Search results

Traditionally, firms have been dependent on internal sources such as their own employees – and up to a certain extent, on some external sources, their customers – for innovation. However, in the current scenario of technological dynamism, firms are exploring multiple sources to generate ideas for innovation. Therefore, there is a need to understand the relative effect of various sources of innovations on a firm’s performance.

We offer a conceptual framework where we identify six distinct sources of innovations – firm, customers, external network, competition, macro-environment, and technology and how they create value for focal firms especially their brand equity. We introduce a taxonomy of various costs and benefits related to innovations. We then argue using our proposed taxonomy to understand the relative strengths of various sources of innovation affecting a firm’s brand equity.

We discuss and compare the relative effects of these sources of innovations on a firm’s brand equity by rank-ordering the sources. The customers and the technology as a source of innovation have the maximum impact on the firm’s brand equity followed by the marginal impact of macro-environment and external network of a firm. The firm itself has a moderate impact on its brand equity, while competition has the minimal impact. Further, we also discuss how the relationship is moderated by different innovation characteristics (nature and type of innovations).

The main practical implication is to create awareness among managers about various costs and benefits of the proposed six sources of innovations and their effects on brand equity. Managers would be able to prioritize their sources of innovation based on firms’ current needs, and whether to focus on lower costs or building higher brand equity in the scarce resource environment.

We offer a comprehensive list of six sources of innovation, build a conceptual framework wherein we discuss the relative strengths of these sources affecting brand equity.

The European Union’s Digital Markets Act (DMA) calls for far-reaching changes to the way economic activity will occur in EU digital markets. Before its remedies are imposed, it is critical to assess their impacts on individual markets, the digital sector, and the overall European economy. The European Commission (EC) released an Impact Assessment in support of the DMA that purports to evaluate it using cost/benefit analysis.

An economic evaluation of the DMA should consider its full impacts on dynamic competition. The Impact Assessment neither assesses the DMA's impact on dynamic competition in the digital economy nor evaluates the impacts of specific DMA prohibitions and obligations. Instead, it considers benefits in general and largely ignores costs. We study its benefit assessments and find they are based on highly inappropriate methodologies and assumptions. A cost/benefit study using inappropriate methodologies and largely ignoring costs cannot provide a sound policy assessment.

Instead of promoting dynamic competition between platforms, the DMA will likely reinforce existing market structures, ossify market boundaries, and stunt European innovation. The DMA is likely to chill R&D by encouraging free riding on the investments of others, which discourages making those investments. Avoiding harm to innovation is critical because innovation delivers large, positive spillover benefits, driving increases in productivity, employment, wages, and prosperity.

The DMA prioritizes static over dynamic competition, with the potential to harm the European economy. Given this, the Impact Assessment does not demonstrate that the DMA will be beneficial overall, and its implementation must be carefully tailored to alleviate or lessen its potential to harm Europe’s economic performance.

Green innovation in supply chains is crucial for socioeconomic development and stability. Factors that influence collaborative green innovation in the supply chain are complex and diverse. Exploring the main influencing factors and their mechanisms is essential for promoting collaborative green innovation in supply chains. Therefore, this study analyzes how upstream and downstream enterprises in the supply chain collaborate to develop green technological innovations, thereby providing a theoretical basis for improving the overall efficiency of the supply chain and advancing green innovation technology.

Based on evolutionary game theory, this study divides operational scenarios into pure market and government-regulated operations, thereby constructing collaborative green innovation relationships in different scenarios. Through evolutionary analysis of various entities in different operational scenarios, combined with numerical simulation analysis, we compared the evolutionary stability of collaborative green innovation behavior in supply chains with and without government regulation.

Under pure market mechanisms, the higher the green innovation capability, the stronger the willingness of various entities to collaborate in green innovation. However, under government regulation, a decrease in green innovation capability increases the willingness to collaborate with various entities. Environmental tax rates and green subsidy levels promote collaborative innovation in the short term but inhibit collaborative innovation in the long term, indicating that policy orientation has a short-term impact. Additionally, the greater the penalty for collaborative innovation breaches, the stronger the intention to engage in collaborative green innovation in the supply chain.

We introduce the factors influencing green innovation capability and social benefits in the study of the innovation behavior of upstream and downstream enterprises, expanding the research field of collaborative innovation in the supply chain. By comparing the collaborative innovation behavior of various entities in the supply chain under a pure market scenario and government regulations, this study provides a new perspective for analyzing the impact of corresponding government policies on the green innovation capability of upstream and downstream enterprises, enriching theoretical research on green innovation in the supply chain to some extent.

This work aims to attempt an in-depth study of the link between relationship benefits and store loyalty, examining the moderating role of the retailer’s degree of innovation in these relations.

An equations model has been contrasted based on 820 valid individual structured questionnaires administered to consumers of 13 trade names in four retail distribution sectors (food, textile, electronics and household goods).

The results provide evidence of the positive influence of relationship benefits on store loyalty and in particular the benefits stemming from trust. The links between social and special treatment benefits in relation to loyalty are, however, significantly stronger in the less innovative establishments.

This paper provides evidence of the moderating role of innovation on the relationship between social benefits and special treatment benefits and loyalty.

Technology may be used as a differentiation tool. The retailer should concentrate its investments on information and communications technology solutions that contribute to enhance the customer experience at the point of sale without neglecting the social dimension to increase the benefits of trust and ultimately, customer loyalty.

The paper provides an in-depth examination of the retail innovation variable which is scarcely analysed in the literature, offering support for the idea that innovation at the point of sale plays a moderating role in the links between relational benefits and customer loyalty.

Research suggests that innovation plays a key role in creating a competitive edge and business survival in highly competitive industries like retail. Despite the importance of innovation in retail establishments, very limited efforts have been made so far to study how innovation influences consumer behavior in retail establishments. This paper aims to identify the impact of relationship benefits (i.e. confidence, social and special treatment benefits) on consumer’s loyalty with the retail store and examine the moderating effect of retailer innovation in these relationships.

To conduct this study, a sample comprised of 400 consumers of four retail sectors (i.e. household, electronics, textile and food) was chosen. The data were analyzed through partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) technique.

The findings of this research suggest a significant positive influence of confidence and special treatment benefits on consumer loyalty and that retail innovation moderates the link between relationship benefits and consumer loyalty.

This research contributes to the existing literature in the domain of retail customer loyalty by empirically testing the under-studied phenomenon of retail innovation with the help of contingency theory.

As buyers and suppliers seek to create value, they face the challenge of creating an environment that promotes coordination and information sharing and discourages opportunism. While the literature suggested dyadic mechanisms to create such an environment, this study focuses on ties beyond the buyer–supplier dyad. Specifically, close connections to one's partner's partners (CPP) are crucial in the realization of benefits for buyers and suppliers.

Drawing from embeddedness theory and governance theory, the authors developed a contingency framework to examine when CPP are beneficial or counterproductive considering two dyadic attributes – relational capital (RC) and partner dependence. Analyses were conducted using data from a dyadic survey complemented with archival data on 106 buyer–supplier relationships (BSRs).

The study reveals that CPP both help and hurt in the realization of benefits. Stark asymmetries exist between the impact of CPP on the buyer and supplier sides. For buyers, CPP exert a direct positive effect on operational and innovation benefits. For suppliers, the effect of CPP on operational and innovation benefits is contingent on buyer dependence and RC – CPP serves as a substitute for buyer dependence and RC. There are no such contingency effects for buyers. Further analysis identifies situations for suppliers when CPP hurt the realization of benefits.

The study highlights the importance of CPP to foster efficiency and innovation within BSRs and illustrates how their impact varies across contingency conditions and across the parties within a dyad.

The purpose of this paper is to look at the effect of profit sharing (PS) on the ability of the firm to take care of the environment.

In a large cross-section of French firms, the authors find strong associations between PS and various innovations with environmental benefits. With cross-sectional data from the Community Innovation Survey and FARE, the authors estimate simultaneous equations for these effects, with endogenous PS.

This relationship between PS and environmental innovation is plausible, since workers benefit more than outside owners from a better local environment. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this paper provides the first empirical evidence, so the results suggest PS supports environmental policy, in addition to its other, better known incentive benefits.

Further studies, using panel data, are needed.

Financial participation may be considered as an additional tool to protect the environment.

This is the first paper looking at the impact of PS on the ability of the firm to take care of the environment. In this critical period when policy makers are searching for ways to limit global warming and protect the environment, the authors have presented here the first evidence that financial participation helps to support these policies.

The high uncertainty of technological innovation in megaprojects brings great challenges to the R&D institution and also acts as a trigger for moral hazard. The incentive and supervision are effective means to improve the performance of innovation. The purpose of this paper is to propose appropriate incentive and supervision mechanisms to reduce information asymmetry and improve the efficiency of incentives. Suggestions on technological innovation are put forward to megaprojects management.

According to the principal-agent theory, the research develops incentive models under three states, i.e. information symmetry, information asymmetry and information asymmetry based on supervision mechanism. The Bayesian theory is employed to prove the effectiveness of the novel supervision method based on risk assessment.

The results indicate that under the information asymmetry, the incentive intensity is positively correlated with the social benefits coefficient, and negatively correlated with the patent benefits coefficient. The R&D effort and the owner's incentive intensity decline with the increase of information asymmetry. The supervision of risks can effectively reduce the degree of information asymmetry, and the higher the uncertainty of innovations, the more significant the effect of supervision is. As the supervision intensity increases, the incentive intensity, the R&D effort and the innovation output will increase. In addition, the R&D institutions with high innovation capability, low unit cost of R&D and low risk-aversion are more willing to make efforts to innovate.

This study fills the research gap on incentive and supervision of technological innovation in megaprojects. The externality of innovation benefits is considered in the model. The traditional incentive model is extended through the introduction of supervision. Furthermore, a novel supervision method based on risk assessment is proposed. The results validate the importance of risk management in technological innovation and provide a new insight for project management.

The purpose of this paper is to answer two research questions: what are the ERP resources and organizational complementary resources (OCRs) required to achieve each group of benefits? And on the basis of its resources, when should an organization invest more in ERP resources and/or OCRs so that the potential value of its ERP is realised?

Studying 12 organizations in different countries and validating the results with 8 consultants.

ERP benefits realization capability framework is developed; it shows that each group of benefits requires ERP resources (classified into features, attached technologies and information technology department competences) and OCRs (classified into practices, attitudes, culture, skills and organizational characteristics) and that leaping ahead to gain innovation benefits before being mature enough in realising a firm’s planning and automation capabilities could be a waste of time and effort.

It is qualitative study. It needs to be backed by quantitative studies to test the results.

Although the “P” in ERP stands for planning, many academics and practitioners still believe that ERP applies to automation only. This research spotlights that the ability to invest in ERP can increase the innovation and planning capabilities of the organization only if it is extended and grown at the right time and if it is supported by OCRs. It is not cost effective to push an organization to achieve all the benefits at the same time; rather, it is clear that an organization would not be able to enjoy a higher level of benefits until it achieves a significant number of lower-level benefits. Thus, investing in higher-level benefit assets directly after an ERP implementation, when there are no organizational capabilities available to use these assets, could be inefficient. Moreover, it could be stressful to users when they see plenty of new ERP resources without the ability to use them. Although it could be of slight benefit to introduce, for example, business intelligence to employees in the “stabilizing period” (Badewi et al., 2013), from the financial perspective, it is a waste of money since the benefits would not be realised as expected. Therefore, orchestrating ERP assets with the development of organizational capabilities is important for achieving the greatest effectiveness and efficiency of the resources available to the organization. This research can be used as a benchmark for designing the various blueprints required to achieve different groups of benefits from ERP investments.

This research addresses two novel questions: RQ1: what are the ERP resources and OCRs required to achieve the different kinds of ERP benefits? RQ2: when, and on what basis, should an organization deploy more resources to leverage the ERP business value?

Co-creation of knowledge offers significant opportunities for innovation. This chapter seeks to gain understanding of the process of co-creation of knowledge for innovation and public relations in multi-stakeholder projects by exploring current insights in academic literature. The research questions look at how co-creation of knowledge for innovation has been investigated in the scholarly literature; the roles of end-users; and the modes and challenges of end-user participation and in collaboration relating to communication.

The method of this chapter is a structured literature review, following a series of rigorous steps: a search of databases, analysis of 33 articles found, summarising relevant content using a data extraction table and a data extraction continuum as analysis tools to show the range of projects discussed in the literature to create a comprehensive overview.

The findings indicate that multi-stakeholder networks can be structured for different aims. In the articles found different types of projects were investigated. Four categories of projects were found: (1) co-creation projects benefiting one company; (2) co-creation projects benefiting business-to-business value chain networks; (3) co-creation projects benefiting public entities; and (4) co-creation projects benefiting innovation network stakeholders.

Complexity is highest for multiple stakeholder co-creation projects benefiting innovation network stakeholders, where the roles between stakeholders are fluid and changing constantly. Solving common issues motivates the stakeholders to collaborate and build trust. Open innovation environments may facilitate communication and interaction.

Co-creation of knowledge requires intensive collaboration. Knowing the main challenges to address will help the functioning of co-creation collaboration networks and their public relations.