Search results

Building on the little guidance in the existing literature regarding the relationship between human resource management (HRM) practices, entrepreneurial orientation and firm performance, this study aims to generate theoretical propositions that underpin an integrative framework following a systematic literature review, then to test such a framework within the context of a small and medium enterprise (SME) to demonstrate how employees’ knowledge and competencies are translated into added value while fostering the company’s entrepreneurial capabilities and culture.

For the purpose of this research, a systematic literature review was adopted to build the propositions underpinning an integrative theoretical framework linking HRM practices, entrepreneurial orientation and firm performance. A single case study approach was then followed to test the propositions of the integrative theoretical framework within the context of an SME, while adopting a triangulation methodology for data collection, including questionnaires, interviews and archival data. Data analysis was conducted following the procedures of a pattern-matching methodology.

This research confirms the strategic role of HRM practices in fostering the firm’s entrepreneurial orientation and capabilities, while nurturing, enriching and bundling employees’ knowledge, skills and distinctive competencies within the context of a company’s innovation-driven strategy. HRM practices through a strategic alignment with the company’s business strategy, contribute to shaping up organizational attitudes, behaviors and cultural determinants that are, in turn, conducive to better innovativeness, risk propensity and initiative-taking. Theoretical and empirical evidence shows how such corporate entrepreneurialism is then translated into adding value activities, individual and group productivity and overall organizational performance.

This research generates meaningful insights on how HRM practices contribute to shaping up corporate entrepreneurship attitudes and transforming them into both individual and organizational results while building on conceptual assumptions and empirical evidence. The authors believe such insights have the potential to lay the foundations of a comprehensive theoretical model that disentangles the complexities and the dynamics of how strategically-oriented HRM interventions could help an organization redirect its employees’ competencies into innovation and entrepreneurial capabilities to generate a competitive advantage in an ever-changing business environment. Future research should emphasize mainly on multiple case study approaches and ethnographic methodologies for the sake of result generalizability and holistic understandings.

This research draws significant conclusions for SMEs to cope with the change and the fierce competitive dynamics affecting current business environments. To consolidate and further develop their strategic positioning, this research suggests that SMEs could leverage distinctive individual and group competencies, through strategically aligned HRM actions and investments, to foster learning and generate entrepreneurially-oriented cultural values and management style conducive to innovation, performance and competitive advantage.

This research offers integrated and holistic views of how HRM practices affect organizational performance while leveraging on learning to create the necessary cultural and managerial conditions for corporate entrepreneurialism. This research builds on both theoretical propositions and empirical evidence to lay the foundations of a comprehensive model linking HRM practices, entrepreneurial orientation and firm performance. From a practical perspective, the research findings suggest new human resource developmental venues while placing much emphasis on the value of creating the innovation-driven managerial culture and fostering entrepreneurially-oriented attitudes to achieve better performance results.

This introduction paper to the special issue on “The twenty‐first century knowledge‐based value drivers of innovation and sustainable development” aims to focus on such relationships between knowledge, learning, capabilities, innovation and competitive advantage in different forms of organization: businesses, clusters and regions. The purpose is to point out the conceptual pillars and contribute to the ongoing debate on: how knowledge assets impact organizational performance, what are the characteristics of such value‐generating processes, what factors affect the process of building organizational capabilities and distinctive competences, and how organizations translate specific capabilities into sustainable competitive advantages.

The article is based on a thorough analysis of the management literature addressing the nature, role and relevance of knowledge, organizational capabilities, learning and knowledge management for organization competitiveness. The conceptual background sets the foundations for a better understanding of the strategic importance of knowledge‐based value drivers for innovation and sustainable organizational value creation.

As knowledge management is establishing itself as a research discipline, it is fundamental to define the conceptual pillars grounding the application of knowledge management initiatives for innovation and business performance improvements. This paper provides a framework summarizing the key assumptions at the basis of understanding the strategic relevance of knowledge‐based value drivers for growth and competitiveness.

In addressing some of the questions posed, this article provides some implications for future research that build on different perspectives and emphasize the importance of adopting multi‐disciplinary approaches to disentangle the complexities of how organizations convert knowledge resources to a long‐lasting competitive advantage.

This editorial presents the key conceptual pillars explicating the role of knowledge resources as building blocks of organizational capabilities and how firms can develop and maintain their competences by promoting and nurturing learning processes. The value of this paper is the definition of a conceptual framework outlining the relationships between knowledge management, organizational capabilities, organizational learning and competitiveness.

Organizational knowledge assets have been identified as sources of competitive advantage. It is therefore critical that organizations understand how they impact on performance in order to effectively manage these assets. This paper aims to extend the “knowledge‐value chain”, recently introduced in the management literature, by integrating the concept of dynamic capabilities. Based on a systematic review of the literature it seeks to demonstrate the important role of dynamic capabilities in the relationship between knowledge asset management and firm performance. This paper aims to argue that the effective management of knowledge asset enhances the value of organizational competencies, which in turn support organizational processes, products and services. Dynamic capabilities take the role of continuously shaping operating routines and competencies, and consequently deliver superior long‐term performance.

The central objective of the article is to extend the work presented by Carlucci et al. with the concept of dynamic capabilities. Carlucci et al. introduce the “knowledge value chain” as a model linking knowledge assets with firm performance.

Based on an extensive systematic literature review, a recognized evidence‐based tool for theory building, the paper finds that dynamic capabilities represent a missing component in the relationship between knowledge assets and firm performance.

It is believed that the insights presented in this paper represent the theoretical basis for the development of a conceptual framework on how effective knowledge asset management affect the overall business performance and improve the value‐generating activity of a company.

The paper reveals that knowledge assets interact with each other through learning mechanisms and knowledge management processes enable the generation of new knowledge, and the development of organizational routines that form the building blocks of firm's competencies. These organizational competencies, hence, condition the efficiency and the effectiveness of business processes, and consequently the value of firm's products and services. Dynamic capabilities shape and systematically reconfigure organizational competencies, through assimilating new knowledge, and linking, organizing and integrating the generated knowledge into organizational routines.

The goal of this research is to empirically assess whether knowledge management (KM) and learning organizations (LO) are distinct concepts and if so, to test whether KM enhances LO more or vice versa.

The authors propose an approach by which they first empirically assess the independence of those two concepts, then KM's fundamental processes, being knowledge acquisition, sharing, and utilization, are hypothesized to have a positive relationship with the different LO dimensions. Retail business employees working in organizations in Lebanon were surveyed. KM processes were first designated as dependent variables and then as independent variables. Bartlett's test, Pearson correlation, factor analysis, and regression analysis were used to test the hypothesis.

The results indicated that the two dimensions LO and KM are distinct and that KM enhances LO more than LO enhances KM.

This research extends the impact of knowledge management to include informal processes. It provides empirical evidence that managers should seek to implement formal and informal knowledge management processes into their organizational culture to enable a dynamic learning environment.

This research is significant in that up to this point the relationship between KM and LO has been posited and supported through anecdotal evidence and observation. This research provides empirical evidence of the relationship and forms the basis for further study in this area.

The authors aim to investigate the concept of open innovation, identify different open innovation practices which help describe the continuum between closed and open innovation, and propose a framework that suggests an association between innovation contexts and practices.

The authors first identify the variables to describe innovation contexts and practices. Such variables are developed based on the literature and on a previous paper by the same authors in 2011. Then, they establish an association between contexts and practices, and test it through cases drawn from the existing literature.

The paper proposes a detailed assessment of open innovation practices and suggests the association between each of them and diverse innovation contexts. A few case examples drawn from the literature prove coherent with the theoretical framework underlying the proposed association.

The authors' results (and specifically the framework) enhance the organizations' awareness of the open innovation concept and the possible practices to implement it, as well as supporting managers to better select open innovation practices in different contexts.

This paper discusses the concept of open innovation practices to enhance the comprehension of the open innovation concept. Also, to the authors' knowledge, the proposed association between context and practices is original in that there are no similar theoretical frameworks that help organizations selecting innovation practices.

The aim of the paper is to explore the requirements of knowledge‐based management in the regional development network of the Tampere region in Finland.

The requirements of knowledge‐based management are analysed on the basis of the perceptions of the regional developers interviewed (n=13) and by using the extended SECI model and intellectual capital framework as analytical tools.

Different regions benefit from different knowledge‐based management activities according to their performance in the cycle of the extended SECI model and the intellectual capital available among the regional developers. When the knowledge‐based management requirements of a regional development network are identified by applying these two frameworks, more appropriate investments (e.g. for ICT infrastructure) and development activities can be made.

The perspectives of knowledge creation (i.e. the extended SECI model) and intellectual capital provide one approach for evaluating the call for knowledge‐based management of regional development. Other perspectives are also expected to be valuable as the understanding of regional knowledge‐based management in different contexts is enhanced.

The study contributes by proposing and applying a method for evaluating the requirements of regional knowledge‐based management.

The purpose of this paper is to provide a three‐dimensional framework to facilitate future definitions of intellectual capital (IC). The concept of IC is often ill‐defined and there is a multitude of different definitions for the construct of IC. The lack of a common platform for dialogue has negative implications for research and practice in the field as it has hinders cross‐disciplinary learning. This paper aims to presents a flexible framework in order to make important differences explicit and therefore, if adopted, facilitates the creation of a cohesive body of knowledge.

The paper utilises a systematic review process. This methodology was initially developed in the medical science to produce a replicable, scientific, and transparent analysis of evidence in the literature and has recently been broad into management science. A total of 938 papers were analysed to extract findings. The summary of the review protocol can be found in the Appendix.

Analysing the literature allowed the necessary components of a definition together with a list of possible sub‐components to be extracted. Definitions of IC need to be explicit about the: component parts of the construct; role IC will take in an organisation; and disciplinary perspective taken for the discussion.

This paper presents the necessary components of a definition of IC. If widely used, it would be able to facilitate cross‐disciplinary understanding and hopefully inter‐disciplinary research. It is seen as a starting point and open for future extension and development. A systematic review aims to limit bias and random error, however, it is limited by its scope on the basis of the defined research question and therefore delimited by factors outlined in the research protocol.

The major implication for practitioners is the understanding that IC can mean very different things for different people. Insights outlined in this paper will enable anyone to understand better the important construct of IC from different perspectives, which in turn should facilitate dialogue and avoid many unnecessary misunderstandings.

The paper is a first attempt to present a framework to facilitate future definitions of IC. If used, discussed, and extended in the future, it could present an important corner stone for better cross‐disciplinary dialogue and the establishment of a research field of IC.

The purpose of this paper is to contribute to the understanding of small to medium‐sized enterprise (SME) clustering processes initiated from the bottom up. In particular, this paper seeks to tackle the major setbacks encountered by a group of Spanish SMEs with long tradition in the chemical sector on their way to setting up a cluster.

The authors propose a collaborative action research approach. The fact that the study was carried out within the framework of the EU‐FP7 CADIC project made this approach particularly suitable. The intervention strategies along the cluster development cycle are especially focused.

Collective and distributed leadership, collaborative culture, communication, dynamic relational capabilities, and a shared vision or purpose are all necessary and critical, though not sufficient elements, for the success of SME bottom‐up clusters. The timeframe of the strategic interventions and the roles of the partners are equally fundamental.

The practical implications are to enhance SMEs' clusters management capacity and collaboration readiness; to promote more business‐grounded and effective cluster policies; and to contribute to enlighten the discussions about the opportunity/appropriateness of cluster evaluation frameworks/policies addressed to enact collaboration, when the focus is the SME.

This study suggests that misalignments in the triad roles‐purpose‐culture among the cluster partners could bring about dysfunctions and lead the cluster to a prolonged “projectism” and early degeneration. Particularly, it highlights the fundamental role of the “roles” displayed in the cluster in achieving success. These roles are dynamic and emergent mechanisms of adaptation of the cluster to the internal and external environmental changes.

This study aims to offer new insights to further the understanding on the relevance of engaging employees in knowledge sharing behaviours in order to improve current operations.

The authors' conceptual model proposes a direct relationship between knowledge sharing behaviours and employees' innovative behaviour, moderated by employees' perception of social capital. Six hypotheses were developed from the literature, grounded and tested among 198 employees of four hospices and palliative care organisations (H&PCOs) for dying cancer patients. All constructs were measured using multiple‐item scales that were adapted from previous related studies. The authors' hypotheses were tested using seemingly unrelated regression (SUR).

This study has three main results. First, the authors found a positive role of knowledge sharing behaviours in affecting sharers' innovativeness, in terms of propensity and capacity to promote and implement new ideas. Second, sharing best practices and sharing mistakes are two distinct drivers of individuals' innovativeness. Third, individuals' perceptions of social capital have a relevant moderation effect on the linkage between knowledge sharing and innovative behaviour.

Past research posited that knowledge sharing is convenient for others, and possibly at the expense of sharers' best interest. The authors' research was grounded on a different notion of knowledge sharing as: a self‐interested behaviour, which individuals deploy to generate a norm of reciprocity among knowledge recipients, which might create future benefits in the short term; and an improvement process, which individuals can use to translate new ideas into workable innovations.