Search results

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the inverted U-shaped relationship that exists between exploitative leadership styles and innovation implementation. In addition, drawing on the social cognitive theory, the paper explores the effect of the three-way interaction between exploitative leadership style (ELS), work–family balance (WFB) and family-friendly workplace practices (FFWPs) on innovation implementation.

A quantitative study of 440 employees from 38 medium and large companies based in Italy and Croatia was conducted, using an online survey. The proposed hypotheses were tested using hierarchical regression analysis.

The results show that there is an inverted U-shaped curvilinear relationship between ELS and innovation implementation. Furthermore, the findings support the existence of the three-way interaction suggesting that the combination of high-level WFB and high-level FFWPs strengthens the relationship between ELS² and innovation implementation.

This is the first contribution that examines a curvilinear relationship between ELS and innovation implementation. Additionally, it contributes to the work–family literature by providing the first empirical examination of the joint impact of WFB and FFWPs in enhancing innovation implementation. Our results suggest that individuals who perceive a high level of WFB and who work in an organization with family-friendly practices are more accepting of an exploitative leader, and that the positive feelings from the family domain encourage the implementation of innovation. These results may change the attitudes of managers, encouraging them to consider WFB and FFWPs as important for the implementation of innovation.

The management literature has extensively discussed innovation diffusion as an essential part of corporate and economic competitiveness. However, most work centers on diffusion external to the organization. The purpose of this paper is to provide a framework for understanding post adoption innovation implementation.

Research concerning diffusion inside the firm has focused almost exclusively on innovation creation as opposed to implementation. Although current definitions of innovation often make clear the internal/external distinction, the authors propose that it could be made more meaningful by further delineating the components of internal innovation diffusion. To that end, prominent innovation research is synthesized to explore innovation implementation.

A systematic review of the literature suggests three main types of influences on implementation: organizational, innovation, and human. Each represents unique challenges for innovation implementation.

The model presented here can serve as a useful organizing rubric for leaders attempting to facilitate change.

This paper fulfils a need for greater understanding of internal innovation implementation.

This research reports on how influence processes (IP) impact on the implementation effectiveness of information technology (IT) projects. Drawing on an innovation perspective that elevate the interplay of factors related to innovations framing, innovations environment and innovation attributes, the study focused on IT projects based in Africa that are generally classified as “challenged” due to the conditions in the environment. The purpose of this paper is to assess how IP related to innovation framing, innovation environment and innovation attributes can be used to determine implementation effectiveness.

Using a interpretive approach, a case study of institutions under a partnership that has been implementing various educational technologies in five African countries formed the sample. In all, 25 interviews of top-management representatives, project leaders and user representatives were conducted between 2012 and 2013 to assess the implementation effectiveness of these projects. Theoretical thematic analysis, based on a deductive approach, was employed to analyse the data.

The results show that a majority of these development-oriented projects are “mandated failures” characterized by high framing, a bad internal environment and typically negative innovation attributes. That typically, the institutions engage symbolically in such innovations initiatives which are regarded as “show” projects. Such behaviour can be construed to be a pattern of cynical technology adoption linked to the appeasement of external stakeholders. In addition, participation in initiatives was largely symbolic and is considered as a mere demonstration of a modern organization that is technologically aware, yet the requisite innovation environment is lacking for effective appropriation of the technology. Third, mandated failures result in low morale of employees, who regard themselves as pawns in the process which make them grudgingly participate in the implementation process.

These findings have implications for managing innovations in such challenged environments: the first proposition is that projects in challenged environment for innovation adopting organizations need to be considered as technology transfer projects. Second, the innovation environment and attributes can only be improved during implementation of the conditions related to absorptive capacity of the organization and the individual are addressed.

The research reported in this paper, provides an empirical determination of the concept of implementation effectiveness by using three constructs of innovations framing, environment and attributes. On the basis of the empirical findings, an original contribution is claimed, especially in “challenged” IT project environments where the concept of success if fluid and outcomes uncertain.

Assessing the antecedents of innovation implementation holds importance for companies, as previous studies have shown that without proper implementation the innovation is doomed to fail. Over the past few years, research on innovation implementation is growing. However, the evidence on the antecedents of innovation implementation is inconsistent. The purpose of the study is to conduct a review of the literature using meta-analysis to summarize the divergent views present in the literature.

A meta-analysis technique is adopted for reviewing the literature. The literature search was conducted with selected keywords in different databases and top journals from the ABDC list (A* and A).

The results of the meta-analysis that summarize evidence from 42 papers, 100 effect sizes and 32,223 organizations show the significance and homogeneous/heterogeneous opinions of the past studies. Results reveal the homogeneity in antecedents such as transformational leadership, business collaboration, employee competency, leader competency, absorptive capacity and business size and heterogeneity in the antecedents such as communication, customer collaboration, internal entrainment, external entrainment, implementation climate and strategic resources.

The results imply that managers attempting to implement innovation in the organizations need to first focus on homogenous antecedents followed by heterogeneous antecedents for successful implementation.

This study advocates research on innovation implementation. It tests the significance, nature of the relationship and summarizes the divergent views on antecedents of innovation implementation in an organization. The results of this study can also be used in the theoretical advancement of management innovation literature.

This chapter develops a framework for classifying approaches to conceptualizing and measuring implementation of innovations. It first develops a typology that distinguishes rollout, modification, programmatic and transformation conceptualizations of implementation. The implications of each conceptualization for measurement of implementation are discussed. Following this a classification scheme for implementation measures is presented that distinguishes measures on the basis of their: (a) criterion for success of the implementation; (b) innovation unit; (c) source of data; (d) measurement scale; and (e) level of analysis. Issues related to various measurement choices are discussed along with recommendations for future research and development in the measurement of implementation.

Can we speed the testing, implementation and spread of management innovations in a systematic way to also contribute to scientific knowledge? Researchers and implementers have developed an approach to test and revise a local version of an innovation during its implementation. The chapter starts with a case example of an application of this combination of implementation and quality improvement sciences and practices (improve-mentation). It then summarizes four examples of this approach so as to help understand what improve-mentation is and how it is different from traditional quality improvement and traditional implementation of evidence-based practices. It considers gaps in knowledge that are hindering both more use of improve-mentation to generate scientific knowledge about spread and implementation, as well as more use of improve-mentation by health care service organizations and researchers. It closes by proposing fruitful research and development that can address these knowledge gaps to speed the implementation, sustainment and spread of care and management innovations.

The purpose of this paper is to compare the implementation of 12 different organisation and management innovations (OMIs) in Swedish healthcare, to discover the generic and specific factors important for successful healthcare improvement change in a public health system.

Longitudinal cross‐case comparison of 12 case studies was employed, where each case study used a common framework for collecting data about the process of change, the content of the change, the context, and the intermediate and final outcomes.

Clinical leaders played a more important part in the development of these successful service innovations than managers. Strategies for and patterns of change implementation were found to differ according to the type of innovation. Internal organisational context factors played a significant role in the development of nearly all, but external factors did not. “Developmental evolution” better described the change process than “implementation”.

The 12 cases were all of relatively successful change processes: some unsuccessful examples would have provided additional testing of the hypotheses about what would predict successful innovation which were used in the case comparison. The cross‐case comparative hypothesis testing method allows systematic comparison if the case data are collected using similar frameworks, but this approach to management research requires considerable resources and coordination.

Management innovations that improve patient care can be carried out successfully by senior clinicians, under certain circumstances. A systematic approach is important both for developing and adapting an innovation to a changing situation. A significant amount of time was required for all involved, which could be reduced by “fast‐tracking” approval for some types of change.

This is the first empirical report comparing longitudinal and contextualised findings from a number of case studies of different organisational and management healthcare innovations. The findings made possible explanations for success factors and useful practical recommendations for conditions needed to nurture such innovation in public healthcare.

The purpose of this paper is to address how management innovations are implemented deeply at the most micro level of organizations, namely, organizational routines, or to investigate the process through which organizational routines evolve in implementing management innovations, with existing routines overturned and new routines created and solidified.

This paper adopts an interpretive and exploratory case study on the case of Day-Definite (DD) innovation which has successfully brought Arima World Group Company Limited (HOAU) into a new value-added arena, in terms of timing, security and high service quality. Considering that DD innovation reflects a systematic innovation of the whole organization, this paper focuses on it to explore the complex implementation mechanism of management innovation. Multiple approaches were utilized during data collection to meet criteria for trustworthiness, including semi-structured interviews, archival data and observation; and the data analysis went through a five-step process.

The results confirm management innovation as a complex project concerning organizational routines which represent a central and fundamental element of organizations. Also, it finds that organizational routines evolve in innovation implementation through a three-phase process consisting of the existing-routine-domination phase, the new-routine-creation phase and -solidification phases, each exhibiting different innovation activities and characteristics of participants’ cognition and behaviors; recreation of new routines is the key for routine evolution, thus for success of management innovations.

This research is constrained by several limitations. The set-up framework of organizational routine evolution in innovation implementation needs a further confirmation in more organizations; other elements, such as cognition of managers, resource orchestration, environmental elements or organizational culture, should be considered for the success of innovation implementation; and more attention should be paid to the potential power asymmetries among participants and its potential influence on forming shared schemata and subsequent new routines, besides interactions and role taking.

The findings offer some valuable insights for further research on management innovation and organizational routines and hold important implications for management practices. This research extends research on management innovation and the Kurt Lewin Change Theory and Change Model to explore innovation implementation at a most micro level; furthers research on organizational routines, especially routine dynamic theory, by holding the two-component view and exploring the process through which organizational routines evolve; and contributes to research on the relationship between organizational routines and innovations by taking an organizational routines’ perspective. It reminds managers of the depth and complication of innovation implementation.

The purpose of this paper is to provide a deeper understanding of how transformational leadership relates to followers' innovation implementation behavior, the psychological mechanisms of this relationship, and the role of individual perceptions of climate for initiative.

Perceptual data were collected from 198 employees in lower and middle management positions of a multinational automotive corporation. Relationships were tested using hierarchical regression analysis.

Results demonstrate that transformational leadership was strongly related to followers' innovation implementation behavior and that the nature of this relationship was moderated by followers' levels of perceived climate for initiative. Additionally, commitment to change fully mediated the relationship between transformational leadership and followers' innovation implementation behavior.

The paper is based on a cross‐sectional design. A causal interpretation requires studies with experimental or longitudinal designs.

Companies should invest in transformational leadership training and in the selection of supervisors with this leadership style before initiating the implementation of innovations. Enhancing contextual factors, such as a perceived climate for initiative, should be promoted by integrating them into organizations' reward systems.

The paper is one of the first to investigate the relationship between transformational leadership and followers' innovation implementation behavior. It specifies the organizational contexts under which transformational leadership is most likely related to innovation implementation behavior, and those in which such a relationship is unlikely to occur.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the implications of implementing innovation in experimental schools (focussing on R & D) for school effectiveness post-intervention (five years). Based on theoretical models of social exchange and “conservation of resources” (Hobfoll, 1989), the authors focussed on assessing the effects of implementing innovation on individual outcomes (strain) and school level outcomes (social cohesion, emotional conflict, organizational innovation). The authors compared three types of schools: schools that have completed the implementation process (after), schools still in the implementation process (during) and schools not participating in the implementation process (control group).

A sample of 75 schools (23 non-experimental, 25 during the experiment, 27 post-experiment) was used. Data were collected from teachers and principals to avoid a single source bias.

MANOVA analyses suggest that the process of implementation of innovation contributes to organizational effectiveness: differences were found between the control group and the two groups of experimental schools. The two groups of experimental schools showed higher levels of organizational innovation and social cohesion and lower levels of emotional conflict and strain as compared to the control group.

This study concentrated on the question of the direct links between the study variables – the effects of the implementation of innovation on school functioning. It would be interesting to examine the limit conditions (encourage – discourage factors) for these relations.

Findings suggest that a structured process of implementing innovation contributes not only to the outcome of innovation in school, but also enhances overall school functioning.

Permits the authors to deepen the knowledge of the potential of organizational processes of innovation in schools over time (pre-during-post process).