Search results

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.

Drawing on resource and capability theory, this study aimed to analyze the relationship between the dynamic capabilities (DC), the knowledge management (KM) process (KMP) and results in customers and people. More specifically, the study argues that the KM process mediates the relationship between DC and the results outlined above. In addition, a predictive analysis is carried out that demonstrates the relevance of the KM process in the model.

The study sample is made up of 118 Spanish organizations that have some kind of recognition of excellence awarded by the European Foundation for Quality Management (EFQM). Partial least squares methodology is used to validate the research model, the hypothesis testing and the predictive analysis.

The results show that organizations which leverage the DC through the KMP improve customer and people outcomes. Moreover, the predictive power is higher when the KMPmediates the relationship between the DC and the results.

There is no consensus in the literature on the relationship between DC, KM and performance. Moreover, there are also not enough papers that study KM or DC through the dimensions that define these constructs or variables. Given this need, this work considers the KMP according to the stages of knowledge creation, storage, transfer and application. Similarly, DC is dimensioned in sensing, learning, integrating and coordinating capabilities. These, as reconfigurators of knowledge assets, influence the KMP. Accordingly, the empirical model connects these knowledge domains and analyses their link to outcomes.

The purpose of this paper is to report on research into the impact of two sequential dimensions of strategic purchasing – purchasing recognition and purchasing involvement – on the development and deployment of dynamic capabilities. The authors also examine how such dynamic capabilities impact on both cost and innovation performance, and how their effects differ for service as opposed to manufacturing firms.

The authors test hypotheses using structural equation modeling of survey data from 309 manufacturing and service firms.

From a dynamic capability perspective, the analysis supports the positive relationships between purchasing recognition, purchasing involvement, and dynamic capability in the form of knowledge scanning. The authors also find support for the positive impact of knowledge scanning on both cost and innovation performance. From a contingency perspective, data supports hypothesized differences caused by industry, whereby service-based firms experience stronger positive linkages in our model than manufacturing-based firms. Finally, emerging from the data, the authors explore a re-enforcing effect from cost performance to purchasing involvement, something that is in line with the dynamic capabilities perspective but not typically addressed in operations management (OM) research.

The research offers a number of theoretical and managerial contributions, including being one of a relative few examples of empirical assessment of dynamic capability development and deployment; examining the enablers of dynamic capability in addition to the more commonly addressed performance effect; assessing the contingency effect of firm type for dynamic capabilities; and uncovering a return (re-enforcing) effect between performance and enablers of dynamic capabilities.

In this paper, the authors aim to introduce international dynamic marketing capabilities (IDMCs) theoretically derived from marketing capabilities (MCs), dynamic marketing capabilities (DMCs) and international marketing capabilities (IMCs) and provide a novel conceptualization of the concept by applying a holistic view of the international enterprise.

This is a literature review that maps the current research on MCs, DMCs and IMCs and serves as a basis for the theoretical conceptualization of a novel IDMCs concept as well as for the identification of research gaps and the development of future research directions on this phenomenon.

Existing typologies of MCs, DMCs and IMCs are classified into four categories: strategic, operational, analytical and value creation capabilities. A new typology of IDMCs is proposed, consisting of digital MC and dynamic internationalization capability as strategic capabilities, agile IMC, IM excellence and absorptive capability in IM as operational capabilities, IM resilience capability, IM knowledge management capability, AI-enabled IDMC and Industry 4.0-enabled IDMC as analytical capabilities, and ambidextrous IM innovation capability as value creation capability. Finally, the authors identify research gaps and develop research questions that open future research avenues for the coming years.

This paper offers a novel view of MCs, DMCs and IMCs and argues that, in contrast to the majority of previous research, a comprehensive understanding of these is only possible if all levels are considered simultaneously: the strategic, the operational, the analytical and the value creation level. A new conceptualization and typology of IDMCs follows this logic.

Drawing on the transformational leadership (TL) and knowledge-based view (KBV) theory, the present study investigates the impact of TL on radical innovation (RI) through the mediation of knowledge management capabilities (KMCs) and moderation of competitive intensity (CI) of textile and apparel industries with an Asian context.

Data were collected from the relevant stakeholders of the industry-university collaboration teams with a structured survey questionnaire. Working with 304 textile and apparel industry respondents, structural equation modeling based partial least square (PLS-SEM) is used to test the conceptual framework. PLS-SEM technique was applied to test the hypothesis using Smart-PLS 3.8 packages program.

The results proposed TL has a positive impact on KMC and RI. Furthermore, the study reveals KMC positively mediated the relationship between TL and RI. This mediation is conditional on the moderating role of CI for the KMC (knowledge acquisition capability + knowledge-sharing capability) path to RI. Conversely, moderation of CI is insignificant and does not influence on fostering RI.

Leaders and managers have realized creative and innovative culture is built within the organizations by leader-follower collaboration through actual knowledge acquisition and knowledge sharing. Moreover, industry policymakers and practitioners establish the knowledge management department to enhance the innovation culture among the firms' stakeholders to encourage RI to sustain the global business market.

The study has introduced KMC as a mediator and CI as a moderator in the proposed model between TL-RI and KMC-RI. Further, it explores the linkages between TL, KMC, CI and RI.

The purpose of this paper is to structure existing research on knowledge management (KM) in small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) to offer a comprehensive overview of research strands and topics in KM in SMEs to determine their evolution over time.

The paper, which is considered a follow-up literature review, is based on a systematic literature review that covers 180 scientific papers that were published since the review paper by Durst and Edvardsson in 2012 that covered 36 papers.

The findings of this review and those of the aforementioned review are brought together in the form of an overview that structures research on KM in SMEs based on themes that, in turn, allow the derivation of promising research directions and research questions aimed at structuring future research on KM in SMEs.

By combining the findings of this review with the findings from the review published in this journal in 2012, this paper offers, to the best of the authors’ knowledge, the most comprehensive literature review on KM in SMEs produced to date.

This paper aims to analyze factors based on organizational knowledge management (KM; transactional memory systems and knowledge-oriented leadership [K-OL]) that help firms to mitigate conflicts based on task management at work, with the aim to improve their innovation capabilities (IC). The knowledge-based view of the firm, conflict management theory and cognitive collective engagement theory have been used to build a model of relationships that connects the development of positive KM contexts and management of dysfunctional conflict with IC improvement.

Data survey collected from inland hotel establishments in Spain is used to test seven hypotheses by means of structural equations modeling, applying the partial least squares technique. Direct, indirect and mediating relationships between variables are examined from the structural path model.

The results confirm that, as expected, IC improve when K-OL and transactive memory systems (TMSs) are properly implemented by hotel establishments, which leads them to reduce negative effects of task management conflict (TMC). Significant direct effects are found between the key variables of the study and also a significant indirect effect between K-OL and IC through TMS reinforcement and the mitigation of TMC.

This paper provides useful ideas for hotel managers about how to improve KM contexts in their establishments while avoiding TMC. Efforts devoted to creating those contexts by hotel establishments are shown to be effective to improve their IC and create competitive advantages.

The analysis of IC improvement by studying TMC mitigation had not been researched to date by the KM literature. The consideration and testing of a model that integrates KM-related tools such as K-OL and TMS to avoid TMC in the hotel industry is the main contribution of this study.

This study aims to understand the interaction between capabilities inherent in open innovation and dynamic capabilities (sensing, seizing and transforming) as a source of competitive advantage.

Qualitative method and grounded theory were used as guidelines for data collection and analysis.

The study identifies a set of capabilities in the practice of open innovation related to dynamic capabilities, which indicates the importance of developing dynamic capability in the strategic management of internal and external knowledge in the company.

The number of interviewees approached herein do not allow generalizations, but the use of grounded theory through various strategies of data collection in the interviews allowed the triangulation of the data, increasing the credibility, validity and quality of the research.

This study presents capabilities identified in open innovation and their relationship with dynamic capabilities, identifying the importance of the dynamic capability in the strategic management of internal and external knowledge in the company as a source of competitive advantage.

From the organisational perspective, the authors know that management, including innovation management, becomes less “organised” by bureaucracy and administrative tools, and much more impacted by organisational capabilities, competences and hidden, “soft” routines, bringing innovation and creativity to the core of organisation. The purpose of this paper is to focus on competency sets for open innovation (OI) and is to provide recommendations for OI competency development in companies, linked to the core OI processes.

The research is exploratory and aims at theory-based practical indication combining deductive identification of competency clusters and inductive model development. Thus, the authors apply quantitative methods to data collection and analysis. The authors conducted an extensive literature review on competence challenges with regard to execution of OI, and empirical data analysis based on a large-scale structured industrial survey in Europe (N=264), leading to the development of competency sets for companies. SPSS tools are applied for empirical tests.

The authors develop a generic OI competency model applicable across industries, combined with organisational implications for sustaining OI management capabilities. The research clusters competencies based on the empirical analysis, which addresses the various challenges of OI, leading to recommendations for competency management in an OI context.

The data were collected from one key informant per company. Although the authors made efforts to ensure that this was a senior manager responsible for innovation, the authors cannot exclude some bias in the way that OI activities and related competencies are perceived. Exploratory nature of the research, which calls for a more systematic investigation of the OI activity modes and the OI competencies resulting competency model. In particular, the competencies could be tested on an inter-professional sample of employees with involvement in and/or responsibility for innovation, development, and HR management, as well as on leaders of innovating companies. Third, although significant in size for the analyses undertaken, the sample is not large enough to enable a more fine-tuned analysis of regional differences across Europe in the way that OI is managed through the development and implementation of competencies.

The research contributes to the OI management field with an outlined OI competency profile that can be implemented flexibly and tailored to individual firm’s needs. It brings indications for both further theory building and practice of innovation organisation, especially with regard to human resource development and organisational capability building for OI.

The social implications of the paper result from the contribution to innovation management competency development in OI regimes, which is an important tool for designing contemporary educational programmes, contributes to OI management sophistication in business which is especially important during the economy slowdown and search for new sources of growth and productivity, and supports firms productive engagement in OI ecosystems and collective technology upgrading towards higher societal benefits and stakeholder involvement.

An empirically grounded OI competency model is proposed with an implication to support human resource development for OI. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, there has been no prior attempt to build such a model. The distinguished feature of the research is its extensive European coverage of 35 countries and multinational scope. The empirical validation strategy makes the research extremely relevant for management decisions related to human factors related OI capability development in organisations.

Prior research has reported the indirect implications of firm's dynamic capabilities on their competitive firm performance. Our attention now turns to open innovation since it has been confirmed to be an influential factor contributing to the superior performance of technological firms. So far there has been little research on assessing the relationship between a firm's dynamic capabilities as an antecedent of the competitive performance of the firm or investigations into the mediating role of open innovation in this relationship.

Drawing on the theory of dynamic capabilities, we developed a framework as a way to better understand the role of open innovation, which could then help to better explain the relationship between firms' dynamics capabilities and their competitive firm performance. Based on the empirical data of 465 firms operating in innovative and non-innovative industries, we employed structural equation modelling (SEM) to examine the research hypotheses and the path relationships in the proposed model.

The SEM analysis revealed that a firm's dynamic capabilities significantly impact its open innovation performance and that open innovation, consequently, impacts the competitive performance of the firm. Moreover, the results show that the path between dynamic capabilities and competitive firm performance is partially mediated through open innovation.

The findings provide practical implications and draw managerial attention to the importance of: (1) investing in innovation, (2) engaging customers in the innovation process and (3) maintaining innovation management excellence as significant antecedent factors in increasing competitive firm performance.

Considering the lack of empirical research in the literature on the links between dynamic capabilities and open innovation, this paper contributes to the dynamic capabilities and open innovation literature by confirming that open innovation not only mediates the relationship between these two aspects but also strengthens the effect the dynamic capabilities have on competitive firm performance. Besides, due to the significant impact of dynamic capabilities on open innovation, dynamic capabilities might be regarded as an antecedent of open innovation.