Search results

The purpose of this paper is to assess the validity and utility of two theoretical approaches to understanding the relationship between strategic orientations, innovation and firm performance and to examine the role of innovation in the relationship while avoiding circular arguments. The universalistic approach suggests that strategic orientations have independent and parallel effects on firms’ performance, and that innovation does not influence this relationship. The holistic approach proposes that strategic orientations in a complementary and interrelated view have both direct and indirect effects on firms’ performance through innovation.

A meta-analytic path analysis applying two-stage structural equation modeling (TSSEM) was conducted on data from 132 primary studies and 33,063 observations.

The holistic approach was demonstrated to be superior due to its more explanatory power in linking more complex relationships through simultaneous direct and indirect effects and its capacity for including the interrelatedness and complementarity of strategic orientations. It was found that innovation has a full mediating role in the relationship between entrepreneurial orientation (EO) and firm performance, and a partial mediating role in the relationship between market orientation (MO) and learning orientation (LO) and firm performance.

The study used observed variables instead of latent variables for meta-analytic path analysis, which may reduce some sources of endogeneity. However, causal inference is not possible due to the nature of meta-analysis. The scope of the final sample was limited by some studies not reporting the estimates of correlations between constructs.

Managers can improve an organization's chances of success in the marketplace by adopting a holistic view of strategic orientations focusing on customer satisfaction, learning from the external environment and pursuing new market opportunities. Furthermore, an organization can gain a competitive advantage through innovation by creating products and services that are different from what is currently available in the market. To be successful, an organization must not only create innovative products and services but also market them effectively to consumers.

This study is the first to meta-analytically assess the explanatory value of two theorized models linking strategic orientations, innovation and firm performance. It also clarifies the role of innovation in the relationship between strategic orientations and firm performance.

The purpose of this paper is to explore how organizations manage and integrate exploration and exploitation across the innovation project portfolio. Such ambidextrous capabilities are required for organizations to innovate and succeed in today's rapidly changing competitive environment. Understanding how exploration and exploitation projects are integrated can illustrate ways to enhance ambidexterity and boost learning for the benefit of both approaches.

A multiple-case study approach was used to explore innovation portfolio management in six large organizations that emphasize innovation in their strategies.

The findings draw upon concepts of paradox and contingency to reveal that the inherent tension between formality and flexibility in managing innovation project portfolios is aligned with the need for organizational ambidexterity that maintains effective exploitative innovation while supporting explorative innovation capabilities. Four integration mechanisms are identified that enhance ambidexterity across the innovation portfolio by embedding processes for transition from exploration to exploitation and cross-fertilizing knowledge to build innovation capability across both exploration and exploitation.

Managers may find inspiration on ways to enhance learning by bridging exploration and exploitation projects from the four types of integration mechanisms. Recognizing the paradoxical nature of the tension between formality and flexibility in project and portfolio management may also help guide organizations to effectively develop ambidextrous approaches to enhance overall innovation outcomes.

In contrast to perspectives which suggest that paradox and contingency approaches represent disparate perspectives, the authors demonstrate how they can complement each other and work together through innovation portfolio management to support ambidexterity at the portfolio and project levels.

Health care ecosystems instantiate different innovation trajectories, driven either by science-/techno-push or user-centric rationales. This article focuses on organization intermediaries (OIs), respectively, active in health care ecosystems driven by science- and techno-push versus user-centric innovation processes; it aims at characterizing their operation and intervention modes. The analysis elaborates on network and content brokerage. Innovation also needs to consider various challenges associated with physical vicinity. The authors check whether territorial anchoring plays a role in brokerage, depending on the innovation model.

The article offers an investigation of eight French organizations matching the definition of OIs and active in different areas of health care-related innovation. It follows a qualitative and abductive research protocol adhering to the precepts of grounded theory.

First, the authors show that content and network brokerage specialize in specific activities in each innovation model. On network brokerage, the authors show that OIs foster the development of communities of practice in the science-/techno-push model, while they nurture communities of innovation in the user-centric model. Services materializing content brokerage are typical consequences of activities performed in each model. The second contribution deals with physical vicinity. In the science-/techno-push model, OIs install a physical space (the “internal” dimension) to support the development of communities of practice, while the “external” dimension copes with agglomeration effects. In the user-centric model, OIs deliver services thanks to the “internal” space; communities of innovation create a leverage effect on the physical space to operate their activities that are supported by “external” network effects.

The originality of the article lies in the description of the alternative roles plaid by organization intermediaries in the science-/techno-push versus user-centric approaches of innovation. In these two approaches, (contents and network) brokerage and physical vicinity play different roles.

By adopting the “hard” and “soft” project management (PM) approaches from the PM-literature, this paper aims to problematize the expected role of client organizations in driving innovation in the transport infrastructure sector.

Addressing a large public client in Sweden, a case study design was initially applied to provide in-depth insights and perspectives of client project managers’ views and experiences of managing projects expected to drive innovation. In this paper, the concepts of “hard” and “soft” are used to discuss empirical findings on challenges associated with adopting a PM-approach for driving innovation in projects. The empirical material consists of interview data, complemented with observations and archival data.

Findings reveal challenges associated with combining hard and soft approaches, frequently demonstrating difficulties in balancing short-term project expectations with the promotion of innovation. In line with the literature, project managers note that there is a need for soft approaches to promote development and drive innovation. Yet, findings reflect a situation in which operational success criteria predominate, whereas soft approaches are not sufficiently used to create the grounds required for fostering innovation.

Insights are provided into how PM-approaches may impact construction innovation in the infrastructure sector, demonstrating a need for further research on the challenges and implications of applying and combining hard and soft PM-approaches.

The textile industry is a labor-intensive industry in which where innovation-oriented studies are conducted intensively. However, identifying potential innovation gaps for a firm operating in the textile industry is not easy and greatly influences the firm's future success. To this end, this study aims to propose a novel integrated approach for the pre-assessment of the firm-level innovation process.

The proposed approach uses two important tools: the technology capability audit tool and innovation audit tool. The proposed approach integrates these tools to discover possible innovation opportunities for firms. The proposed approach is called the innovation gap finder model (IGFM).

A real case study in the textile industry is conducted to show how IGFM works in practice. The results of this study show that decision-makers can easily identify existing innovation gaps using IGFM.

Firms must first identify innovation gaps in order to initiate achievable projects in line with their current situation. Addressing a firm-level pre-assessment of the textile innovation process helps achieve growth and enables the firm to know what it should do in the near future. By identifying innovation gaps by considering the innovation processes at the firm level, it is also easier to prepare an action plan on what and how to do in accordance with the firm's own culture. There is no specific tool developed to discover potential innovation gaps in the literature. To fill this gap, a novel integrated approach is proposed for a pre-assessment of firm level innovation process in this study. The proposed approach can also accelerate the establishment of the “idea-invention-innovation” path within the firm.

This study aims to map and assess the conceptual development of the innovation ecosystem literature.

A bibliometric analysis was performed using the VOSviewer, RStudio software, Bibliometrix and Biblioshiny packages. To accomplish this, 367 publications published between 2006 and 2020 and indexed in the Web of Science and Scopus databases were assessed.

The results demonstrate a rise in research during 2016, with almost 30% of publications concentrated in only six journals. The co-citation analysis presented four clusters: case studies, business and innovation ecosystems (platform approach), open innovation and national and regional innovation systems (territorial approach). We proposed a theoretical framework based on two approaches in the innovation ecosystem literature based on co-citation analysis: platform, which has its roots in the literature on strategy, and territory, grounded in research on economic geography literature.

One of the limitations of the study is that only articles published in journals were analyzed, leaving out of the sample those published in congresses, books and other sources.

This paper contributes to the literature by presenting and clarifying the different conceptual trajectories of research in innovation ecosystems. We also proposed an analytical framework based on the two main approaches to innovation ecosystems – platform and territory. This framework presents the critical elements of managing innovation ecosystems from both perspectives.

This paper aims to explore the evolutionary dynamics of innovation ecosystems in the food industry by adopting both open innovation and convergence approaches to derive practical policy implications to develop impactful innovation ecosystems to promote food production sustainably.

Starting from the cutting-edge case of Foodvalley in the Netherlands, the study adopts a backcasting approach to reach a future vision of food ecosystems from a sustainable food production perspective. The authors set the backcasting analysis in four steps: (1) description of the present and trends analysis, (2) selection of trustworthy criteria and goals, (3) development of future images and (4) analysis of how to reach the images.

The trends analysis has identified three existing innovation fields – protein shift, circular agrifood and food and health – and two strategic directions – convergence and localness decrease. The study reports how a long-term commitment may lead the valley toward a best future scenario.

The study suggests that policymakers and stakeholders can promote innovation strategies in sustainable food production ecosystems by encouraging collaboration between different sectors, reducing regulatory barriers, attracting innovative actors, and investing in education and training programs. To achieve measurable environmental and social impact outcomes, policies should promote entrepreneurship and create an enabling environment that encourages innovation and risk-taking.

The originality of this paper concerns the backcasting perspective applied to the analysis of the food ecosystem. This approach facilitates the identification of a path direction for successfully managing open innovation and industry convergence toward a desirable future of sustainable food production.

This research aims to examine the challenges of recruiting participatory action research (PAR) in managing innovation projects. An enhanced methodology based on PAR was developed to mitigate the challenges related to recruiting PAR in managing innovation projects. The proposed methodology was evaluated by comparing it to established methodologies/frameworks such as Scrum, Design Thinking (DT) and The Lean Startup (TLS). The evaluation aimed to determine the advantages and limitations of the proposed methodology in managing innovation projects.

The proposed enhanced methodology consists of eight steps, ranging from developing an understanding of the industry and business structure to learning and knowledge management. In addition, the enhanced methodology uses other techniques, such as Force field analysis and 12 boundary questions.

The research findings indicate that using the proposed methodology can improve the formalization of collaboration in PAR, enabling the organization to respond better to market changes. It helps define the project scope more clearly, encouraging innovation, addressing communication barriers and considering different worldviews and practical issues. Based on the findings, the proposed enhanced methodology could complement other methodologies/frameworks such as Scrum, DT and TLS.

The current research adds to the existing literature by identifying the challenges of recruiting PAR in managing innovation projects. A deductive reasoning process was utilized because there is no comprehensive research concerning the challenges of recruiting PAR in managing innovation projects. On the other hand, the PAR 4-phase cycle has been reviewed and enhanced to manage innovation projects.

The proposed methodology was used in a new product development project. The case study was done on one of the payment service provider companies that design, develop and deploy a digital product for marketing, installation, repair and maintenance of electronic funds transfer at point of sale devices.

No research has yet sought to identify the challenges of using PAR in innovation project management (IPM). Identifying the challenges associated with applying PAR in the IPM and providing an enhanced methodology to mitigate the challenges could fill a gap in IPM studies.

Industry 4.0 defines the application of digital technologies on business infrastructure and processes. With the increasing need to take into account the social and environmental impact of technologies, the concept of Society 5.0 has been proposed to restore the centrality of humans in the proper utilization of technology for the exploitation of innovation opportunities. Despite the identification of humans, resilience and sustainability as the key dimensions of Society 5.0, the definition of the key factors that can enable Innovation in the light of 5.0 principles has not been yet assessed.

An SLR, followed by a content analysis of results and a clustering of the main topics, is performed to (1) identify the key domains and dimensions of the Industry 5.0 paradigm; (2) understand their impact on Innovation 5.0; (3) discuss and reflect on the resulting implications for research, managerial practices and the policy-making process.

The findings allow the elaboration of a multileveled framework to redefine Innovation through the 5.0 paradigm by advancing the need to integrate ICT and technology (Industry 5.0) with the human-centric, social and knowledge-based dimensions (Society 5.0).

The study detects guidelines for managers, entrepreneurs and policy-makers in the adoption of effective strategies to promote human resources and knowledge management for the attainment of multiple innovation outcomes (from technological to data-driven and societal innovation).

Absorptive capacity, technological collaboration and servitization are analyzed to establish ways to overcome the balance between products and services in manufacturing companies. A fresh perspective is introduced by presenting a framework for innovation strategy, moving beyond product-based R&D.

The hypotheses are tested using data on Spanish firms in the high-tech chemical and pharmaceutical industries through ordinary least squares regression analysis. The sample consists of 112 manufacturing firms included in the Spanish Survey of Business Strategies.

The results show that absorptive capacity facilitates servitization and that technological collaboration moderates the relationship between absorptive capacity and servitization. The synergies between absorptive capacity and technological collaboration for servitization are recognized from the perspective of open innovation as a way of resolving the trade-off between products and services.

Future research should introduce more sources of collaboration by broadening the value chain perspective. Other approaches to innovation may also be considered, including relationships to process innovation.

The results can provide meaningful guidance for companies to determine the key opportunities of servitization driven by absorptive capacity, and the best ways to leverage open innovation and collaboration strategies to exploit such approaches.

This research enriches theories on servitization, open innovation and innovative behavior. Open innovation strategy should be linked to greater servitization activity and should support an open service strategy. This approach is crucial for building innovation capabilities through technological collaboration.