Employees' Innovative Behavior in Social Context: A Closer Examination of the Role of Organizational Care

A substantial body of research has examined the antecedents of innovation in organizational settings, but our current understanding of how social aspects of the work environment influence the innovative behavior of employees remains underdeveloped. One of these social aspects connected to the theme of “doing well by doing good” concerns organizational care, with scholars examining how actions centered on promoting employee well‐being may result in pro‐organizational outcomes. The purpose of this study is to present a conceptual analysis of the intricate relationship between organizational care and employees' innovative behavior by detailing key mediating mechanisms and conditional factors. This research will combine insights from multiple theories and literatures, most notably self‐determination theory, social exchange theory, and the literatures on organizational care, work motivation, and innovation. The proposed multilevel model clarifies how organizational care affects the creative, complex, and mundane elements of employees' innovative behavior through its effect on the motivational constructs of intrinsic motivation, identified motivation, and introjected obligation feelings, respectively. Moreover, the model highlights the potential dark sides of organizational care that managers must consider when designing and implementing caring policies and practices. Specifically, it clarifies how the effect of organizational care on employees' innovative behavior may depend on their subjective perceptions of care intrusiveness and care insincerity. As such, this study responds to calls for rich and nuanced conceptual research in the innovation field, especially concerning the role of employees' social work environment in motivating their innovative behavior. Important theoretical and practical implications of this conceptual analysis will be discussed, and valuable directions for future research will be outlined.     

What we will do versus what we can do: The relative effects of unit‐level NPD motivation and capability

Although a firm's innovation performance has been commonly attributed to its innovative capability, in a study of 102 Chinese automobile assemblers, we find that employees' collective motivation for new product development (NPD) is more important than NPD capability in determining firms' innovation performance. This finding suggests that researchers need to simultaneously consider both unit‐level capability and unit‐level motivation in studying the mechanisms that drive innovation. Furthermore, our results indicate that a firm's strategic orientation focusing on NPD affects its employees' collective NPD motivation and NPD capability through relevant, mediating HRM practices. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Is Boreout a Threat to Frontline Employees' Innovative Work Behavior?

With the recognition that innovation is the lifeblood of competitive firms, researchers have investigated multiple antecedents of employees' innovative work behaviors. Most studies focus on supportive work conditions, work requirements, or even high work challenges as drivers of innovative work behavior as the extent to which frontline employees (FLEs) generate new problem‐solving ideas and transform these into uses during the service encounter. This study focuses instead on a lack of resources at the service encounter. Specifically, boreout is a negative psychological state of low work‐related arousal, manifested in three main forms: a crisis of meaning at work, job boredom, and crisis of growth. According to the conservation of resources theory, these three dimensions of job boreout as lack of resources draw energy from FLEs and thus, likely affect innovative work behavior. Data from 142 FLEs and their customers confirm that these dimensions of boreout affect FLEs' innovative work behavior, though in varying ways. A crisis of meaning at work and crisis of growth both impede innovative work behavior, but job boredom has no effect. Furthermore, support provided by customers moderates the relationships of these three boreout dimensions with innovative work behavior in unique ways.     

Thematic Thinking and Individual Performance in Research and Development

Individuals differ in their preference for processing information on the basis of taxonomic, feature‐based similarity, or thematic, relation‐based similarity. These differences, which have been investigated in a recently emerging research stream in cognitive psychology, affect innovative behavior and thus constitute an important antecedent of individual performance in research and development (R&D) that has been overlooked so far in the literature on innovation management. To fill this research gap, survey and test data from the employees of a multinational information technology services firm are used to examine the relationship between thematic thinking and R&D professionals' individual performance. A moderated mediation model is applied to investigate the proposed relationships of thematic thinking and individual‐level performance indicators. Results show a positive relationship between thematic thinking and innovativeness, as well as individual job performance. While the results do not support the postulated moderation of the innovativeness–job performance relationship by employees' political skill, they show that the relationship between thematic thinking and job performance is fully mediated by R&D professionals' innovativeness. The present study is thus the first to reveal a positive relationship between thematic thinking and innovative performance.     

Managerial Political Behavior in Innovation Portfolio Management: A Sensegiving and Sensebreaking Process

By applying formalized innovation portfolio management systems, firms seek to ensure an alignment of their goals and strategy with their employees' different abilities, actions, and outcomes. However, research indicates that nonrational, political behavior also determines formalized innovation portfolio management decision‐making processes. Research on political behavior in respect of innovation portfolio management usually conceptualizes political behavior as a set of self‐serving activities, such as negotiation, bargaining, coalition building, and acquiring power, aimed at protecting, maintaining, or promoting an actor's self‐interest and power. Consequently, extant research tends to focus on political behavior's dysfunctional impacts on decision‐making processes and their subsequent outcomes. This paper challenges this negativity bias by exploring a novel, neutral specification of political behavior and its relation to innovation portfolio management decision‐making processes. By conducting an automotive industry case study focusing on the innovation portfolio management decision‐making processes, the paper analyzed the data from 43 interviewees. The conceptual model shows that managers' political capabilities determine their ability to behave politically. According to the results, political behavior comprises the activities that prepare the stage and orchestrate others in order to form a political coalition. Furthermore, results show that political behavior functions as a sensegiving and a sensebreaking process, with managers seeking to shape an innovation project's understanding according to their interests and to influence portfolio decisions. The resulting novel specification of political behavior extends the construct's scope and validity by investigating their functional and dysfunctional aspects, and by indicating that a political sensemaking process complements formalized innovation portfolio management decision‐making processes.     

The Impact of a Creativity‐supporting Work Environment on a Firm's Product Innovation Performance

Many scholars and practitioners have suggested that a creativity‐supporting work environment contributes to a firm's product innovation performance. Although there is evidence that such an environment enhances innovative behavior at individual level, very few studies address the effect of a creativity‐supporting work environment on product innovation performance at firm level, and the results are inconsistent. This paper examines the relationship between a firm's creativity‐supporting work environment and a firm's product innovation performance in a sample of 103 firms. For measuring a firm's creativity‐supporting work environment, a comprehensive and creativity‐focused framework is used. The framework consists of 9 social‐organizational and 12 physical work environment characteristics that are likely to enhance employee creativity. These characteristics contribute to the firm's overall work environment that supports creativity. The firm's product innovation performance is defined by two distinct concepts: new product productivity (NP productivity), which is the extent to which the firm introduces new products to the market, and new product success (NP success), which is the percentage of the firm's sales from new products. In most firms, different knowledgeable informants provided the data for the variables. The results show that firms with creativity‐supporting work environments introduce more new products to the market (NP productivity), and have more NP success in terms of new product sales (NP success). NP productivity partly mediates the relationship between creativity‐supporting work environment and NP success. The mediation model shows that the two paths from a creativity‐supporting work environment to NP success are about equally important: the direct path between creativity‐supporting work environment and NP success has a coefficient of .22, and the coefficient of the indirect path via NP productivity is .23. The creativity‐supporting work environment framework can be used in managerial practice to enhance employee creativity for product innovation. It allows applying a flexible and broad approach by influencing both social‐organizational and physical characteristics of the work environment.     

Managing technology development teams – exploring the case of microsytems and nanosystems

New sensor and actuator concepts based on microelectromechanical systems (MEMS) and nanoelectromechanical systems (NEMS) are increasingly being developed from lab status toward commercialization. The associated technology development for the provision of improved functionalities and cost reduction often requires highly interdisciplinary development teams where scientists and engineers from different disciplines closely work together. Managing these teams is a key challenge for MEMS/NEMS organizations. This research examined eight technology developments in MEMS/NEMS in international companies. Based on in‐depth interviews with innovators, we explored the managerial aspects of development teams. We identified and discuss (1) leadership, (2) market, (3) team structure and culture, (4) innovation motivation, (5) innovation driver, (6) experience and know‐how, and (7) product vision and innovation strategy as key influences on teams in the early development phases of MEMS/NEMS. Our study reveals that integrative and manufacturing know‐how and capabilities are the most critical capacities to be developed by the team from the idea to the concept phase. The team's lived experience during long development times from 5 to 10 years or more may allow a fast response to changes from market and technology (e.g. materials and nanotechnology). The results indicate that the process of how know‐how and capabilities are created by the team is more important than the mere existence of specific expertise.     

Exploring the contribution of management innovation to the evolution of dynamic capabilities

Companies that find innovative ways to manage capabilities gain competitive advantages. The results of multiple case studies of capital goods manufacturing companies suggest that management innovation contributes to dynamic capabilities. The findings confirm the importance of sensing, seizing, and reconfiguring as dynamic capabilities. Management innovation differs in terms of whether it contributes to sensing, seizing, or reconfiguring. The findings describe issues of management innovation, such as key change agents and utilization (motivation, invention, implementation, as well as theorizing and labeling), which facilitate sensing, seizing, and reconfiguring. Maintaining capability-driven competitive advantages is not limited to the innovation of products and services, but should also address management innovation that drives dynamic capabilities. The present study relies on a novel conceptualization of dynamic capabilities through management innovation. This conceptualization advances theory-building on the issue of dynamic capabilities.     

Championship Behaviors and Innovations Success: An Empirical Investigation of University Spin‐Offs*

Despite the flurry of scholarly research on champions, no prior article has explicitly addressed how different dimensions of championship behavior actually contribute to innovation success. In this article, based on an extensive literature review, the authors argue that champions display four behaviors, namely (1) pursuing innovative ideas, (2) network building, (3) persisting under adversity, and (4) taking responsibility for the idea. The authors use data from 123 university spin‐offs to test proposed linear and curvilinear relationships between the four behaviors and an objective measure of innovation success, namely a longitudinal measure of sales growth. The results indicate that network building has the desired positive relationship with sales performance. Surprisingly, pursuing the innovative idea is not related to sales growth. Furthermore, the present study also reveals some dysfunctional effects of champion behaviors. Persisting under adversity and taking responsibility have the hypothesized inverted‐U relationship with sales growth. The present study provides a more refined discussion of the benefits and dangers of championing behaviors. Our results show that linking technology to markets can be planned and controlled only to a very limited extent even if champions are working hard to sell the idea to potential customers. Moreover, any new idea is often competing with existing products and pursuing such ideas may result in opposition to the idea. In contrast, network building has the desired positive relationship with innovation success. Effective championing behavior keeps an innovative idea alive by mobilizing support and building coalitions around the idea with critical individuals or important third parties. Moreover, this study challenges the widespread “heroic” discussion of championing as fundamentally positive “across the board.” The results show that persisting under adversity and taking responsibility are desirable up to some levels. Beyond such critical levels, these two champion behaviors may actually become detrimental to the innovation process. Being too persistent in the face of adversity or taking too much responsibility for the innovative idea might undermine the power of the champion's justifications for an innovation and thereby increase resistance to change. An “over‐performing” champion may interpret opposing communications as an unwarranted and injurious response. By taking overmuch responsibility for the innovative undertaking, the champion is likely to discourage contributions from other team members who see no valuable opportunity to bring their expertise and knowledge to the idea.     

Intrafirm Knowledge Transfer and Employee Innovative Behavior: The Role of Total and Balanced Knowledge Flows

Research on intrafirm knowledge transfer has generally found a positive impact of knowledge inflows on the innovation of an organizational unit. However, the role of knowledge outflows during knowledge transfer is less clear. This paper argues that knowledge outflows influence innovation through a self‐learning mechanism and a fairness assessment mechanism, and play a unique and important role on team innovation. Based on this new understanding on knowledge outflows, it is necessary to examine the impacts of inflows and outflows simultaneously in innovation research. This paper expresses the sum and difference of knowledge inflows and outflows as total and balanced knowledge flows. A theoretical model is proposed to examine the distinct and synergistic effects of total and balanced knowledge flows on employees' innovative behavior of an organizational unit. The model was tested on 148 retail units of an apparel firm based on survey responses from both shop managers and staff. Results showed that total and balanced flows have independent direct effects and a synergistic effect on employee innovative behavior: employees of a unit had the highest levels of innovative behavior when knowledge flows were high and balanced at the same time. This paper contributes to the literature by taking into account both the direction and magnitude of knowledge transfer to examine team innovation.     

Brand Community Members as a Source of Innovation

Brand community members have a strong interest in the product and in the brand. They usually have extensive product knowledge and engage in product‐related discussions; they support each other in solving problems and generating new product ideas. Therefore, brand communities can be a valuable source of innovation. So far, little is known about the member's ability and willingness to participate in a company's innovation process. How does passion for the brand, affiliation to the brand community, and trust in the brand affect the willingness to engage in a company's innovation process? What is the effect of brand passion on brand knowledge and on domain‐specific skills, which are considered important prerequisites for qualified and creative contributions to new product development? What is the effect of personality traits on the willingness and ability to engage in new product development? This research addresses these questions, which are interesting for managers who are thinking about opening up their innovation process and collaborating with brand communities and for academics exploring the opportunities of online communities for new product development and trying to develop promising new forms of open innovation networks. Drawing on brand community literature, relationship theory, creativity theory, and personality traits research, this paper introduces a comprehensive set of antecedents affecting brand community members' willingness to engage in new product development. It is argued that consumer creativity, identification with the brand community, and brand‐specific emotions and attitudes (passion and trust) as well as brand knowledge are important determinants of consumers' willingness to share their knowledge with producers. The paper also identifies two personality traits (i.e., extraversion and openness) that have significant influence on brand passion, creativity, and identification with the community. The hypotheses are tested on a sample of 550 members of the Volkswagen Golf GTI car community. Structural equation modeling was used to test the relationship among the constructs. Though a positive disposition toward a brand may be advantageous for consumers that are willing to interact with producers during new product development, our results show that it is consumer interest in innovations and the innovative process that drives them to get involved. Further, brand community members with more knowledge and more innovative skills seem to be more willing to contribute than less qualified community members.     

Lighting the way or stealing the shine? An examination of the duality in star scientists' effects on firm innovative performance

Do star employees enhance or constrain the innovative performance of an organization? Using data from 456 biotechnology firms between 1973 and 2003, we highlight the duality of the effects that stars have on firm performance. We show that while stars positively affect firms' productivity, their presence constrains the emergence of other innovative leaders in an organization. We find that firm productivity and innovative leadership among non‐stars in a firm are greatest when a star has broad expertise and collaborates frequently. We offer cross‐disciplinary insights into the role of human capital as a source of competitive advantage, suggesting that the value of human capital in a firm is contingent on the mutual dependence inherent in high‐status employees' relationships with other individuals in a firm. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Why co‐creation experience matters? Creative experience and its impact on the quantity and quality of creative contributions

This article introduces ‘virtual design competitions’ as a new means of opening up the innovation process and enriching the companies, ‘design‐ideas’ by utilizing the creativity of a multiplicity of external designers and enthused consumers all over the world. The ‘Swarovski Enlightened^? jewellery design competition’, explored in this study, demonstrates the enormous potential of virtual co‐creation platforms. It further highlights the importance of the co‐creation experience and its impact on the quantity and quality of designs submitted. First, we introduce the idea of virtual co‐creation platforms and the requirements on the design of such a platform. Second, we explore the impact of the co‐creation experience on the content contributed by participants. Our study shows that co‐creation experience significantly impacts the number of contributions by consumers as well as the quality of submitted designs. Our paper contributes to a better theoretic understanding of the impact of a participant's perceived autonomous, enjoyable, and competent experience, as well as participants' perceived sense of community on their experience. From a managerial perspective, it provides guidance in designing successful idea and design competitions. While innovation managers may be interested in creative contributions, for participants, it is the experience which matters. Fully featured community platforms rather than single idea submission websites are required to attract creative users to submit their ideas and designs.     

When Will Employees Embrace Managers' Technological Innovations? The Mediating Effects of Employees' Perceptions of Fairness on Their Willingness to Accept Change and its Legitimacy

Innovation researchers have thoroughly discussed how attitudes toward innovation influence people's intentions to use it. Most prior research tried to explore employees' acceptance of technological change through the lens of change initiators; however, using a manager's or the “great man's” perspective to explain change recipients' reaction to an innovation is indirect and peripheral. This paper argues that innovation should be studied directly from the perspective of change recipients, and that their perceptions of fairness in the wake of an innovation become a key factor in their willingness to accept it. More specifically, this paper argues that the recipients' fairness perceptions mediate the impact of innovation characteristics (operationalized as “usefulness” and “ease of use”) and implementation approach on their acceptance and belief in the legitimacy of the innovation. Two studies investigated the hypothesized mediating effects of procedural fairness/outcome fairness. The field study was conducted in a real‐world technological innovation setting, but raised questions about whether the causal effect of the mediating model really existed. The scenario study was conducted in a semi‐experimental condition which had high internal validity and guaranteed the cause–effect relation. Hence, the research design of the two studies complemented each other. The multiple regression analyses using the criteria proposed by Baron and Kenny were used to test the mediating models in the paper. Moreover, both Sobel tests and bootstrapping methods were used to guarantee that the mediating paths do exist among the independent variables, mediators, and the dependent variables. Both the field study and the scenario study showed that most of our hypotheses were supported, and change recipients had strong psychological reactions to the innovation and how the innovation was implemented in terms of fairness perceptions. Change recipients' perception of procedural and outcome fairness mediated the impact of innovation characteristics and implementation approach on their acceptance of the innovation and the perceived legitimacy of the innovation. The results disclosed that the change recipients' fairness perceptions were a key step for their sense‐making process of an innovation and its implementation. The results also indicated that studying change from recipients' perspective, as well as trying to understand their fairness perceptions, can broaden our knowledge about change. Other theoretical and practical implications were also discussed.     

Innovators, Organization Structure and Management of the Innovation Process in the Securities Industry

This article examines innovation in the securities industry with the central objective of identifying factors that separate innovators from non-innovators. Akira Iwamura and Vijay Jog report results based on their survey of corporate finance vice presidents or CEO's of 43 investment houses from around the world. They conclude that innovative companies seem to be larger and have a well-defined strategy, with management defining the focus of the business. In addition, the firms have developed better communication channels, both internally and with their customers. Yet, the most significant difference that separates innovators from non-innovators is their management of the idea generation process, including concept generation and management's support. Innovators tend to approach idea generation in the following ways: they employ a variety of idea sources, both internal and external; they assign a specific person or group to be in charge of developing new ideas; they encourage employees at all levels to generate new ideas; they use a variety of innovative techniques to stimulate creativity; they reward their employees by non-monetary means; and they encourage group-level participation in evaluation decisions.     

The Impact of Innovative Culture on Individual Employees: The Moderating Role of Market Information Sharing

Current innovation literature provides a very limited understanding of the potential impacts of innovative culture on employees. Building on resource‐based view theory, the authors investigate theoretically and empirically how a perceived innovative culture can be a building block for a firm's competitive resource and advantage by creating superior employee‐level outcomes and how a market information‐sharing process may moderate these effects. The authors identify three distinct types of individual‐level outcomes stemming from an innovative culture. The three outcome variables—job satisfaction, organizational dynamism perception, and firm performance perception—reflect employees’ psychological and cognitive reactions to the process of creating organizational innovation and innovative culture. The authors collect survey data from 3960 individual employees in China. Their findings first show that a perceived innovative culture significantly and positively affects employees’ job satisfaction and perceptions of organizational dynamism and firm performance. Moreover, organizational dynamism perception plays an important mediating role among three employee‐level outcomes by converting job satisfaction into firm performance perception. The authors also find support for the direct, positive effect of a perceived market information‐sharing process on job satisfaction but not on perceptions of organizational dynamism and firm performance. Most importantly, their findings on the significant moderating role of a market information‐sharing system contribute to innovation theory by emphasizing the importance of the innovation/marketing interface: bundling market information sharing and innovative culture together enhances employees’ positive attitudes and perceptions. This result also suggests that examining only the direct effects of innovative culture and market information sharing may lead to incorrect conclusions as to how to manage the cultural infusion process: the market information‐sharing process shows only a weak effect on job satisfaction and no effect on perceptions of organizational dynamism or firm performance. Organizational designs should ensure simultaneous consideration of both variables in the cultural transformation process to enhance employees’ derived benefits in the process of creating an innovative culture. We offer a new insight: a perceived market information‐sharing process may strengthen the effect of an innovative culture on employees’ job satisfaction and organizational dynamism perception, while it may weaken the effect of an innovative culture on firm performance perception. This more nuanced view of market information sharing in the cultural infusion process presents new wisdom and calls for further studies in entrepreneurial innovation.     

Extending Lead‐User Theory: Antecedents and Consequences of Consumers' Lead Userness*

Lead users are found to come up with commercially attractive user innovations and have been shown to be a highly promising source of innovation for new product development tasks. According to lead‐user theory, these users are defined as being ahead of an important market trend and experiencing high benefits from innovating. The present article extends lead‐user theory by exploring the antecedents and consequences of consumers' lead userness in the course of three studies on extreme sports communities. Regarding antecedents, it uncovers that field‐related variables (consumer knowledge and use experience) as well as field‐independent personality variables (locus of control and innovativeness) help explain an individual's lead userness. These variables might therefore be used as a proxy to identify the rare species of lead users. With regard to consequences, it uncovers that lead users demonstrate innovative behavior not only by creating new product ideas but also by adopting new commercial products more heavily and faster than ordinary users. This highlights the idea that lead users might not only be valuable to idea‐generation processes for radically new concepts; instead, they might also be relevant to more general issues in the marketing of new products.     

Employee acceptance of digital monitoring systems while working from home

Digitalisation and COVID-19 led to an expansion of remote work arrangements, raising the question of whether and how employers should monitor remote workplaces. However, before the implementation of monitoring methods, it is important to consider employees' acceptance of this approach. Therefore, we contribute to current research on electronic performance monitoring by empirically investigating employees' evaluations of performance monitoring at home. This paper presents an analysis of how certain monitoring technologies for work-from-home arrangements are perceived as undesirable and whether other job aspects can compensate for these unattractive monitoring components. Using an experimental factorial survey design, German employees evaluated remote work arrangements with randomly varying characteristics. We show that respondents accept a certain degree of monitoring at home but increasingly reject monitoring systems as they become more invasive. However, in some cases, the negative impact of monitoring at home can be mitigated by certain incentives, such as money or the purpose of monitoring.     

Do Formal Management Practices Impact the Emergence of Bootlegging Behavior?

Innovation in an organization often relies on initiatives by employees who take action to develop their ideas and obtain buy‐in by organizational decision‐makers. To achieve this, employees sometimes apply unorthodox approaches, ignoring formal structures to further elaborate their ideas' potential and promote their implementation. They work without formal legitimacy and gather their own resources until sufficient clarity allows for informed decisions. Finally, they bypass formal communication channels to convince top management of the merits of their ideas. Despite the significance of such bootlegging behavior, research has barely addressed the antecedents of this deviance. Drawing on strain theory and social cognitive theory, we study whether the emergence of bootlegging behavior is influenced by formal management practices, in particular, strategic autonomy, front‐end formality, rewards, and sanctions. Additionally, we investigate the role of employees' self‐efficacy related to innovation tasks at the entrepreneurial stage to explain the emergence of bootlegging. We tested the proposed relationships with empirical field survey data using structural equation modeling. In summary, this paper concludes that intrapreneurial self‐efficacy, strategic autonomy, and rewards for innovation accomplishments foster bootlegging. Front‐end formality has a positive effect on bootlegging by increasing intrapreneurial self‐efficacy, but it reduces the likelihood that employees will ignore formal structures when promoting their ideas and gathering their own resources to support their bootlegging efforts.     

Learning Capability,Technological Parity,and Innovation Mode Use*

The purpose of this research was to examine whether a firm's learning capability interacts with industry technological parity to predict innovation mode use. Learning capability is conceptualized in the current research as a firm's ability to develop or acquire the new knowledge‐based resources and skills needed to offer new products. Industry technological parity is conceptualized as the extent to which similarity and equality exist among the technological competencies of the firms in an industry. Three generic modes of innovation are considered: internal, cooperative, and external innovation. These modes reflect the development of new products based solely on internal resources, the collaborative development of new products (i.e., with one or more development partners), and the acquisition of fully developed products from external sources, respectively. The premises of this research are that (1) technological parity can create incentives or disincentives for innovating in a particular mode, depending upon the value of external innovative resources relative to the value of internal innovative resources and (2) firms will choose innovation modes that reflect a combination of their abilities and incentives to innovate alone, with others, or through others. Survey research and secondary sources were used to collect data from 119 high‐technology firms. Results indicate that firms exhibit greater use of internal and external innovation when high levels of industry technological parity are matched by high levels of firm learning capability. By contrast, a negative relationship between learning capability and industry technological parity is associated with greater use of the cooperative mode of innovation. Thus, a single, common internal capability—learning capability—interacts with the level of technological parity in the environment to significantly predict three distinct innovation modes—modes that are not inherently dependent upon one another. As such, a firm's internal ability to innovate, as reflected in learning capability, has relevance well beyond that firm's likely internal innovation output. It also predicts the firm's likely use of cooperative and external innovation when considered in light of the level of industry technological parity. A practical implication of these findings is that companies with modest learning capabilities are not inherently precluded from innovating. Rather, they can innovate through modes for which conditions in their current environments do not constitute significant obstacles to innovation output. In particular, modest learning capabilities are associated with higher innovative output in the internal, cooperative, and external modes when industry technological parity levels are low, high, and low, respectively. Conversely, strong learning capabilities tend to be associated with higher innovative output in the internal, cooperative, and external modes when industry technological parity levels are high, low, and high, respectively.