Innovation, organizational learning, and performance

Literature examines the relationship between innovation and performance and asserts a positive relationship between organizational learning and both performance and innovation. However, few empirical studies analyze these relationships together. This article explores those relationships using SEM with data from 451 Spanish firms. The findings show that both variables — organizational learning and innovation — contribute positively to business performance, and that organizational learning affects innovation. Another finding of this study is that size and age of the firm, industry and environmental turbulence moderate these relations.     

Acquisitions in a Patent Contest Model with Large and Small Firms

Big companies and small innovation factories possess different advantages in a patent contest. While large firms typically have better access to product markets, small firms often have a superior R&D efficiency. These distinct advantages immediately lead to the question of cooperations between firms. In this paper, we model a patent contest with heterogeneous firms. In a pre-contest acquisition game large firms bid sequentially for small firms to combine respective advantages. Sequential bidding allows the first large firms to bid strategically to induce a reaction of its competitor. For high efficiencies both large firms prefer to acquire immediately leading to a symmetric market structure. For low efficiencies strategic waiting of the first large firm leads to an asymmetric market structure even though the initial situation is symmetric. We also discuss two different timing setups of the acquisition stage. In all setups, acquisitions increase the chances for a successful innovation.     

Do Leveraged Firms Underinvest in Corporate Social Responsibility? Evidence from Health and Safety Programs in U.S. Firms

The explosion of health-related costs in U.S. firms over more than a decade is a huge concern for managers. The initiation of Health and Safety (H&;S) programs at the firm level is an adequate Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) initiative to contain this evolution. However, in spite of their documented efficiency, firms underinvest in those programs. This appears as a puzzle for health economists. In this paper, we uncover a strong negative relation of financial leverage to the implementation of H&;S programs. The negative impact of debt on investment and CSR activities is generally interpreted as an efficient disciplinary effect of debt on managers. H&;S are particularly well suited to revisit this evidence, given their strong profitability and homogeneity across firms. Very interestingly, the negative effect is stronger for firms with high free cash flows, for which debt is used to prevent overinvestment. This strongly suggests that debt, while disciplining managers, also discourages investments which are valuable both for firms and society.     

Why implementing corporate innovation is so difficult

While corporate innovation is commonly touted as a viable strategy for sustaining superior performance in today's corporations, the successful implementation of corporate innovation remains quite elusive for most companies. A recent Accenture survey of more than 500 executives revealed that over 50% report a poor innovation process, while fewer than 18% believe their own innovation strategy provides a competitive advantage for the firm. While many causal reasons can be offered, our research on corporate entrepreneurship and innovation demonstrates there are four key implementation issues that most corporations are not recognizing or responding to effectively. Effective recognition of and response to these four implementation issues may represent the difference between those companies that create a successful corporate innovation strategy and those that do not. The four issues are: (1) understanding what type of innovation is being sought, (2) coordinating managerial roles, (3) effectively using operating controls, and (4) properly training and preparing individuals. Together, these four issues—if understood and appropriately addressed—help create an effective innovative ecosystem within the organization.     

Choosing the Right Metrics to Maximize Profitability and Shareholder Value

There is an ever-present need for managers to justify marketing expenditures to the firm. This can only be done when we can establish a direct link between marketing metrics and future customer value and firm performance. In this article, we assess the marketing literature with regard to marketing metrics. Subsequently, we develop a framework that identifies key metrics that firms should focus on that can give a firm a better picture of how they got to where they are now and insights towards how they can continue to grow into the future. We then identify several organizational challenges that need to be addressed in order for firms to build the capabilities of collecting the right data, measuring the right metrics, and linking those metrics to customer value and firm performance. Finally, we offer guidelines for future research with regard to marketing metrics to help firms establish successful marketing strategies, measure marketing effectiveness, and justify marketing expenditures to top management.     

Facilitators of organizational innovation: The role of life-cycle stage

One of the most serious challenges facing an entrepreneurial company, particularly a high-technology firm, is knowing how to manage innovation as the organization evolves. Macro-level facilitators/inhibitors of innovation—i.e., organizational and environmental conditions of a firm that promote or restrain innovation such as the structure of an organization, its incentive system, resources provided by its environment, or its ways of analyzing firm-external information—and their relationship to the innovativeness of the firm are considered in this study.Two basic arguments have been put forward previously as to why the innovativeness of an organization may change as it evolves. First, it has been suggested that facilitators of innovation change over time and so will firm innovativeness. That is, the relationship between the facilitator and innovation stays unchanged but the facilitator itself is transformed, causing changes in firm innovativeness as it develops. For instance, it has been suggested that mature firms become less innovative because their structure becomes overly formalized to perform other functions more efficiently, which then stifles innovative processes. Second, other researchers have proposed that the relationship between a facilitator and innovation changes as firms evolve; for instance a formal structure may support innovation in a younger firm because it allows the entrepreneur to focus her energy, whereas it may suppress innovation later since it inhibits an innovator's interaction with other environments. The results of our analysis, using data from 326 U.S. firms in different stages of their development and involved in many kinds of high-tech industries, support the second theory.However, the results for the relationships of the individual facilitators to innovation were not always as expected. We found that formally structured young firms were less innovative than informal ones and that in older organizations, formalization had no negative impact on innovation. This finding possibly can be explained with micro-level facilitators of innovation: younger firms may have more entrepreneurial personnel whose ability for innovation is more inhibited through a formal structure than the more “seasoned” employees in older, larger firms. However, this finding implies that the concern for formal structures with respect to firm innovativeness does not necessarily apply as typically assumed.Of similar significance was our finding with respect to the relationship between financial incentives and innovation. It has been suggested that younger rather than older firms use incentives such as equity to encourage an innovative environment. Results of this research, however, show that innovation is associated with stock incentives especially in older firms. This may be an indication for older firms to use differentiated incentives that reflect the individual's contribution to the firm to retain innovative personnel, whereas start-ups might rely on the excitement of working in a new venture as an incentive for innovative behavior.More in line with expectations were the results for how firms process external information. Environmental scanning and data analysis were positively associated with innovation, and this more so in older firms, presumably because they have become more remote from developments outside the organization. This result confirms the notion that much innovation by a firm is initiated externally. However, the results also indicate that the conditions of the environment itself are of lesser importance to firm innovativeness than the firm's active pursuit of information from its environment. An often discussed implication of these findings is that the boundaries of a firm must be permeable, at least from the outside in, and systematic information gathering from customers, competition, research institutions, etc. may be necessary to the success of a firm that depends on its product development. This seems especially important for older firms.As expected, the centralization of power in an organization also affected innovation. Centralization correlated positively with innovation in new ventures and negatively in older firms. This indicates the importance of the entrepreneur and strong leader in a start-up. It also suggests, though, that as the firm matures, this person has to give up some of her control and may have to relinquish the job at the head of the organization to someone else.Finally, there are some more general implications of this work to managers involved with organizational innovation. First, reliance on past experience may be detrimental to future performance. Whereas a firm evolves through different stages, means that have facilitated innovation earlier may be detrimental to it now or tomorrow, and vice versa. Second, copying successful strategies for innovation from other firms may not necessarily work—not because their implementation was worse but because the conditions of the other firm, for instance its evolutionary stage or its micro-level facilitators, were different.Researchers who study innovation should consider including life-cycle stage as a potential moderating variable. Factors that facilitate innovation at some point during an organization's evolution actually hinder it in another. Also, factors that were unimportant to innovation at the inception of a firm may facilitate it in later stages. This study supports the conclusion that the consideration of contingency factors, such as life-cycle stage, may enhance the development of a theory of organizational innovation.     

The Pricing Processes of Exporters

Abstract

Within the realm of research regarding the successful implementation of exporting strategies lies the often neglected topic area of export pricing. This subject has received relatively little attention over the years for a number of reasons, including a lack of formal export pricing theory and a reluctance among international managers to discuss their pricing practices. Concurrently, what research that has been conducted on this issue has been largely undertaken from the single country perspective. Future research, both exploratory and empirical, is called for.

This study attempts to define what export pricing strategies and processes are currently being utilized by exporting firms, what influences the adoption of these strategies, and how these strategies differ across cultures. Through a series of interviews with export managers from U.S. and Mexican manufacturing firms, an exploratory case study analysis was conducted to address four major issues, namely (1) what are the export pricing processes of the firm, (2) how do stated export objectives relate to these strategies, (3) what are the perceived barriers to the successful implementation of pricing practices, and (4) how do these factors differ between Mexican and U.S. exporters.     

Unpacking the impact of innovation ambidexterity on export performance: Microfoundations and infrastructure investment

When designing and managing routines for their innovation activities firms often face a challenge. Either they can concentrate their efforts on one approach i.e. exploring new ideas or exploiting its existing capabilities, or they can try to do both, i.e. becoming ambidextrous. In this paper, we aim to explore first the effect of exploration, exploitation and ambidexterity on export performance and second the moderating role of investment in infrastructure. Using firm-level data from the UK’s innovation survey (CIS) we find that both exploration and exploitation improve export performance. We also find that investment in infrastructure weakens this relationship. Counterintuitively, we find that ambidexterity has a negative effect on export performance, and that it is negatively moderated by investment in infrastructure. We use microfoundations arguments (the routines firms employ and the actions taken by individuals and groups within them to shape their exporting capabilities) to explain how efforts to achieve ambidexterity can improve export performance.     

Virtual customer environment design and organizational innovation: An exploration–exploitation perspective

ABSTRACT

Many firms are developing virtual customer environments (VCEs) that provide customers the opportunity to submit, discuss, and vote for new ideas. Some studies show that VCEs promote the development of incremental improvements in existing products and services (i.e., exploitative innovation). However, other studies find that customers working in VCEs will often suggest radical ideas for brand new products and services (i.e., exploratory innovation). Exploration and exploitation are often incompatible; thus, we address this paradox by investigating whether the design of a firm’s VCE architecture is related to the firm’s exploratory innovation activity and exploitative innovation activity. Using matched data collected from VCEs and managers, we show that two-way information exchange VCE tools facilitate exploratory innovation, and one-way information exchange VCE tools enhance exploitative innovation. We also find that absorptive capacity positively moderates the latter relationship. Our findings have implications for research and practice in VCEs, organizational innovation, and organizational learning.     

The internationalisation of family firms: case histories of two Chinese overseas family firms

Internationalisation is an important part of the business history of both non-family and family firms. The discourse regarding both is based on the mainstream microeconomic theories of the firm. This article, through examining the case histories of two successful Chinese overseas family firms, shows that explanations of internationalisation need often to venture beyond the confines of existing theories, especially where contextual factors are influential in shaping decision-making. The experiences of these firms point to the role of the state as a major contextual factor. The case history approach is the most relevant in this and other instances where context matters.     

Open innovation requires integrated competition-community ecosystems: Lessons learned from civic open innovation

Open innovation has received substantial business attention as a means of providing firms in hyper-competitive environments with the ability to create a stream of new products and services. For open innovation, organizing external sources correctly is a critical capability; current literature suggests that external sources should be organized either as collaborative communities or as competitive markets. While firms have generally been slow to adopt open innovation, many cities in the U.S. and Europe have been quick to embrace it—providing needed field-based experience on how to organize external sources. Based on our examination of six cities opening their data for innovation, we found that while cities often started with one or the other approach to organizing their external sources, each approach was inadequate in ways that could potentially be addressed by the addition of the other approach. Thus, we conclude with an integrated approach in which the needs of the entire ecosystem of sources and supporters of innovation are organized to address both competitive and community needs.     

Open innovation: Are absorptive and desorptive capabilities complementary?

While recent studies in open innovation emphasize the synergies between in-bound and out-bound knowledge flow, empirical results are inconsistent. In this study, we argue that in order to engage simultaneously in both “buying” and “selling” activities, firms need to develop specific capabilities to manage knowledge inflows and outflows, e.g., absorptive and desorptive capacities. We build on key aspects of open innovation and knowledge management literature, arguing that absorptive and desorptive capacity are complementary rather than substitute, and engaging simultaneously in both activities should allow firms to develop their financial performance. We test our model using a sample of 541 New Zealand firms that are deeply involved in international collaborations and find empirical evidence that absorptive and desorptive capacity are not independent and the balanced development of these capabilities has higher impacts on firm’s performance. Further, our findings indicate that technology licensing capability is not a stand-alone task, and its interplay with absorptive capacity plays a key role in the development of a firm’s performance.     

International new venture performance: Role of international entrepreneurial culture,ambidextrous innovation,and dynamic marketing capabilities

International new ventures (INVs) contend with environmental dynamism in global markets, compelling firms to enhance their innovation and marketing capabilities. While the INV literature is growing, it is not informative as to how INVs develop and utilize dynamic capabilities to overcome resource-constraints to enhance performance. We utilize the concept of international entrepreneurship culture (IEC) to better understand how INVs advance innovation and dynamic marketing capabilities to succeed in their internationalization activities. Building on the dynamic capabilities view (DCV), we empirically examine the relationships among IEC, ambidextrous innovation, dynamic marketing capabilities, and INV performance under varying levels environmental dynamism. The findings highlight that IEC influences both ambidextrous innovation and dynamic marketing capabilities; and, together, these link to INV performance gains. Furthermore, this research finds support for the mediating effects of ambidextrous innovation and dynamic marketing capabilities in the IEC – INV performance relationship. Additionally, the results indicate an international entrepreneurial culture is of greater significance in developing ambidextrous innovation when environmental dynamism is present. The study context is a sample of 286 high-technology INVs from India, a large and dynamic emerging market.     

Networks and Local Environmental Characteristics in the Survival of New Firms

This study seeks firstly to clarify which networks at start-up situation and early in life influence the survival of new firms. Secondly the study examines regional differences in the success of new firms. The subjects were firms which had closed down during their fourth to sixth year of operations, and they were compared with firms continuing in business. The results indicate, firstly, that it is networks internal to firm that create competitive advantage, innovation and efficiency. Secondly, management based on working in groups was emphasized in the firms that continued in business. In a typical family enterprise, ownership, management and family are united in a single entity. In other types of firms networks are seen as participating in the strategic management of the firm. Thirdly, close-downs were often caused by uncontrolled risks. A firm which fails after a successful start-up often tends to grow rapidly in the beginning, leaning on its product idea, but this rate of growth is too high from the viewpoint of the financing and the management of the firm. In firms which closed the growth objectives were too ambitions compared with the resources of the entrepreneur.     

Managers' mobility,trade performance,and wages

Knowledge is key to the competitiveness and success of an organization and in particular of a firm. Firms and their managers acquire knowledge via a variety of different channels which are often difficult to track down and quantify. By matching employer–employee data with trade data at the firm level we show that the export experience acquired by managers in previous firms leads their current firm toward higher export performance, and commands a sizeable wage premium for the manager. Moreover, export knowledge is decisive when it is market-specific: managers with experience related to markets served by their current firm receive an even higher wage premium; firms are more likely to enter markets where their managers have experience; exporters are more likely to stay in those markets, and their sales are on average higher. Our findings are robust to controlling for unobserved heterogeneity and, more broadly, endogeneity and indicate that managers' export experience is a first-order feature in the data with an impact on a firm's export performance that is, for example, at least as strong as that of firm productivity.     

Market valuation of marketing alliances in East Asia: Korean evidence

This paper investigates firm value created by non-equity marketing alliance announcements of Korean listed firms in terms of stock price reactions to the announcements. We find evidence that on the Korean stock market, the announcements of marketing alliances produce significant positive abnormal returns, which reflect an increase in firm value, around the announcement date. This suggests that firm managers need to seek for various marketing alliances not only for an effective competition in competitive business environments but also for enhancement in shareholder wealth. The increase in firm value has inverse relationship with firm's size and growth opportunity. In particular, marketing alliances with firms based in G7-countries create greater firm value than ones with firms based in the home country. Our study provides investors, firm managers, and academics with valuable implications of an importance of marketing alliances for valuation of firms in other Asian countries as well as in Korea.     

The tradeoff between firm size and diversity in the pursuit of technological progress

Conclusion Our analysis lends support to both sides of the debate concerning the optimal firm size for achieving technical advance. It provides a basis for why industries composed of many small firms will tend to exhibit greater diversity in the approaches to innovation pursued, and why greater diversity will contribute to more rapid technological change. It also provides a basis for why industries populated by larger firms will achieve a more rapid rate of technical advance on the approaches to innovation that are pursued. These arguments together suggest that a tradeoff exists between the appropriability advantage of large size and the advantages of diversity that accrue from numerous small firms. Our analysis has been more appreciative than rigorous and, indeed, often explicity speculative. While we attempted to raise important questions, our framework requires more structuring before we can be confident about any of our conclusions. Even in its inchoate form, however, our analysis demonstrates that much needs to be done before the current debate about firm size can seriously inform policy. If we accept the plausibility of our basic framework, it focuses attention on a range of issues and questions. The fundamental premise of our analysis is that firm capabilities and perceptions differ within industries. This premise is not, however, widely reflected in analyses of industry behavior and performance, which typically take some representative firm as their starting point. Indeed, the analytic utility of our particular premise deserves scrutiny. Are differences in firm capabilities and perceptions as critical to explaining the industry patterns in innovative activity and performance as we suggest? Do these differences persist? Is our abstract characterization of these differences and their effects on innovative activity up to the task of providing a basis for policy?These intraindustry differences in capabilities and perceptions underpin the hypothesized relationship in our framework between the number of firms within an industry and the number of distinct technological activities pursued by the industry as a whole. Surely this hypothesis should be tested. To establish the relationship between numbers of firms and technological diversity, we also made two important assumptions, which themselves should be examined. First, we assumed that firms independently decide upon which approaches to innovation to pursue.This assumption precludes the clustering of firms around innovative activities due to imitation, a phenomenon highlighted by Nelson (1981) and Scott (1991). To the degree that innovative activities yield relatively fast, public results, the assumption may be suspect. While our evidence indirectly suggests that such clustering may not be critical for explaining innovative activity in a wide range of industries, more research would be helpful. Second, we assumed that the number of approaches to innovation pursued by firms is independent of their size, implying large and small firms will tend to pursue the same number of approaches. This assumption probably does not apply to the smallest firms within an industry, particularly to the extent that such firms are often not full line manufacturing firms. Does it apply, however, to the medium to large firms that account for the preponderance of R&D and economic activity inthe manufacturing sector? While our evidence again provides indirect support for this claim, more empirical and theoretical research is indicated.We also made other claims and assumptions that deserve further attention. For example, we argued that greater technological diversity stimulates technical advance and provides gross increments to social welfare. Assuming it exists, the mechanism linking diversity and technical advance has never been examined empirically and is not obvious. Our assumption that expected firm growth due to innovation is increamental played an important role in permitting usto hypothesize an appropriability advantage of large size. Again, both the assumption and its alleged effect on innovative activity are worth examining. Finally, we also need to test whether the relationship between R&D and firm size within industries depends upon appropriability conditions, particularly upon the extent to which firms can sell their innovations or grow rapidly due to innovation. In conclusion, this litany of reasonable but unsubstantiated assumptions and arguments should make clear that this paper is only a modest beginning of a daunting research agenda.

---

     

Growing profitable or growing from profits: Putting the horse in front of the cart?

Firm growth is almost universally portrayed as a good thing, and is commonly used as a measure of success. Applying resource-based reasoning, we argue that growth is often not a sign of sound development. Specifically, we hypothesize that firms which grow without first securing high levels of profitability tend to be less successful in subsequent periods compared to firms that first secure high profitability at low growth. Empirical tests using two large, longitudinal data sets confirm that the profitable low growth firms are more likely to reach the desirable state of high growth and high profitability. In addition, they have a decreased risk of ending up performing poorly on both performance dimensions compared with firms starting from a high growth, low-profitability configuration. The results suggest that academics, managers, investors and policy-makers may benefit by adopting a more nuanced view of firm growth that explicitly incorporates its intricate relationship with profitability.     

Performance expectations of small firms considering radical product innovation

Performance expectations influence business decisions such as investment decisions and demand for supplies, particularly in small firms with limited strategic planning. Despite widespread use of performance expectations by firms and governments when making sales forecasts and economic outlooks, surprisingly little research exists about how small firms form performance expectations. This paper contributes to reduce this knowledge gap by analyzing performance expectations of small firm managers operating in markets with radical product innovations. This paper proposes a model and hypotheses, which explain performance expectations of small firm managers based on firms' current success, radical product innovation, and variables that indicate firms' ability to respond to customer needs for radical product innovation. Data from 200 decision-makers in a real decision-making context support the model. The results show that performance expectations in small firms are only to a limited extent a naïve extrapolation of current success: radical product innovation and small firm's ability to respond to customer needs for radical product innovation influence performance expectations.     

Barriers to Innovation among Spanish Manufacturing SMEs

Innovation is widely recognized as a key factor in the competitiveness of nations and firms. Small firms that do not embrace innovation within their core business strategy run the risk of becoming uncompetitive because of obsolete products and processes. Innovative firms are a perquisite for a dynamic and competitive economy.
This paper reports on the results of a study that examined barriers to firm innovation among a sample of 294 managers of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in Spain. The study examined the relation between (1) product, process, and management innovation and (2) 15 obstacles to innovation, which can limit a firm's ability to remain competitive and profitable. Findings of the study show that barriers have a differential impact on the various types of innovation; product, process, and management innovation are affected differently by the different barriers. The most significant barriers are associated with costs, whereas the least significant are associated with manager/employee resistance. Additionally, the results demonstrate that the costs associated with innovation have proportionately greater impact on small than on larger firms.
The findings can be used in the development of public policy aimed at supporting and encouraging the innovation among SMEs in Spain. Government policies that encourage and support innovation among all firms, especially small firms, can help countries remain competitive in a global market. Public policy that encourages innovation can enable firms to remain competitive and survive, both of which have direct implications for employment and a country's economic viability. The results may also be insightful for managers who are attempting to encourage innovation. Understanding barriers can assist managers in fostering an innovative culture by supporting new ideas or by avoiding an attitude that creates resistance to new ideas.