.
Faculty-of-record: Prof. David Teece, PhD, Strategy
Last reviewed 2026-04-25. Disclosed pursuant to FTC Act §5, FTC Endorsement Guides §255.1, FTC Operation AI Comply (2024).
Or request program information — no call required.