Value creation by knowledge‐based ecosystems: evidence from a field study

A growing number of research and development‐driven companies are located in knowledge‐based ecosystems. Value creation by these ecosystems draws on the dynamics of single firms (interacting and partnering) as well as the ecosystem at large. Drawing on a field study of a Dutch high‐tech campus, two key sources of value creation are identified: (1) facilitation of the innovation process for individual companies and (2) creation of an innovation community. Furthermore, the coevolution of the ecosystem's business model with firm‐level business models explains why technology‐based firms join, stay in, or leave the ecosystem at a certain point in time. A remarkable finding is that ecosystem managers have to deliberately facilitate exit routes for companies that no longer fit the ecosystem in order to enhance and reinforce its business model. As such, this study suggests a dynamic capability perspective on knowledge‐based ecosystems that need to develop a business model at the ecosystem level to create sufficient innovative capacity and entrepreneurial fitness.     

Product Innovation Processes in Small Firms: Combining Entrepreneurial Effectuation and Managerial Causation

This article reports a multimethod study of product innovation processes in small manufacturing firms. Prior studies found that small firms do not deploy the formalized processes identified as best practice for the management of new product development (NPD) in large firms. To explicate small firms' product innovation, this study uses effectuation theory, which emerged from entrepreneurship research. Effectuation theory discerns two logics of decision‐making: causation, assuming that means are selected to attain goals; and effectuation, assuming that goals are created based upon available means. The study used a process research approach, investigating product innovation trajectories in five small firms across 352 total events. Quantitative analyses revealed early effectuation logic, which increasingly turned toward causation logic over time. Further qualitative analyses confirmed the use of both logics, with effectual logic rendering product innovation resource‐driven, stepwise, and open‐ended, and with causal logic used especially in later stages to set objectives and to plan activities and invest resources to attain objectives. Because the application of effectuation logic differentiates the small firm approaches from mainstream NPD best practices, this study examined how small firms' product innovation processes deployed effectuation logic in further detail. The small firms: (1) made creative use of existing resources; (2) scoped innovations to be realizable with available resources; (3) used external resources whenever and wherever these became available; (4) prioritized existing business over product innovation projects; (5) used loose project planning; (6) worked in steps toward tangible outcomes; (7) iterated the generation, selection, and modification of goals and ideas; and (8) relied on their own customer knowledge and market probing, rather than early market research. Using effectuation theory thus helps us understand how small firm product innovation both resembles and differs from NPD best practices observed in larger firms. Because the combination of effectual and causal principles leverages small firm characteristics and resources, this article concludes that product innovation research should more explicitly differentiate between firms of different sizes, rather than prescribing large firm best practices to small firms.     

In Search of Innovation and Customer‐related Performance Superiority: The Role of Market Orientation,Marketing Capability,and Innovation Capability Interactions

Understanding the mechanisms through which firms realize the value of their market‐based knowledge resources such as market orientation is a central interest of innovation scholars and practitioners. The current study contends that realizing the performance impact of market orientation depends on know‐how deployment processes and their complementarities in functional areas such as marketing and innovation that co‐align with market orientation. More specifically, this study addresses two research questions: (1) to what extent can market orientation be transformed into customer‐ and innovation‐related performance outcomes via marketing and innovation capabilities; and (2) does the complementarity between marketing capability and innovation capability enhance customer‐ and innovation‐related performance outcomes? Drawing upon the resource‐based view and capability theory of the firm, a model is developed that integrates market orientation, marketing capability, innovation capability, and customer‐ and innovation‐related performance. The validity of the model is tested based on a sample of 163 manufacturing and services firms. In answer to the first research question, the findings show that market orientation significantly contributes to customer‐ and innovation‐related performance outcomes via marketing and innovation capabilities. This finding is important in that market‐based knowledge resources should be configured with the deployment of marketing and innovation capabilities to ensure better performance. In answer to the second research question, the findings indicate that market orientation works through the complementarity between marketing and innovation capabilities to influence customer‐related performance but not innovation‐related performance. Managers are advised to have a balanced approach to managing the deployment of capabilities. If they seek to achieve superiority in customer‐related performance, marketing capability, innovation capability, and their complementarity are essential for attracting, satisfying, building relationships with, and retaining customers. On the other hand, this complementarity would be considerably less important if firms placed greater emphasis on achieving superiority in innovation‐related performance. In contrast to many existing studies, this study is the first to model the roles of both innovation capability and marketing capability in mediating the relationship between market orientation and specific performance outcomes (i.e., innovation‐ and customer‐related outcomes).     

Declared essential patents and average total R&D expenditures per patent family

The sharp increase in SEP declarations and declaring firms emphasizes the necessity for understanding firms’ innovation investment behavior in standardization. This paper empirically investigates whether declared standard-essential patents (SEPs) and the declaring firm’s business model (operationalized as a firm’s location in the value chain) are associated with a firm’s innovation investment behavior. To this end, we measure firms’ innovation investment behavior through average total research and development (R&D) expenditures per filed patent family for publicly listed firms from 1999 to 2018. Our sample mainly includes major SEP family declarants. We rely on a binary business model taxonomy differentiating upstream and downstream firms. Within that setting, total R&D expenditures rise with increasing fragmentation of declared SEP families, suggesting that firms adjust their R&D investments to declaration developments in standard-setting organizations (SSOs). We also show that upstream firms have significantly lower total R&D expenditures than downstream firms, which could indicate structural differences in their intellectual property (IP) and R&D management processes. Our results can help SSOs and regulators better understand firms’ innovation investment behavior.     

Drivers of Outsourced Innovation: An Exploratory Study*

The outsourcing of innovation has been on the rise for years, but research in this area lags behind industry practice. Interviews with managers and a theory base grounded in transaction cost analysis are used to guide the development of an exploratory model that details potential drivers of the outsourcing of innovation activities. Using industry‐level data, the proposed model is partially tested using two distinct regression analyses that reveal significant effects both contemporaneously and persisting over time. Several of the proposed drivers of outsourced innovation are shown to be significant, including exploratory research performed and profit margin. The finding that exploratory research performed is significantly related to the outsourcing of innovation activities represents a significant contribution to the innovation and organizational learning literatures. As well, finding a relationship between margins and organizational sourcing fills a gap in the business to business marketing literature. Managerial implications are drawn for both managers of the innovation process in traditional firms and those in firms wishing to garner outsourced innovation contracts. The drivers found to be significant in this study should allow for better resource planning from innovation managers in traditional firms as well as better targeting of perspective clients from firms seeking contract innovation business.     

Negotiating innovation: product renewal as the outcome of a complex bargaining process

In this paper, it is argued that innovation can be the result of a repetitive, multi-actor negotiation process. We present the case of an environment-related product innovation in a large multinational company that emerged as the outcome of a complex interaction process in which numerous external and internal actors negotiated to safeguard their own interests. This negotiation perspective challenges conventional economic views of innovations, in which new products and processes are regarded as exogenous variables, the outcomes of deliberately planned research, or the combination of technology (pushing) and market (pulling) inducements. Instead, innovation may be a non-linear, unpredictable process that involves multiple actors with divergent interests and that leads to outcomes that are collectively acceptable but not necessarily (sub)optimal.     

Business group characteristics and affiliated firm innovation: The case of Taiwan

This paper investigates the relationship between business group factors and affiliated firm innovation in terms of patents granted. We examine the following factors for business groups: group affiliation, group diversification, inside ownership, and family ties. In emerging markets, business groups act not only as an internal capital market, but also as a platform for resource sharing among affiliates. We use Taiwan's business groups as a research sample to investigate how these group factors affect affiliated firms' innovation. The findings indicate that firms that are affiliated with business groups innovate better than their unaffiliated counterparts. Group diversification and family ties have positive effects on firm innovation, while inside ownership has no significant positive effect. Our study contributes to the innovation literature by shedding light on business group factors and firm innovation.     

Business model innovation: The effects of exploratory orientation,opportunity recognition,and entrepreneurial bricolage in an emerging economy

Business model innovation takes shape through a process of experimentation. This study holds that exploratory orientation is a key initiating factor of the experimentation process, and opportunity recognition and entrepreneurial bricolage both are actions constituting this process and thereby serve as conduits between exploratory orientation and business model innovation. Based on a survey data of Chinese firms, this study finds the positive relationship between exploratory orientation and business model innovation is mediated by opportunity recognition and entrepreneurial bricolage. The findings not only enrich the discipline’s knowledge on the antecedents of business model innovation but also extend the implications of exploratory orientation, opportunity recognition, and entrepreneurial bricolage to business model innovation.     

New Product Development Practices and Early‐Stage Firms: Two In‐Depth Case Studies

New product development practices (NPD) have been well studied for decades in large, established companies. Implementation of best practices such as predevelopment market planning and cross‐functional teams have been positively correlated with product and project success over a variety of measures. However, for small new ventures, field research into ground‐level adoption of NPD practices is lacking. Because of the risks associated with missteps in new product development and the potential for firm failure, understanding NPD within the new venture context is critical. Through in‐depth case research, this paper investigates two successful physical product‐based early‐stage firms' development processes versus large established firm norms. The research focuses on the start‐up adoption of commonly prescribed management processes to improve NPD, such as cross‐functional teams, use of market planning during innovation development, and the use of structured processes to guide the development team. This research has several theoretical implications. The first finding is that in comparing the innovation processes of these firms to large, established firms, the study found several key differences from the large firm paradigm. These differences in development approach from what is prescribed for large, established firms are driven by necessity from a scarcity of resources. These new firms simply did not have the resources (financial or human) to create multi‐ or cross‐functional teams or organizations in the traditional sense for their first product. Use of virtual resources was pervasive. Founders also played multiple roles concurrently in the organization, as opposed to relying on functional departments so common in large firms. The NPD process used by both firms was informal—much more skeletal than commonly recommended structured processes. The data indicated that these firms put less focus on managing the process and more emphasis on managing their goals (the main driver being getting the first product to market). In addition to little or no written procedures being used, development meetings did not run to specific paper‐based deliverables or defined steps. In terms of market and user insight, these activities were primarily performed inside the core team—using methods that again were distinctive in their approach. What drove a project to completion was relying on team experience or a “learn as you go approach.” Again, the driver for this type of truncated market research approach was a lack of resources and need to increase the project's speed‐to‐market. Both firms in our study were highly successful, from not only an NPD efficiency standpoint but also effectiveness. The second broad finding we draw from this work is that there are lessons to be learned from start‐ups for large, established firms seeking ever‐increasing efficiency. We have found that small empowered teams leading projects substantial in scope can be extremely effective when roles are expanded, decision power is ground‐level, and there is little emphasis on defined processes. This exploratory research highlights the unique aspects of NPD within small early‐stage firms, and highlights areas of further research and management implications for both small new ventures and large established firms seeking to increase NPD efficiency and effectiveness.     

Innovation Field Orientation and Its Effect on Innovativeness and Firm Performance

New product development (NPD) has become a prime source for gaining a competitive edge in the market. Although a large body of research has addressed the question of how to successfully manage individual innovation projects, the management of a firm's new product portfolio has received comparably less research attention. A phenomenon that has recently emerged on the research agenda is innovation field orientation. Such orientation is understood as the deliberate setup and management of multiple thematically related NPD projects. However, the facets and effects of innovation field orientation are still unexplored. In particular, this study is interested in (1) developing a concept of innovation field orientation, (2) investigating the extent to which innovation field orientation is an established part of the corporate strategic planning practice, and (3) assessing the direct and indirect performance effects of innovation field orientation. For the empirical analysis, data were collected through a mail survey and document analyses from 122 publicly listed firms. Tobin's q was used as an objective performance metric directly related to shareholder value. The results confirm that innovation field orientation is a phenomenon that prevails in practice. In addition, all defining aspects of this orientation have either direct or indirect effects on firm performance. Hence, those firms that deliberately specify and manage innovation fields have a more innovative product portfolio and are more successful than others. Specifically, the findings underline the performance relevance of formally framing innovation fields and assigning a critical mass of resources to them. In addition, empirical support is lent to the suggestion that innovation field orientation has strong indirect performance effects mediated by the innovativeness of the firm's new product portfolio. This implies that firms that deliberately specify focus areas, assign resources to, provide organizational framing for, and stimulate synergies between related NPD projects stand a better chance to achieve a more innovative new product portfolio. This again is highly appreciated by investors and results in a superior stock market evaluation of these firms.     

How to approach business model innovation: the role of opportunities in times of (no) exogenous change

Firms need to show dynamic adaptability and innovate their business models to achieve survival and growth, in particular when they are exposed to high levels of exogenous change. However, business model innovation also takes place in the absence of exogenous change. We know relatively little about firms’ approaches to opportunities for business model innovation in both of these environmental settings. The objective of this study is to understand how firms exposed to various environmental conditions explore and exploit business model innovation opportunities. In a qualitative multiple case analysis, the study compares the approaches to business model innovation used by four firms exposed to high levels of exogenous change with those of four firms operating in the absence of exogenous change. The findings are contrasted with entrepreneurial opportunity discovery and creation theories. The results reveal that firms exposed to high levels of exogenous change focus on discovering objective opportunities, whereas firms operating in the absence of exogenous change concentrate on creating opportunities for business model innovation. However, this study revealed that when the firms further explore and exploit these opportunities, they tend to combine the behaviours that the two opportunity perspectives suggest. This study contributes to the literature on business model innovation by emphasising the relationship between environmental context and approach to business model innovation and by reinforcing the link with entrepreneurship theory.     

Business model innovation in strategic alliances: a multi‐layer perspective

Business model innovation (BMI) has recently become a topic of interest for research as well as corporate practice. However, we lack specific insights into actors, drivers, and different forms of BMI as the concept is by now mainly addressed in a very general way. In this paper, we analyze how BMI takes place in strategic alliances with the focus of enhancing the recent knowledge about BMI by developing a concept that links firm‐level BMI with alliance‐driven innovation of business models. Against the background of an in‐depth explorative qualitative study, we shed light on the basic nature business model innovation alliances (BMIA) and their effects on both, alliance level and firm level. We develop a process model of BMIA that is the first model providing a holistic picture of this particular type of BMI. Our findings allow for deep insights into BMI processes in incumbent companies and uncover in detail the importance of boundary spanning activities in this realm. By providing these insights, we pave the ground for a new stream of BMI research that focuses on the in‐depth understanding of the role of collaboration and network effects in recent BMI processes. In addition, we show practical benefits for partners in BMI alliances. These insights may help to overcome the traditional fear of negative effects that is still very often prevalent in companies when it comes to issues of partnering with firm external players in strategic issues.     

Business networking and innovation of Asian enterprises in Western countries: The moderation of institutional distance

This study advances extant cross-nation and cross-cultural business-to-business (B2B) supply chain literature by exploring the contingent effect of institutional distance in the business networking-innovation relationship. Unlike previous studies largely based on Western firms operating in the developing economies, this study focuses on Asian firms operating in the Western developed market. By examining the experiences of one hundred and sixty Asian B2B firms operating in New Zealand, this study finds that formal institutional distance positively moderates the effect of business networking on innovation whereas informal institutional distance negatively moderates the effect of business networking on innovation. This study provides new theoretical conceptualizations and perspectives to cross-national and cross-cultural B2B supply chain research.     

Innovation and Product Development Strategies in the Italian Motorcycle Industry

The motorcycle industry in Italy offers fertile ground for anyone interested in developing a better understanding of the role innovation plays in enhancing a firm's competitive position. This industry includes both domestic and Japanese firms, with companies ranging from high-volume manufacturers to specialty or niche producers. Firms trying to gain a competitive edge in this crowded field must contend with not only advances in product and process technology, but also the whims of fashion. In a survey of top-level marketing and product development managers from eight leading firms in the Italian motorcycle industry, Moreno Muffatto and Roberto Panizzolo explore the innovation models these firms employ to enhance their competitive position. Their study has the following objectives: categorizing the various competitors in terms of their product and market strategies and their product development and innovation strategies; highlighting differences between the methods of Italian and Japanese firms competing in this market; analyzing the relationships between firms, as well as the roles suppliers play in the various innovation strategies; and identifying the various organizational models employed by the firms in this industry. Different product and market strategies are identified on the basis of three variables: total production volume, the number of different products offered, and the number of different engine capacities offered. Using these variables, the companies in the study are categorized as volume producers, specialists, or niche specialists. The firms are further differentiated on the basis of the relative emphasis each places on product technology and design, product innovation, product variety, and time-based competition. In the firms studied, partnerships play a key role in new product development. Nearly every firm participates in joint projects, most often involving development of either an entire vehicle or an engine. Other partnerships involve firms in countries that offer emerging markets for the motorcycle industry. Organizational structures and strategies employed by the volume producers in this study include: the large product leader, who oversees concept definition and product planning; the project leaders group, which coordinates all phases of development, including activities assigned to external groups; the project managers matrix, a matrix organizational structure with a strong product orientation; and the business unit program manager, who oversees all projects within an independent business unit.     

Application and performance impact of stage–gate systems – the role services in the firm’s business focus

Although service innovation is important, knowledge of new product and service development, including the positive effect of stage‐and‐gate‐type systems, has been derived almost exclusively from studies in the manufacturing sector. In the present paper, we address two important questions: How do differences in the firm’s business focus, which describes whether a firm puts more emphasis on products or services in its business activities, influence the usage of such formal innovation processes? Is stage‐and‐gate‐type systems’ impact on innovation program performance contingent on the firm’s business focus? Unlike previous studies, we not only differentiate service and manufacturing by industry classification codes but also apply a continuous measure to take into account the blurring of boundaries between the manufacturing and service businesses. Based on a comprehensive discussion of service‐specific characteristics and their implications for innovation management and using a cross‐industry, multi‐informant sample of innovation programs from 272 firms with 1,985 informants, we find empirical support for firms with a stronger focus on the service business being less likely to use stage‐and‐gate‐type systems. Furthermore, the use of stage‐and‐gate‐type systems fosters innovation program performance, and this effect becomes stronger as the business focus shifts toward services. This result implies that service‐based firms can benefit from stage‐and‐gate‐type systems to a greater extent than product‐based firms. Our research also demonstrates the gap between the desired level of innovation process formalization and its current usage in practice, especially for firms with a dominating service business.     

The sites and practices of business models

This paper examines the concept of business models. Drawing on the business model literature, we first identify technology, market offering and network architecture as the three core elements of business models. The theoretical routes of each element are then examined through the associated literatures: technology and innovation studies, industrial marketing, operations strategy, and evolutionary economics. Multiple dimensions of each element are identified and the resultant framework is used to explore developments within the recorded music market across three centuries.Through changes in the recorded music market since the 1870s, we explore how business models emerged, took on multiple sites and evolved through their practice over time. We look at how interlinking business models become spread out across the business network as different network actors play their part. The recorded music market generates important insights into how business models are created, developed and practiced. We suggest that firms, business networks and markets form embedded systems within which multiple overlapping business models can be considered as constituent parts. In this way, the business model is understood as having agency to shape action; but in turn actions (of others in the business network as well as within the firms themselves) also shape the business model.     

The management of technological innovation in the machine tool industry: a cross-national regional survey of Britain and Switzerland

Abstract
The research was undertaken during 1983 to find out why a country such as Switzerland has been able to manage innovation in a mature industry, such as machine tools, much more successfully than Britain. The methodology used was by structured interviews of Managing Directors in a sample of firms in the two important machine tool regions of Berne and Yorkshire/Humberside. The results cover the main types of innovation in products and processes, the reasons for innovation and the problems which were encountered by the companies visited. We found that the Swiss firms were strong on product innovation. The most important innovation was the introduction of computer numerical control (CNC), and the Swiss firms had on average introduced this earlier than the British firms and it accounted for a larger proportion of their turnover. The main problem for firms in both countries was in adjusting to upstream developments in electronic controls. The Swiss had better downstream market links with their customers who were mostly in foreign countries. Some British firms were handicapped by being part of company groups and used public sector grants for their innovation, whereas the largely independent Swiss firms carried out more self-financing.     

Managerial Ties and Firm Innovation: Is Knowledge Creation a Missing Link?

Managerial ties, the personal networks of senior managers, have been found to be facilitators of firm performance because of their network benefits. However, social network theory suggests that managerial ties only play a “conduit” role by providing possibilities and opportunities to approach external resources. How can firms turn these possibilities and opportunities into internal knowledge assets and further transform them into firm innovation? Extant research constructs a direct mechanism for the managerial ties–firm innovation link. The research reported here, however, provides and investigates an indirect ties‐innovation argument where organizational knowledge creation processes, including knowledge exchange and knowledge combination, are mediators. And managerial ties are examined through two traditional dimensions, business ties and political ties. This study employs empirical data from 270 firms in China and uses structural equation modeling techniques to reveal interesting findings. First, the results support the key argument that the influence of managerial ties on firm innovation is indirect. Second, knowledge exchange and knowledge combination are different constructs and the former positively influences the latter. More interestingly, business ties can exert a significant direct impact on both knowledge exchange and knowledge combination, while political ties can only influence knowledge exchange directly. Although both knowledge exchange and knowledge combination impact product innovation directly, only knowledge combination can directly influence process innovation. These findings indicate that the role of political ties is declining, but business ties still have substantial influence on firm innovation in transitional China. Different processes of organizational knowledge creation, such as knowledge exchange and knowledge combination, make distinct contributions to firm innovation. Product innovation, as opposed to process innovation, is more externally oriented and needs more organizational level knowledge creation activities. This article extends the understanding of the ties–innovation link, organizational knowledge creation theory, and firm innovation in a transitional economy by providing a more complete understanding of how firms can access and internalize external resources and then transform them into product innovation and process innovation.