Conceptualizing Innovation Orientation: A Framework for Study and Integration of Innovation Research*

The term innovation orientation has been frequently used in the innovation literature, but with a mix of conceptualizations and meanings. Drawing from work found in the innovation, management, and marketing literatures over the past 35 years, the concept of innovation orientation as a system is conceptualized and defined in this article. The domain of innovation orientation is delineated as a multidimensional knowledge structure and a framework for understanding innovation orientation and its consequences in an organizational context are developed. The framework defines the innovation orientation knowledge structure as composed of a learning philosophy, strategic direction, and transfunctional beliefs within an organization that define and direct the organizational strategies and actions toward specific innovation‐enabling competencies and processes. These innovation‐oriented firm competencies are in the areas of resource allocation, technology, employees, operations, and markets. The framework then explains that these appropriately developed innovation‐enabling competencies lead to innovation outcomes, specifically ideal innovation form, type, and rate that, in turn, affect firm performance. An inventory of propositions for future research that correspond to the innovation orientation concept is also presented in this comprehensive framework. This study provides two important contributions to the existing innovation literature. First, the article examines the vast innovation literature to arrive at a clear definition of the innovation orientation construct to provide a consistent conceptualization for future research. Second, the article develops a comprehensive, organized framework for understanding innovation orientation and its effects. In doing this, the framework extends the dynamic capabilities research stream by offering an explanation of how innovation orientation fosters the development of organizational competencies and makes it possible for a firm to recognize and respond to shifts in market dynamism.     

Nursing and technology: a love/hate relationship

The fundamental value of information technology in clinical settings is no longer in question, as clinicians enter and retrieve information in order to deliver care and the benefit of ubiquitous availability to clinical data using computers cannot be overplayed. The question now is how to increase adoption, improve productivity, and support transformational changes in health care delivery. It is important to get the interplay between people, process, and technology right for successful implementations which support care transformation. We must lead projects with the clinical practice changes being enabled by the technology, and then ensure the technology supports the practice change. Nurse leaders must consider letting the quality improvement process drive and define when and how technology is used, running our projects as practice changes and not IT implementations, with nursing sponsors owning the projects and leading the charge.     

Social welfare orderings for ratio-scale measurable utilities

Summary. This article characterizes all of the continuous social welfare orderings which satisfy the Weak (resp. Strong) Pareto principle when utilities are ratio-scale measurable. With Weak Pareto, on both the nonnegative and positive orthants the social welfare ordering must be representable by a weakly increasing Cobb-Douglas social welfare function while on the whole Euclidean space the social welfare ordering must be strongly dictatorial. With Strong Pareto, on the positive orthant the social welfare ordering must be representable by a strictly increasing Cobb-Douglas social welfare function but on the other two domains an impossibility theorem is obtained. Received: July 31, 1995; revised version August 7, 1996     

Correction to: What can deregulators deregulate? The case of electricity

Journal of Regulatory Economics - The published version of this article contained a mistake. The name of the second author was printed incorrectly. The correct name is Kwok Ping Tsang.