Search results

Traditionally, firms have been dependent on internal sources such as their own employees – and up to a certain extent, on some external sources, their customers – for innovation. However, in the current scenario of technological dynamism, firms are exploring multiple sources to generate ideas for innovation. Therefore, there is a need to understand the relative effect of various sources of innovations on a firm’s performance.

We offer a conceptual framework where we identify six distinct sources of innovations – firm, customers, external network, competition, macro-environment, and technology and how they create value for focal firms especially their brand equity. We introduce a taxonomy of various costs and benefits related to innovations. We then argue using our proposed taxonomy to understand the relative strengths of various sources of innovation affecting a firm’s brand equity.

We discuss and compare the relative effects of these sources of innovations on a firm’s brand equity by rank-ordering the sources. The customers and the technology as a source of innovation have the maximum impact on the firm’s brand equity followed by the marginal impact of macro-environment and external network of a firm. The firm itself has a moderate impact on its brand equity, while competition has the minimal impact. Further, we also discuss how the relationship is moderated by different innovation characteristics (nature and type of innovations).

The main practical implication is to create awareness among managers about various costs and benefits of the proposed six sources of innovations and their effects on brand equity. Managers would be able to prioritize their sources of innovation based on firms’ current needs, and whether to focus on lower costs or building higher brand equity in the scarce resource environment.

We offer a comprehensive list of six sources of innovation, build a conceptual framework wherein we discuss the relative strengths of these sources affecting brand equity.

Innovation is critical for businesses to stay competitive in today's world, as it allows them to constantly look for new ways to differentiate their products or services from their competitors as well as improve cost-effectiveness. This study explore the role of strategic human resource practices in developing organizations' competitive capabilities-differentiation and cost-effectiveness, which, improves their innovation performance to create a competitive advantage.

The authors collected data from 387 employees from 25 knowledge-intensive information technology organizations in India through a questionnaire-based survey. After checking for biases, reliability and validity, the hypothesized relationships were tested by structural equational modeling using AMOS 26.

Strategic HR practices have a significant and positive effect on innovation performance and both competitive capabilities-differentiation and cost-effectiveness. While the differentiation capability had a strong positive effect on innovation performance, cost-effectiveness capability was not significantly related to innovation performance. The differentiation capability mediates the relationship between strategic HR practices and innovation performance link, whereas the cost-effectiveness capability did not have a mediating effect.

This study provides practical insights to HR and knowledge managers to focus on development of human capital and invest in hiring, training, development, strategic performance management practices to enhance employees' knowledge behaviors, which, stimulates innovation performance.

The paper adds to the strategic HRM paradigm by clarifying the underlying process of how strategic HR practices leads to higher innovation. It affirms the vitality of choosing appropriate competitive capabilities, and supporting organizational factor for business's success. It fills an important research gap by providing original empirical evidence from knowledge intensive information technology organizations in the emerging economy of India.

This study examines the innovation-efficiency linkage for Indian and Chinese manufacturing and service firms.

We applied the stochastic production and cost frontier approach to determine the output and cost efficiency of the firms surveyed in World Bank enterprise surveys. We then used both unconditional and conditional propensity score matching (PSM) estimation techniques to examine the effects of innovation as well as R&D on output and cost efficiency of the firms surveyed.

The study results suggest that innovation-efficiency linkage varies between countries and sectors. Innovations significantly raise output and cost efficiency of Indian manufacturing firms, whereas innovations in Chinese manufacturing firms are cost-oriented and negatively affect output efficiency. For the service firms of both countries, innovations are significantly positively linked with output and cost efficiency. The study also suggests that R&D acts as a crucial moderator for innovation-efficiency linkage for Chinese manufacturing firms but not for Indian firms, and the interaction effects of innovations are not substantially higher in magnitude than their individual effects. Finally, conditional PSM results suggest knowledge spillover for effective innovations of Indian firms, whereas R&D is a must for substantial innovation-efficiency linkage in Chinese firms.

This study offers quite a few crucial policy decisions concerning the relationship between innovation and efficiency as well as the moderation effect of R&D on innovation-efficiency linkage. It concludes that the effects of innovation on firms' efficiency and the role of R&D as a moderator of the innovation-efficiency relationship differ between India and China across the manufacturing and service sectors.

This masterclass examines how two important new books propose to achieve cost innovation, a value creation strategy that can transform an over-priced industry.

In their book, marketing gurus Stephen Wunker and Jennifer Luo Law highlight the potential of cost innovation in helping to create new market demand and transform the competitive dynamics in any industry sector, and they offer guidance on how to develop such a strategy. In their study of transformation by value creation, Professors Vijay Govindarajan and Ravi Ramamurti highlight the potential for cost innovations in emerging markets to help transform health care delivery in the West.

The authors showcased in this masterclass demonstrate how the value-based principles highlighted by Porter and Christensen and Kim and Mauborge are key to transforming any industry to make it more reliable, accessible and affordable.

Cost innovation involves taking a fresh approach to the conventional way of delivering value in any given industry and looking for ways to reimagine it.

The notion of cost as a potential target for breakthrough innovation in its own right is still not widely recognized. As marketing consultants Wunker and Luo Law point out in Costovation: innovation and cost are still most often seen as “magnetic opposites,” the one in natural tension with the other. They set out to challenge this assumption and show how “innovation and cost-cutting” can become “a powerful duo, capable of reshaping markets and creating long-term competitive advantages.”

Promoting technological innovation is important to address the complexity of major engineering challenges. Technological innovations include short-term innovations at the project level and long-term innovations that can enhance competitive advantages. The purpose of this study is to develop an incentive mechanism for the public sector that considers short-term and long-term efforts from the private sector, aiming to promote technological innovation in major engineering projects.

This study constructs an incentive model considering the differences in short-term and long-term innovation efforts from the private sector. This model emphasizes the spillover effect of long-term efforts on current projects and the cost synergy effect between short-term and long-term efforts. It also explores the factors influencing the optimal incentive strategies for the public sector and innovation strategies for the private sector.

The results indicate that increasing the output coefficient of short-term and long-term efforts and reducing the cost coefficient not only enhance the innovation efforts of the private sector but also prompt the public sector to increase the incentive coefficient. The spillover effect of long-term innovation efforts and the synergy effect of the two efforts are positively related to the incentive coefficient for the public sector.

This research addresses the existing gap in understanding how the public sector should devise incentive mechanisms for technological innovation when contractors acting as the private sector are responsible for construction within a public-private partnership (PPP) model. In constructing the incentive mechanism model, this study incorporates the private sector's short-term efforts at the project level and their long-term efforts for sustained corporate development, thus adding considerable practical significance.

Eco-innovation products, which means achieving more efficient and responsible use of resources and reducing the detrimental impact on the environment, can win a competitive advantage for the enterprises. But it is not easy to implement due to the high cost of eco-innovative technologies development, the uncertainty of market needs and return risk of investment. Many enterprises seek collaborations from their upstream suppliers to jointly carry out eco-innovation, such as Apple, IBM and Nike. A unique feature of collaboration is that efforts by one party enhance the marginal value of the other party's efforts. However, the collaboration will make the partner know the eco-innovation technology and prompt the partner to encroach the market to sell competitive products by herself. Motivated by this observation, this paper considers the optimal collaboration strategy on eco-innovation between upstream and downstream supply chain member and the optimal encroachment strategy of upstream supplier in a supply chain.

This paper models a supply chain wherein a supplier provides products or materials for her manufacturer and cooperates with her manufacturer in eco-innovation. Also, the supplier could encroach on the market to sell similar products by herself. Then this paper uses game theory and mathematical modeling to do relative analysis.

The analysis reveals several interesting insights. First, eco-innovation collaboration makes supplier encroachment no longer only rely on the encroachment cost. The delayed realized eco-innovation efficiency information also plays a vital role. Second, different from previous research, the authors find the manufacturer's preference for supplier encroachment depends on the uncertainty of eco-innovation efficiency and potential market demand. Third, both partial and full encroachment strategies of the supplier can effectively improve the eco-innovation level.

The paper is the first to take the interplay between collaboration and encroachment into account in a supply chain. The results caution enterprises and policymakers to take vertical collaboration and delayed realized information into account in the competitive supply chain before making any operational decisions. Furthermore, the authors propose that governmental intervention aimed at stimulating supplier encroachment in appropriate circumstances can contribute to the improved environmental performance of products.

The European Union’s Digital Markets Act (DMA) calls for far-reaching changes to the way economic activity will occur in EU digital markets. Before its remedies are imposed, it is critical to assess their impacts on individual markets, the digital sector, and the overall European economy. The European Commission (EC) released an Impact Assessment in support of the DMA that purports to evaluate it using cost/benefit analysis.

An economic evaluation of the DMA should consider its full impacts on dynamic competition. The Impact Assessment neither assesses the DMA's impact on dynamic competition in the digital economy nor evaluates the impacts of specific DMA prohibitions and obligations. Instead, it considers benefits in general and largely ignores costs. We study its benefit assessments and find they are based on highly inappropriate methodologies and assumptions. A cost/benefit study using inappropriate methodologies and largely ignoring costs cannot provide a sound policy assessment.

Instead of promoting dynamic competition between platforms, the DMA will likely reinforce existing market structures, ossify market boundaries, and stunt European innovation. The DMA is likely to chill R&D by encouraging free riding on the investments of others, which discourages making those investments. Avoiding harm to innovation is critical because innovation delivers large, positive spillover benefits, driving increases in productivity, employment, wages, and prosperity.

The DMA prioritizes static over dynamic competition, with the potential to harm the European economy. Given this, the Impact Assessment does not demonstrate that the DMA will be beneficial overall, and its implementation must be carefully tailored to alleviate or lessen its potential to harm Europe’s economic performance.

It has been suggested that to be successful in the current global economy with increased competition and ever changing markets, especially in the post-crisis context, firms need to focus more on innovation in exploring new ideas and designing new products to develop new markets than on cost-cutting strategies to maintain cost leadership in old markets. However, because of the lack of micro data, this conjecture has not been systematically evaluated. This paper aims to fill this important void by studying the economic performance associated with these two different business strategies using Canadian micro data.

The main data for our analysis are from the Survey of Innovation and Business Strategy (2009 and 2012) which is a sample-based survey of Canadian government. The authors used in this research regression models for the econometric analysis of the underlying factors for undertaking certain business strategies and how business strategies link to economic performance. They also used propensity score matching to ensure the group of firms with innovation strategy being comparable to that with cost-cutting.

The research shows that firms focusing on product innovation are indeed more productive than firms focusing on cost-cutting, although there is no evidence that these two different strategies make a difference in profitability. The first indication from the research has been that certain characteristics of Canadian firms are very useful predictors for firms to undertake product innovation. They are, among other things, the age of the firms, the single-establishment structure of the business and being multinationals.

This empirical research opens up many interesting avenues for future research. Some other variables could be integrated into the models to increase the rate of explained variance. Moreover, because this research is based only on the case of Canadian firms and for a relatively short period of four years after the 2008 crisis, an extension to other context and to a longer period of time should be interesting.

The research has confirmed that Canadian firms adopting long-term business strategies based on product innovation are more productive.

The results truly concur with the vision of the Government of Canada, like some other developed countries, on the importance of innovation and its policies in encouraging business innovation in driving the growth of the Canadian economy and improving the standard of living of country.

Mainly because of the lack of micro data, the existing researches have not provided solid evidence on why firms are choosing different business strategies when they are operating in the same business conditions and how the financial crisis has affected the undertaking of business strategies. They have not established a clear linkage between economic performance and different business strategies, although there has been some anecdotal evidence about their association. This study aims to bridge the knowledge gaps with theoretical and practical contributions.

The purpose of this paper is to identify the different types of adoption costs faced by organizations involved in the adoption of radio frequency identification (RFID) within supply networks, and to understand how these potential costs affect the likelihood of RFID adoption.

The paper applies an existing generic theoretical framework of costs associated with process innovation adoption to the case of RFID technology. Data are collected by interviewing participants in the RFID adoption process in supply network settings, and by examining a range of publicly available information on RFID development. The data are used to test and expand the theoretical framework.

Of the six main categories of generic process innovation costs, four are identified as applicable in the case of RFID adoption by early adopters: development, switching, cost of capital and implementation. No evidence is found for initiation and relational costs. In addition, a seventh category of costs is identified as applicable to the adoption of RFID in supply networks: ethical costs associated with privacy and health issues.

Further empirical work is required to test the generalisability of the findings. Because RFID technology is still in the early phases of development, the research has been able to consider only early adopters: further work is required as the technology matures to assess the impact of costs throughout the technology development lifecycle.

The work demonstrates that when considering the adoption of RFID managers need to look at a range of potential costs in making the investment decision. Policy makers also need to consider how organizations consider a range of costs that may not be explicitly specified when making adoption decisions.

The paper tests and extends the generic framework of costs associated with process innovations in supply networks. The study also clarifies the various costs involved in the adoption of RFID technologies by early adopters, and their influence on the decision to adopt.

The basic concept of transaction cost theory is that firms like to conduct transactions in a channel with lower transaction costs. Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to use the transaction cost perspective to identify which conditions cause companies to choose between outbound open innovation (hierarchy governance) and inbound open innovation (market governance).

Accordingly, transaction cost economics was used to relate the choice and implementation of open innovation using a sample of 250 electronics and information start-ups in China. Structural equation modeling was used to conduct confirmatory factor analysis to evaluate measurement model, while logistic regression analysis was used to test the hypotheses.

As expected, the dedicated asset specificity, human asset specificity, behavioral uncertainty, transaction frequency, and small number exchange were positively associated with outbound open innovation.

The contribution of this paper lies in explaining the role played by transaction cost economics in the process of open innovation for start-ups through empirical analysis.