Search results

Firms increasingly rely on both external and internal crowdsourcing to capture ideas more broadly and enhance innovative problem-solving. Especially in internal crowdsourcing, knowledge sharing that contributes to develop or further the understanding of the problem the idea is focused on solving can take place between critical employees, and in that way improve ideas generated by others. This far, most crowdsourcing practices have focused on identifying solutions to proposed problems, whereas much less is known about how crowds can be used to share problem-related knowledge. There is thus an untapped potential in leveraging crowds not just to generate solution-oriented ideas but also to share knowledge to improve ideas and even to reframe problems. This paper aims to explore the effect of problem- and solution-related knowledge sharing in internal crowdsourcing for idea development.

Data on ideas and comments were collected from an idea management system in a Swedish multinational company. The investigation captures the influences of the problem- and solution-related knowledge sharing on ideas based on content analysis and logistic regression analysis.

The results from this study show that sharing knowledge related to solutions in idea development impacts idea acceptance positively, whereas sharing knowledge related to problems in idea development has a negative effect on the likelihood of idea acceptance and these effects of knowledge sharing are moderated by the active author responses.

This research provides managerial implications for firms to deliberately manage knowledge sharing in peer communities in internal crowdsourcing, especially by providing suggestions on problem reframing and solution refining for ideas.

The results contribute to existing theory in terms of extending the view of crowdsourcing in ideation to include how crowds contribute to the development of the problem and the solution during the development of ideas and providing new insights on knowledge sharing in internal crowdsourcing based on problem-solving theory.

Considering the vital role of resource-constraint innovation in developing countries, the aim of the study is to examine the mechanism of internal and external heterogeneous knowledge sharing (HKS) in the relationship between sustainable leadership (SL) and frugal innovation (FI). The social exchange theory was used to develop a research framework.

This study employed Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) analysis to examine the relationship among several latent factors based on 263 participants from Pakistani SMEs.

The current findings support the significant positive impact of SL on both internal and external HKS. Moreover, this study also confirms the mediating effect of both types of HKS in the relationship between SL and FI.

To delve further into the benefits and vital role of HKS, it is recommended to conduct further research that would examine the potential impact of heterogeneous knowledge sources on the “SL–FI relationship” and to apply the presented research methodology in other countries and organizations beyond Pakistani SMEs.

This study is one of the first documented attempts to demonstrate HKS as a mechanism in the relationship between a specific type of leadership and FI.

This study aims to examine direct effects of qualified team gatekeepers on absorptive capacity (AC), and the mediating roles of combinative capabilities – knowledge integration capability (KIC) and interteam coordination.

A social networking analysis was used to analyze a unique data set collected from all members of 32 Japanese research and development (R&D) teams to identify key individuals who perform daily gatekeeping functions. This study analyzed the data through partial least squares structural equation modeling with higher-order latent variables. Finally, cross-validation tests were used with holdout samples to test the model’s predictive validity.

Qualified gatekeepers directly contribute to teams’ realized AC but not to their potential AC. Furthermore, qualified gatekeepers can improve their teams’ capability to absorb and exploit external knowledge by facilitating their capability to consolidate knowledge, that is, its KIC and interteam coordination.

Unlike prior research that asks top managers to identify team gatekeepers, this study used social network analysis to identify these vital individuals. This study provides a new framework indicating how qualified gatekeepers impact the AC of R&D teams through the examination of both the direct and indirect paths of gatekeeping abilities, two combinative capabilities as mediators and team AC.

Establishing a competitive advantage in today's dynamic environment involves optimizing an organization's exploration and exploitation strategy. This paper aims to explore how an open innovation strategy complements the organization's ambidextrous strategy in attaining a competitive advantage. Organizational ambidexterity and dynamic capability theories are also explored to investigate the impact of open innovation on the organization's ambidextrous strategy and competitive advantage – especially inbound and outbound open innovation.

The authors conducted a systematic literature review using Boolean search techniques, which was focused on the research fields of the sub-areas of general management, strategy, innovation, organization studies, information management, entrepreneurship, international business, marketing, and economics, supplemented by the snowball technique.

Organizations that combine their ambidextrous strategy with open innovation attributes achieve a competitive advantage through developing their dynamic capabilities by which organizations change their value proposition. This study also shows that an ambidextrous strategy should no longer be viewed as a structural solution implemented by management, but also as a bottom-up intervention. Additionally, the authors found that the organization's dynamic capabilities establish a feedback loop, which changes the organization's ambidextrous strategy to resolve the efficiency–agility paradox.

Previous research has focused on strategic orientation; however, hardly any research has investigated how the interrelatedness of open innovation, organizational ambidexterity and dynamic capabilities support a competitive advantage. The authors present a conceptual model that inspires new research avenues.

The purpose of this study is to propose a model of knowledge legitimation in organizational learning focusing on the relationship between power politics and legitimacy.

This study adopts the approach of a conceptual discussion.

This study developed an organizational learning model that explains how actors exercise their power and how knowledge is legitimated through politics. The author identified various factors that shape the politics; these factors trigger, enhance, facilitate and inhibit power exercise. This study also identified which type of power (influence, force, domination and discipline) leads to which type of legitimacy (pragmatic, moral and cognitive). Furthermore, this study found that power politics and organizational learning are interrelated; actors’ powers bestow legitimacy on knowledge, and knowledge enhances the power of related actors.

This study identified the set of factors that shape actors’ power exercise in organizational learning as well as their associated mechanism and illustrated how they lead to knowledge legitimation. The author also revealed the relationships between actors’ power and legitimacy of knowledge. Finally, this study elaborated on the findings of prior studies concerning politics of organizational learning.

This paper aims to investigate the impact of Industry 4.0 (I4.0) technologies on knowledge creation for innovation purposes by assessing the relationships among the variety of I4.0 technologies adopted (breadth I4.0), the penetration of these technologies within the firm’s value chain activities (depth I4.0) and the mediating role of both internal (inter-functional (IF)) and external [with knowledge-intensive business services (KIBS)] collaborations in this process.

The study employed a quantitative research design. By administering a survey to entrepreneurs, chief operation officers or managers in charge of the operational and technological processes of Italian manufacturing firms, the authors collected 137 useful questionnaires. To test this study's theoretical framework and hypotheses, the authors ran regression and mediation analyses.

First, the results highlight the positive link between breadth I4.0 and depth I4.0. Moreover, the results show the key role played by increased collaboration among the firm’s business functions and by relationships with KIBS in creating knowledge to innovate processes and products when I4.0 technologies are adopted.

The variety of I4.0 technologies adopted enables a firm to use such technologies in various value chain activities. However, the penetration of I4.0 into the firm’s value chain activities (depth I4.0) does not per se directly imply the production of new knowledge, for which a firm needs internal collaboration among different business functions, in particular with the production area, or collaboration with external partners that favor I4.0 implementation, such as KIBS.

To achieve innovation goals by creating new knowledge, especially in the manufacturing industries, firms should encourage internal and external collaboration when I4.0 technologies are adopted. Moreover, policy makers should not only consider fiscal incentives for the adoption of such technologies, but also encourage the building of networks between adopting firms and external actors.

The study is one of the first attempt that provides empirical evidence of how I4.0 enables the creation of knowledge to innovate processes and products, highlighting the relevance of collaboration both within the company and with external partners.

In organisational and innovation research, the term “open innovation” refers to the inflow and outflow of knowledge to and from organisations: with open innovation theory suggesting active exchanges of knowledge with external actors leads to the development of exploitable new ideas. In the field of education, however, the exchange of knowledge with external parties represents a paradigm shift. In response, this article presents findings from research design to explore the nature and composition of school innovation networks, and the effects of such these networks on knowledge mobilisation.

The study draws on data from a representative random sample of 411 German school leaders. Respondents were asked to detail their engagement in open and closed innovation activity and their school's external collaborations during the last 12 months. A latent class distal outcome model was developed to examine whether different types of collaboration associate with different knowledge mobilisation processes.

The study findings suggest that schools in Germany mainly use internal knowledge for innovation, with external knowledge exchange taking place on a very limited basis. Knowledge mobilisation varies depending on the innovation network. The authors use the findings to indicate new insights for how schools can further innovate learning and teaching in future.

Although there is increasing discussion on Professional Learning Networks in schools, the discourse on knowledge mobilisation within educational networks is limited, making concept of open innovation so far completely absent from discourses on school improvement. This paper initiates the population of this new research space.

The purpose of the study is to identify and analyze critical mediating and moderating market intelligence challenges faced by the SMEs when implementing corporate social responsibility (CSR) based on an applied market-oriented business model (MOBM).

Focusing on developing CSR-integrated market intelligence, this study uses an action research method by analyzing four case studies. Data is collected through interviews, interactive and knowledge-sharing meetings and on-site observations. The study is part of a larger European Union project using the developed MOBM to follow the four companies' CSR implementation and learning process over a 14-month period. The action research includes seven meetings; between these, the researchers introduced the SMEs to different business focus areas, where CSR is a vital part of the MOBM.

This study shows that the SMEs are too technology-focused and have little initial idea of how to integrate CSR advantages for market intelligence into their internationalization. The MOBM model offers insights and knowledge on the strength and weakness of the internal organization to meet challenges in internationalization.

Via case study and action research, this study spotlights the challenges that SMEs face in the CSR implementation process and how they deal with those challenges to develop market intelligence competence internally. Instead of following a traditional research approach, the current study applies a CSR-based method where the SMEs go through a knowledge development process that originated from a theoretically designed MOBM.

This paper examines the innovation behavior of family-owned firms versus non-family-owned firms. The role of internal family governance and the influence of external stimuli (competition) on innovation are also considered.

The data of 20,995 family and non-family firms across 38 countries are derived from the World Bank Enterprise Survey during the period 2019–2020. Probit models are used to examine the impact of family ownership, family governance, and competition on innovation outcomes.

Family firms are more likely to make R&D investments, acquire external knowledge, engage in product innovation (including innovations that are new to the market) and process innovation, relative to non-family firms. However, a high propensity of family member involvement in top management positions can reduce innovation. Competition has a negative impact on innovation outcomes for both family and non-family firms, but it has a positive moderating effect on the innovation activities of family firms where a higher level of family member involvement in management is present.

This paper provides novel insights into family firm innovation dynamics by identifying family firms as more innovative than non-family firms for all types of indicators, debunking the idea that family firms are conservative, reluctant to change, and averse to the risks in innovation activities. However, too much family involvement in decision making may stifle some innovation activities in family firms, except in cases where the operating environment is highly competitive; this provides new insights into the ownership-management dynamic of family firms.

The purpose of this paper is to test the effect of internal and external collaboration on the degree of newness (incremental/radical) in innovation projects. This adds to the understanding of the particular patterns of open innovation (OI) and what characterizes the innovation emerging through this approach.

Tests are performed on the effect of internal and external collaboration on the degree of newness (incremental/radical) in innovation projects. This adds to the understanding of the particular patterns of OI and what characterizes the innovation emerging through this approach. The empirical analysis is based on a data set including responses from 512 Danish engineers.

The results show that external collaboration has significantly different effects on the degree of newness depending on the type of external partners involved, and they also show that radical innovation output is positively related to involving the R&D department (internal) and universities (external involvement) and negatively related to involving suppliers.

The results provide a more detailed understanding of how different OI patterns affect the development of incremental vs radical innovation in existing organizations. In particular, three findings add new insights into how OI affects innovation to reach the highest degree of newness: high importance of collaboration with external partners with distinct interests and skills; low reliance on existing customers and suppliers for the development of radical innovation; and narrow and focused internal involvement rather than broad internal involvement.