Search results

1 – 10 of over 16000
Open Access
Article
Publication date: 16 February 2021

Arto Wallin, Matti Pihlajamaa and Nando Malmelin

The article explores what forms of disruption are prioritized by top executives of large manufacturing companies in Finland and what strategies they consider appropriate for the…

4086

Abstract

Purpose

The article explores what forms of disruption are prioritized by top executives of large manufacturing companies in Finland and what strategies they consider appropriate for the management of disruptive threats and opportunities.

Design/methodology/approach

The empirical study was based on interviews with top executives in some of Finland's largest manufacturing companies.

Findings

Based on the data, we identify exploitative and explorative strategies in four dimensions that executives consider important in anticipating and responding to disruptions: internal development efforts, stance on new entrants, ecosystems and institutional change. Due to the presence of multiple potential disruptions, which often generate conflicting demands, executives have to consider them simultaneously and balance between them when making strategic decisions. They therefore do not necessarily have a specific response strategy, but their aim is to develop their companies' capabilities so that they are well-placed to face the future with confidence.

Originality/value

The findings indicate that the executives envision a disruption landscape that is more complex than typically described in the literature. In addition, it answers the call for a more systematic understanding of incumbents' response strategies by linking different disciplinary views with well-grounded empirical data.

Details

European Journal of Innovation Management, vol. 25 no. 6
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1460-1060

Keywords

Article
Publication date: 22 December 2020

Ernest Kissi, Kofi Agyekum, Labaran Musah, De-Graft Owusu-Manu and Caleb Debrah

Supply chain (SC) disruption, whether demand sided or supply sided, is conversely perceived to affect organisational performance of construction firms. This paper, therefore, aims…

Abstract

Purpose

Supply chain (SC) disruption, whether demand sided or supply sided, is conversely perceived to affect organisational performance of construction firms. This paper, therefore, aims to examine the linkage of supply chain disruptions with organisational performance of construction firms through the moderating role of innovation.

Design/methodology/approach

Using a quantitative research, approach the views of 84 construction professionals were elicited using a structured questionnaire. Ordinary least squares were utilised to validate the hypotheses set.

Findings

The study proved that there is a negative relationship between demand-related disruption and business performance as well as project performance. Also, it was clear from the study that supply-related disruptions had a significant impact on both project performance and business performance. Although SC innovation was seen to impact business performance, it had no relationship with project performance. Generally, innovation was seen to have a moderating effect of demand and supply disruption of project performance, but it played no moderating role in business performance.

Practical implications

The findings suggest that business firms must be innovative with the supply chain, as it moderated project success. The supply chain of a construction firm plays a very critical role on projects; hence, this study recommends that a supply chain manager ought to be innovative in their operations due to the moderating role SC innovation has on project performance and largely business performance.

Originality/value

Various studies on supply chain has been done on different sectors in the economy; however, little can be said about the construction industry on how supply chain disruptions affects business and project performance and how innovation moderates such effects.

Details

Journal of Financial Management of Property and Construction , vol. 26 no. 1
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1366-4387

Keywords

Article
Publication date: 23 September 2013

Ismail Golgeci and Serhiy Y. Ponomarov

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the nexus of relationships linking firm innovativeness, innovation magnitude, disruption severity, and supply chain resilience. These…

5507

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the nexus of relationships linking firm innovativeness, innovation magnitude, disruption severity, and supply chain resilience. These relationships are examined within a supply chain disruptions context.

Design/methodology/approach

This study employed between subjects scenario-based experimental methodology combined with a survey method. Participants in the study were senior level logistics/supply chain and operations managers in US and European manufacturing companies. The hypotheses were tested via linear regression models.

Findings

Findings suggest that both firm innovativeness and innovation magnitude are positively associated with supply chain resilience. In addition, it was found that disruption severity is positively associated with innovation magnitude.

Research limitations/implications

Based on the findings, the authors expect that firm innovativeness as a dynamic capability should have a positive impact on achieving supply chain resilience. The more severe the disruption faced, the higher the magnitude of innovation adopted by firms. Therefore, firm innovativeness and innovation magnitude work in tandem to positively influence supply chain resilience.

Originality/value

This paper contributes to the supply chain risk management literature by enhancing the understanding of both positive outcomes of firm innovativeness and drivers of supply chain resilience. It responds to the question, “What enables firms to respond effectively to supply chain disruptions?” from an innovation perspective that has been ignored in the previous literature.

Details

Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, vol. 18 no. 6
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1359-8546

Keywords

Abstract

Details

Comprehensive Strategic Management
Type: Book
ISBN: 978-1-78714-225-1

Article
Publication date: 22 February 2022

Joao Paulo Nascimento Silva and André Grützmann

This article aims to understand the dynamics between disruptive innovations and innovation ecosystems, using disruption business models as a catalyst.

1028

Abstract

Purpose

This article aims to understand the dynamics between disruptive innovations and innovation ecosystems, using disruption business models as a catalyst.

Design/methodology/approach

This study presents an integrative literature review and a theoretical framework in order to integrate the theories of disruptions and ecosystems.

Findings

The dynamics of disruptive innovation, within an ecosystem, as an essential driver of creating new markets. The effect of creative destruction from a disruption influences business models in a coopetitive dynamic that drives the ecosystem as a whole.

Research limitations/implications

Limited to theoretical research and suggested the application of the proposed model in an empirical study.

Practical implications

Understand the formation of new ecosystems based on the occurrence of a disruption as a way for organisations to prepare for the arrival of this new market.

Originality/value

The contribution of this study is based on joining the literature of disruptive innovation and innovation ecosystem, pointing to a theoretical framework and a flow of Evolution and Adaptation to the Disruptive Ecosystem that integrates this complex dynamic.

Details

European Journal of Innovation Management, vol. 26 no. 5
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1460-1060

Keywords

Article
Publication date: 16 April 2020

Sucet Jimena Martínez-Vergara and Jaume Valls-Pasola

Disruptive innovation theory has attracted the interest of researchers and practitioners across many areas, resulting in the development of new business models and strategies…

2211

Abstract

Purpose

Disruptive innovation theory has attracted the interest of researchers and practitioners across many areas, resulting in the development of new business models and strategies. Despite the increasing scholarly attention, its definition has not yet been understood, the understanding of the term “disruptive” and the complex nature of this innovation has provoked some misinterpretations, and the meaning remains ambiguous. To address this confusion, this article undertakes a critical review of disruptive innovation in an attempt at providing a solid theoretical grounding.

Design/methodology/approach

The review examines the key issues of published articles, identified after conducting a search in the Web of Science scholarly database. The analysis highlights the basic definitions of disruptive innovation, showing its evolution, types and its characteristics. This article also examines the behaviours adopted by the actors associated with disruptive innovation (i.e. incumbents, entrants and customers).

Findings

Overall, this article finds that disruptive innovation has its own elements to be identified, requiring an in-depth analysis to avoid confusing with other innovation approaches. The findings suggest that disruptive innovation affects businesses and sectors in varied and complex ways because customers from low-end market and mainstream market appreciate this innovation. Further, its impact on practice is huge and incites further efforts in establishing a stronger theoretical grounding.

Originality/value

Our research contributes on the evolution of this theory, helping to better understand the phenomenon of disruption and can be used for different types of research settings.

Details

European Journal of Innovation Management, vol. 24 no. 3
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1460-1060

Keywords

Abstract

Details

The Philosophy of Disruption
Type: Book
ISBN: 978-1-80262-850-0

Article
Publication date: 21 March 2016

Stephen Denning

Recently, observers of the battle between incumbents and challengers have turned the field of disruptive innovation theory into contested territory. What strategies work for…

7300

Abstract

Purpose

Recently, observers of the battle between incumbents and challengers have turned the field of disruptive innovation theory into contested territory. What strategies work for defenders and attackers?

Design/methodology/approach

For an update the author asked the opinion of the world’s foremost authority, Harvard professor Clayton Christensen.

Findings

According to Christensen, “We discovered that there are three types of innovations, only two of which we had caught in the [original] theory of disruption.

Practical implications

The only permanent way out of the innovator’s dilemma is to change the game being played and adopt a new corporate focus in which innovation is a necessity, not an option.

Originality/value

The article updates and broadens disruption theory. Disruption, as Christensen defines it, is a theory of competitive response.

Details

Strategy & Leadership, vol. 44 no. 2
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1087-8572

Keywords

Article
Publication date: 5 July 2011

Michael E. Raynor

Executives and managers are in need of research that will elevate the pursuit of successful innovations from a gut‐level, intuition‐driven art to something more closely resembling

5680

Abstract

Purpose

Executives and managers are in need of research that will elevate the pursuit of successful innovations from a gut‐level, intuition‐driven art to something more closely resembling a science based on repeatable processes with predictable results. this paper aims to address this issue.

Design/methodology/approach

Using Intel Corporation's proprietary data the author conducted a number of experiments designed to test disruption theory's impact on predictive accuracy.

Findings

After training in the rules of disruptive theory MBA students were up to 50 percent more accurate in correctly identifying the survivors and failures, constructing, collectively, a portfolio with a survival rate of up to 15 percent.

Research limitations/implications

Intel's New Business Initiatives (NBI) division provided data on a portfolio of 48 new business ventures that were granted seed financing, a sum that ranged between $250,000 and $2 million, between approximately 1995 and 2005.

Practical implications

Disruption theory can deliver statistically significant and practically material improvement in the ability to innovate successfully. Disruption theory can be used to shape existing innovation ideas in ways consistent with the theory's prescriptions.

Originality/value

As of now the disruption theory of innovation is the only one with evidence to support the assertion that it can improve predictive accuracy.

Article
Publication date: 21 November 2022

Tasadduq Imam

There are uncertainties concerning how innovators can successfully venture into disruptive innovations and how incumbents can react to the emergence of such innovations

Abstract

Purpose

There are uncertainties concerning how innovators can successfully venture into disruptive innovations and how incumbents can react to the emergence of such innovations. Disruptive digital innovations, which use information technology to disrupt business contexts and can evolve rapidly to either successes or failures, have unique challenges. The literature has largely remained silent concerning these. Also, existing studies often focus on innovations originating in developed economies and just on successful cases. There is a lack of comparative focus on successful and failure cases emerging across economies. The purpose of this paper is to fill these gaps.

Design/methodology/approach

This paper assesses the evolution of disruptive digital innovations in various contexts through a financial management-motivated conceptual framework. Contrary to existing works, this paper focuses on both successful and failure cases and regards the influence of various stakeholders further to innovators and incumbents to explain the successes or failures of the innovation.

Findings

There are some common success factors for disruptive digital innovation. These include an inherent focus on social value, alignment to financiers' interests and rivals' actions and strategic collaborations to create a synergy effect.

Research limitations/implications

Innovators can cause effective digital disruption by focusing on social and financial values. Success can also largely depend on strategic partnerships rather than actions by an individual entity. Thus, venturing and managing disruptive digital innovation is not an isolated but a social process.

Originality/value

This paper recommends propositions for innovators and incumbents to venture into and confront disruptive digital innovations effectively. Its originality lies in focusing on both successful and failure cases, unexplored in literature, to develop the propositions.

Details

International Journal of Innovation Science, vol. 15 no. 5
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1757-2223

Keywords

1 – 10 of over 16000