Search results

While previous research has demonstrated the positive effects of digital business strategies on operational efficiency, financial performance and value creation, little is known about how such strategies influence innovation performance. To address the gap, this paper aims to investigate the impact of a firm’s digital business strategy on its innovation performance.

Drawing on the dynamic capability view, this study examines the mechanism through which a digital business strategy affects innovation performance. Data were collected from 215 firms in China and analyzed using multiple regression and structural equation modeling.

The empirical analysis reveals that a firm’s digital business strategy has positive impacts on both product and process innovation performance. These impacts are partially mediated by knowledge-based dynamic capability. Additionally, a firm’s digital business strategy interacts positively with its entrepreneurial orientation in facilitating knowledge-based dynamic capability. Moreover, market turbulence enhances the strength of this interaction effect. Therefore, entrepreneurial-oriented firms operating in turbulent markets can benefit more from digital business strategies to enhance their knowledge-based dynamic capabilities and consequently improve their innovation performance.

This study contributes to the understanding of how a firm’s digital business strategy interacts with entrepreneurial orientation in turbulent markets to shape knowledge-based dynamic capability, which in turn enhances the firm’s innovation performance.

This article focusses on the hybrid strategy, a simultaneous combination of cost leadership and differentiation strategy. The study aims to examine the impact of hybrid strategy on firm performance through its anticipated positive effects on process and product innovation. In addition, we study the moderating role of adaptive capacity in the direct relationships of hybrid strategy with process and product innovation.

Structural equation modelling was used to analyse 1,842 Spanish firms with fewer than 250 employees. We randomly selected small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) operating in Spain from the Spanish Central Business Directory (2021) database. The overall sample design was based on stratified sampling.

We found that hybrid strategy is positively related to firm performance and to process and product innovation. Additionally, in firms implementing hybrid strategies, process innovation fostered firm performance. Finally, adaptive capacity strengthened the relationships of hybrid strategy with process and product innovation. This sheds light on how and when hybrid strategy is most effective in fostering SME performance.

We highlight that SMEs need to establish strategies that use diverse resources and capabilities and not just generate competitive advantage using one strategy (cost leadership or differentiation strategy). This requires an agile and flexible systems and structures.

Our research provides novel results by proposing the adoption of hybrid strategies instead of pure strategies (cost leadership and differentiation strategy) as a way for SMEs to survive during crises. Unlike “stuck in the middle” strategies, our study demonstrates the importance of hybrid strategies in a comprehensive model that links them to innovation and firm performance, with adaptive capacity being a determining factor.

This paper aims to examine the relationship between the four cultural dimensions of the competing values framework (CVF) (group, developmental, hierarchical, and rational cultures) and four types of performance: product quality, process quality, product innovation, and process innovation. Theoretically, this represents the contrasts among the four quadrants of CVF in terms of their respective outcomes, with quality and innovation reflecting the contrast between control and flexibility orientations, and product and process reflecting the contrast between external and internal orientations.

Data were collected from 194 middle and senior managers of Australian firms who had knowledge of past and present organizational practices relating to quality and innovation‐related aspects in the organization.

Developmental culture was found to be the strongest predictor among the four cultural dimensions, as it shows relationships with three of the performance measures: product quality, product innovation, and process innovation. Rational culture shows a relationship with product quality, and along with group and hierarchical cultures, it also plays a role in predicting process quality.

The results provide key insights for managers to appropriately understand the fit between the culture and the strategic direction of the firm. The findings also encourage firms to appreciate the balanced view on what seems to be multiple cultural characteristics within the same organization.

By simultaneously examining the relationships between different cultural dimensions and different types of performance, this paper extends the previous empirical studies which linked CVF with a specific measure of performance.

The purpose of this paper is to analyze the degree to which employees’ proactive behavior contributes to innovation performance in firms operating in high-technology sectors. Despite the benefits of these behaviors for individuals and organizations, few studies have analyzed the contextual conditions that enable firms to capture their value in order to improve innovation performance. Drawing on the interactionist perspective, the authors also examine the extent to which informal and formal controls, such as perceived support for innovation and innovation process formalization, can facilitate the contribution of proactive behaviors to improve innovation performance (product and process innovation).

Based on an empirical study with a sample of 173 firms operating in chemical and information technology service sectors, hierarchical regression analysis was used to test the relationship between employees’ proactive behavior and innovation performance, and the moderating effects of informal and formal controls.

The results reveal a positive and significant association between proactive behaviors and product and process innovation performance. Both control mechanisms positively moderate the association between proactive behavior and product innovation, but no moderating role was found for process innovation. Moreover, rather than inhibiting innovation performance, innovation process formalization is positively associated with innovation. More specifically, a curvilinear relationship was found, which implies that when the level of formalization is high, it is able to improve product and process innovation.

The findings suggest that managers should consider proactive behavior in selection processes and performance management, and should cultivate a climate to support innovation and establish formal controls for innovation as a way to channel employees’ initiatives into product innovation.

This study contributes to the theoretical and managerial understanding of the extent to which proactive employees and organizational controls are able to enhance innovation in a technologically dynamic context.

This paper is concerned with the management and organization of product innovation processes, and how innovation performance relates to business performance. The underlying rationale is that encouraging firms to innovate will lead to a better business performance.

This study leverages a data set of 99 medium-sized technology firms in Sweden. The first part of the analysis in this study aims at finding determinants of product innovation processes, and the second part is the analysis and trade-off between innovation performance and business performance. First, a research framework is developed in which the link between strategic dimensions, process dimensions and organizational dimensions of product innovation activity and product innovation performance is tested. Second, the research framework tests the relationship between innovation performance and business performance (sales and profitability).

Product innovation performance (patent) is affected by seven variables of the 14 variables that represent product innovation processes. Product innovation performance is not affected by firm size, firm age, branch and product life cycles and, in the regression model, all three innovation performance variables (patents, copyrights and licenses) have a positive effect on the firm's sales, but there were no connections to the firm's profitability.

The main implication of the study is the idea supporting a multi-aspects approach to the product innovation processes and performance since product innovation process dimensions (variables used in the study) have only partial influence on innovation-/business performance.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the direct and indirect effects of CEO transformational leadership on product innovation performance. This research investigates the mechanism between CEO transformational leadership and product innovation performance, to understand the process through which transformational CEOs exert their influence.

This study is a quantitative research. Data were collected from 269 manufacturing firms in Thailand through a mail survey. This research applied a two-step structural equation modeling process.

The results indicate that CEO transformational leadership indirectly affects product innovation performance through an innovation culture, organizational learning, and the new product development (NPD) process. CEO transformational leadership has a strong effect on innovation culture and organizational learning. Organizational learning is strongly associated with the NPD process, which significantly leads to product innovation performance. By integrating the knowledge of leadership and operations management fields, this study helps extend the understanding of how leaders at the top of an organization influence the NPD process and product innovation outcomes.

For practical implications to be more effective, CEOs focusing on product innovation should develop their skills and behaviors of transformational leadership to foster innovation culture and organizational learning, which in turn will affect product innovation performance.

This study makes a contribution to the literature by filling the research gaps proposed by several prior studies and offering a theoretical framework of the relationship between CEO transformational leadership and product innovation performance.

The purpose of this paper is to analyze the impact of imported intermediate inputs on innovation performance, differentiating among types of innovation output (product and process innovation) and considering both family and non-family firms in the Spanish context.

This paper uses an unbalanced panel of 1963 firms in the Spanish manufacturing sector (13,155 observations; 2006–2016) that can be identified as family or non-family firms. The authors apply a recently developed methodology (conditional mixed process model) that takes into account the possible relationships among the dependent variables to a panel bivariate probit model with robust standard errors.

Importing intermediate inputs is an important source of process innovation for all firms, but not of product innovations. Significant differences were found between family and non-family firms in favor of the family type.

This paper breaks down the family state into two categories (belonging to a family group or not) because the database does not contain information regarding the percentage of family ownership or the number of family members in the management structure. Moreover, the research is context specific.

These results will be useful for firms that are considering the value of importing intermediate inputs as a strategy to improve their process innovations, particularly for family firms.

Family firms are more successful in the utilization of imported intermediate inputs to achieve greater innovation performance. If family firms are more competent in leveraging their intermediate input imports in innovation performance, it should contribute to increasing business performance.

The research on imports takes into account the different impacts of intermediate imports depending on innovation performance (product innovation vs process innovation) and the nature of the firm (family firms vs non-family firms).

Process innovation is a key determinant of performance. While extant literature paints a clear picture of the drivers of process innovation, the effect of process innovation on performance has received little attention. This paper aims to examine how the divergence of process innovation impacts performance. Divergence concerns the extent to which the observed level of process innovation diverges from the expected level of process innovation. Positive divergence occurs when the observed level of process innovation is higher than expected while for negative divergence the opposite occurs. In turn, the authors consider how divergence acts as a driver of performance.

The authors use survey and archival data from 5,594 firms across 15 countries. The authors analyze the data using an advanced two-step random-effects estimator that accounts for the multi-level data used.

The authors find negative divergence to reduce performance under high competitive intensity, whereas positive divergence is detrimental under high environmental uncertainty.

The authors present new and unique insights into the relationship between divergence and performance. The authors argue that each firm has an “ideal” level of process innovation, based on their resources and business environment, relative to which performance diminishes. Specifically, the authors argue that divergence from the firm’s expected level of process innovation is associated with the reduced performance during high environmental uncertainty or high competitive intensity. Furthermore, the authors argue that there can be “too much” process innovation. This nuance of the majority of prior empirical studies in this area suggests that more innovation is always better for firms. The more nuanced approach reveals that the process innovation-performance debate should not focus on more or less innovation per se, but on how innovation is constructed and supported.

Some argue the existence of an academia-practitioner gap, with both living in different worlds (Reibstein et al., 2009). The findings suggest that theory is not only useful to practitioners but also has a crucial and central role regarding decisions relating to efficiency and effectiveness of scarce resources, in the field of process innovation. More specifically, the authors demonstrate that the prior study on process innovation seems to be useful in that relative to a theory-predicted level, divergence diminishes performance in the global sample of companies across a wide range of industries. In addition, the authors suggest that firms should not strive for more innovation per se. The findings suggest that positive divergence or too much innovation is detrimental for performance under environmental uncertainty, while negative divergence or too little innovation is harmful to performance under competitive uncertainty. Moreover, the divergence approach is also useful for comparing performance to that of other firms, typically referred to as benchmarking.

This paper is useful and important for managers and theory development as it provides insight into situations where a firm may have “too little” or “too much” process innovation. Thus, divergence advances understanding as, in contrast with the previous study, the authors do not suggest that more innovation is always better.

Based on the dynamic capability theory (DCT), this study examines the role of digitalisation vision and the impact of key information technology (IT) strategies, such as IT flexibility, IT integration and IT agility, on organisations' process innovation capability and the subsequent impact these may have on innovation performance.

Data for this study were collected from 153 public listed organisations in Malaysia. The survey questionnaire method was used to collect the data from the organisations' representatives.

Results showed that it is important for organisation to have a strategic digitalisation vision to improve their process innovation capabilities. IT agility and IT integration also had a significant positive relationship with the process innovation capabilities of the organisations, which in turn had a positive impact on innovation performance.

Digital transformation and innovation are crucial for organisations to survive in the era of Industry 4.0. However previous studies have not captured the role of digitalisation vision, strategic IT components and its impact on process innovation capabilities. The current study filled up the gap and examined these relationships. The outcome of this study provides valuable insights for managers to understand the importance of digitalisation and the need to focus on key IT strategies. Such insights can be used to improve organisations' process capability which is critical for innovation and performance.

This study aims to determine (1) the effect of environmental management accounting on organizational performance and (2) the mediating effect of process innovation on the relationship between environmental management accounting and organizational performance.

This research uses survey methods designed for management accountants of large manufacturing companies in Indonesia. Data from 123 respondents were analyzed using the WarpPLS.

The implementation of environmental management accounting exerted a positive effect on organizational performance. It is evident that the implementation of environmental management accounting encourages companies to innovate processes which will improve how well the organization performs.

These findings still contained several limitations such as data were only collected from one province in Indonesia, and so the findings might not be generalizable to other provinces in Indonesia. Also, the number of variables studied only involved three. The study only focused on certain dimensions of environmental management accounting without considering other dimensions in-depth.

These findings extend the literature on environmental management accounting and demonstrate, from a practical perspective, environmental management accounting (EMA), which prioritizes the environment, will encourage companies to innovate their processes so that they are more environmentally friendly; EMA recognizes the important role of accountants in managing environmental issues.

This study documents the importance of environmental management accounting to assist companies in getting accurate information on environmental issues and environmental costs.