Search results

This paper aims to suggest a procedure for successfully transforming a firm’s innovation processes in a systematic way.

This is a conceptual paper, which draws on prior academic and practitioner papers.

Changes in a firm’s environment, such as new technological trends or customer needs, regularly call for the dynamic renewal of a firm’s innovation processes. Nonetheless, most firms proceed in a surprisingly unsystematic way if they transform their innovation processes. This approach contrasts with the systematic innovation processes that many firms have established to manage their product development from initial idea to final market launch.

To overcome this discrepancy, this paper distinguishes reconfiguration and realignment challenges in the transformation of a firm’s innovation processes. These different activities are illustrated with the example of transforming firms’ innovation processes towards open innovation. Furthermore, a five-step procedure is suggested to ease implementation. On this basis, implications for managers are discussed with respect to proficiently adapting their firms’ innovation processes over time.

In a session of the Strategos Innovation Academy, participants considered how a number of core management processes – for example, strategic planning, capital budgeting, performance assessment and product and process development – inhibit innovation. Working in groups, the participants identified problems with existing practices and then suggested a number of ways to make the process less toxic to innovation. Today’s strategic‐planning processes rarely emphasize radical innovation – the new business concepts and operational models that are necessary to keep corporations at the head of the pack – either implicitly or explicitly. Another failure that participants identified is the linkage between strategy planning and the annual budgetary cycle. To improve strategic planning, participants made a number of other suggestions, many of which derive from the toxicities and failures of the existing strategic‐planning process. Companies should first ensure that their business definition and associated mission statement are broad. Narrow definitions are likely to reduce a company’s identity to its current business model, thereby impeding the possibility of renewal. Companies should also explicitly include innovation in the strategic‐planning process. A chief innovation officer – a new senior‐level appointee in the company – can help ensure that innovation remains central to the strategic‐planning process. Greater scrutiny of strategic plans can also help. For example, CEOs can reject strategic plans that do not include a substantial amount of innovation. The introduction of new metrics for innovation would help formalize this commitment to innovation. Participants also recommended that companies find ways to dissociate the strategic‐planning process from an annual schedule. Instead, the process needs to become continuous. To this end, some participants advocated renaming the process strategic evolution instead of strategic planning.

The purpose of this paper is to discuss process philosophy’s potential contributions to understanding and investigation of innovation processes associated with organizational contexts.

The paper is a theoretical piece that examines the concept of process philosophy by relating it to the relevant literature and use of examples.

In particular, the authors develop some ideas and encourage future discussion around two aspects: process philosophy-oriented conceptualizations of innovation processes and process philosophy-oriented methods of investigation about innovation processes. The authors conclude that more process philosophy-oriented research of innovation processes must be conceptually multidimensional and methodologically performative.

There is a recent claim about a “process turn” within organization studies, which is partly represented by attempts to develop and apply a deeper meaning of process. The presentation of the concept is novel, and does add to the literature. These aspects provide clarification regarding implications of thinking and enquiring procedurally into innovation processes.

Drawing upon information processing theory (IPT) and natural resource-based view (NRBV), this study analyses the role of social media technologies (SMT) on internal and external environmental collaboration and green innovation (green product, process and managerial innovation).

This study took in-depth empirical research by developing a survey questionnaire to identify the relationship between SMTs, environmental collaboration and green innovation. The respondents of the questionnaire were supply chain professionals working in the manufacturing industry of Pakistan. The survey collected 475 responses, which were tested through PLS-SEM using Smart-PLS.

The study results indicate that SMTs positively influence both internal and external environmental collaboration. Furthermore, internal environmental collaboration (IEC) fosters green products and green managerial innovation. In contrast, external environmental collaboration (EEC) fosters green processes and green managerial innovation. This study has also tested the mediation of IEC and EEC, which shows that both IEC and EEC mediate all the relationships except green process and green product innovation. The results also revealed that innovation capabilities moderate the relationship between environmental collaboration and green innovation.

Though this study has various practical implications, it is not free of limitations. First, the data were collected from Pakistan, and the results may only be compared with other developing countries. Second, few social media platforms have been considered, but they are increasing in numbers and could be used in upcoming studies. Third, green innovation in the context of products, processes and management is considered, but the concept is evolving, and its other indicators can be taken in upcoming studies.

This study addresses the implication of SMTs, environmental collaboration, innovation capabilities and green innovation, which are helpful for managers and policymakers to design policies.

This study provides the seminal operationalization of SMTs in environmental collaboration and green innovation. This study emphasizes innovation capabilities that firms should adopt.

Our understanding of the influence of institutional conditions on process innovation is still limited, despite managers’ need to know which factors should be considered in decision-making and governments should be aware of how to foster process innovation through the provision of attractive institutions. Therefore, this paper aims to examine how institutional dimensions such as workforce, political instability, labor regulation, corruption, tax administration and transportation influence process innovation in smaller firms located in emerging countries other than the BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa).

A data set from the World Bank Enterprise Surveys questioning over 20,000 companies from 41 emerging countries supplemented by the gross domestic product (GDP) per capita for each country was used and analyzed by the means of general linear mixed models. The analysis emphasized small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and excluded BRICS countries.

The findings demonstrate which institutional factors matter for process innovation depending on company size and GDP.

This paper advances research on the influence of institutions on firm innovation – the institution–process innovation relationship in emerging countries other than the BRICS in particular. By considering the role of company size and GDP per capita on the institution–process innovation relationship, the paper offers more nuanced insights compared with prior studies and thus makes a strong contribution to the innovation theory. The data used are not suitable for a longitudinal study the same refers to capturing the variety found in the countries even those coming from the same geographic area.

The results provide practitioners, e.g. managers of SMEs, with concrete ideas on how to improve process innovation in their companies. Other actors such as policymakers too can benefit from the results as they will allow the design of more target group-oriented measures, aspects that can ultimately lead to more sustainable businesses.

By focusing on process innovation and emerging countries, the paper contributes to growing research efforts in emerging countries beyond the BRICS. Thus, the results add more diversity to the study of process innovation and its influencing external (institutional) factors. The emphasis on SMEs also allows us to highlight differences between different categories of SMEs.

This study deals with the processes of innovation in the medium technology industrial sectors. First, it illustrates the differences between the linear model of innovation and the systemic and cognitive model of knowledge creation. Then, it focuses on the concepts of connectivity, creativity, and speed of change, which characterize the processes of interactive learning in the industrial clusters. Finally, it illustrates a typology of regions, where problems and policy fields are different, and it indicates the guidelines of a governance of interregional knowledge and innovation networks.

The literature on organizational learning is very rich and complex. Although most research on learning suggests that it involves individual cognitive, cultural, social, and institutional changes and development, there are slight variations in terms of the number of factors various authors associate with these changes. We discuss the work of several authors as providing a contextual framework for viewing learning as involving both the adoption and diffusion of innovations.

Accounting for quality and improved organizational performance has recently received attention in management control research. However, the extent to which process innovation changes have been integrated into management control research is limited. This paper contributes to that integration by drawing from institutional adaptive theory of organizational change and process innovation strategies. The paper utilizes a 2 by 2 contingency table that uses two factors: environmental conditions and organizational change/learning strategies, to build a process innovation framework. A combination of these two factors yields four process innovation strategies: mechanistic, organic, organizational development (OD) and organizational transformation (OT).

The four process innovation typologies are applied to characterize innovations in accounting such as activity based costing (ABC). ABC has been discussed as a multi-phased innovation process that provides an environment where both the initiation and the implementation of accounting change can occur. Technical innovation can be successfully initiated as organic innovation that unfolds in a decentralized organization and requires radical change and double loop learning. Implementation occurs best as a mechanistic innovation in a hierarchical organization and involving incremental change and single loop learning. The paper concludes that if ABC is integrated into an OD or OT intervention strategy, the technical and administrative innovation aspects of ABC can be utilized to manage the organization’s operating activities.

Many corporations have annual expenditures in research and development in the range of billions of U.S. dollars. Senior managers have often been frustrated by the lack of innovation in their organizations and have been looking for better ways to implement an innovation strategy. To provide initial evidence on this significant topic, we conduct an empirical examination and contribute to the existing literature in two important areas. First, we examine how managers choose what measures to pay attention to in managing the innovation process – defined as the process of creative definition, development, and commercialization of substantially new products, services or businesses. We find that managers use measures about specific phases of the innovation process together. For example, measures that inform about the execution stage of the innovation process are grouped together rather than being grouped with measures informative about other phases of the innovation process, such as market performance. This pattern “focused” around specific phases is in contrast to the alternative “balanced” pattern where managers would use measures from various phases of the process together. This result provides the first empirical test of how managers combine measures to filter information about business processes. It also provides important new evidence on the use of measures and provides guidance to the design of measurement systems. Second, this paper provides empirical evidence on the relationship between innovation strategy and the use of measures. Though previous studies have linked innovation strategy and the use of management control systems in general, there is little empirical data on the relationship of strategy and the use of measures and on the innovation process. We find that different dimensions of strategy are positively associated with how managers use different types of measures.