This handbook looks to provide academics and students with a comprehensive and holistic understanding of the phenomenon of innovation. Innovation spans a number of fields within the social sciences and humanities: Management, Economics, Geography, Sociology, Politics, Psychology, and History. Consequently, the rapidly increasing body of literature on innovation is characterized by a multitude of perspectives based on, or cutting across, existing disciplines and specializations. Scholars of innovation can come from such diverse starting points that much of this literature can be missed, and so constructive dialogues missed. The editors of The Oxford Handbook of Innovation have carefully selected and designed twenty-one contributions from leading academic experts within their particular field, each focusing on a specific aspect of innovation. These have been organized into four main sections, the first of which looks at the creation of innovations, with particular focus on firms and networks. Section Two provides an account of the wider systematic setting influencing innovation and the role of institutions and organizations in this context. Section Three explores some of the diversity in the working of innovation over time and across different sectors of the economy, and Section Four focuses on the consequences of innovation with respect to economic growth, international competitiveness, and employment. An introductory overview, concluding remarks, and guide to further reading for each chapter, make this handbook a key introduction and vital reference work for researchers, academics, and advanced students of innovation. Contributors to this volume - Jan Fagerberg, University of Oslo William Lazonick, INSEAD Walter W. Powell, Stanford University Keith Pavitt, SPRU Alice Lam, Brunel University Keith Smith, INTECH Charles Edquist, Linkoping David Mowery, University of California, Berkeley Mary O'Sullivan, INSEAD Ove Granstrand, Chalmers Bjorn Asheim, University of Lund Rajneesh Narula, Copenhagen Business School Antonello Zanfei, Urbino Kristine Bruland, University of Oslo Franco Malerba, University of Bocconi Nick Von Tunzelmann, SPRU Ian Miles, University of Manchester Bronwyn Hall, University of California, Berkeley Bart Verspagen , ECIS Francisco Louca, ISEG Manuel M. Godinho, ISEG Richard R. Nelson, Mario Pianta, Urbino Bengt-Ake Lundvall, Aalborg

The Oxford Handbook of Innovation

What makes organizations so similar? We contend that the engine of rationalization and bureaucratization has moved from the competitive marketplace to the state and the professions. Once a set of organizations emerges as a field, a paradox arises: rational actors make their organizations increasingly similar as they try to change them. We describe three isomorphic processes-coercive, mimetic, and normative—leading to this outcome. We then specify hypotheses about the impact of resource centralization and dependency, goal ambiguity and technical uncertainty, and professionalization and structuration on isomorphic change. Finally, we suggest implications for theories of organizations and social change.

The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields (Chinese Translation)

Organizational ambidexterity has emerged as a new research paradigm in organization theory, yet several issues fundamental to this debate remain controversial. We explore four central tensions here: Should organizations achieve ambidexterity through differentiation or through integration? Does ambidexterity occur at the individual or organizational level? Must organizations take a static or dynamic perspective on ambidexterity? Finally, can ambidexterity arise internally, or do firms have to externalize some processes? We provide an overview of the seven articles included in this special issue and suggest several avenues for future research.

/pdf/organizational-ambidexterity-balancing-exploitation-and-x2ytf5t71n.pdf

Organizational Ambidexterity: Balancing Exploitation and Exploration for Sustained Performance

Organizational learning has been an important topic for the journal Organization Science and for the field. We provide a theoretical framework for analyzing organizational learning. According to the framework, organizational experience interacts with the context to create knowledge. The context is conceived as having both a latent component and an active component through which learning occurs. We also discuss current and emerging research themes related to components of our framework. Promising future research directions are identified. We hope that our perspective will stimulate future work on organizational learning and knowledge.

http://disciplinas.stoa.usp.br/pluginfile.php/3502/mod_resource/content/1/2011%20Organizational%20learning%20-%20form%20experience%20to%20knowledge.pdf

Organizational Learning: From Experience to Knowledge

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2012.01080.x

Dynamic Capabilities: Routines versus Entrepreneurial Action

We propose that searching for and transferring knowledge across divisions in a diversified firm can cultivate innovation. Using a sample of 211,636 patents from 1,644 companies during the period 1985–96, we find that the use of interdivisional knowledge positively affects the impact of an invention on subsequent technological developments. Furthermore, the positive effect of the use of interdivisional knowledge on the impact of an invention is stronger than the effect of using knowledge from within divisional boundaries or from outside firm boundaries. Our empirical findings have significant implications for the management of knowledge in diversified firms.

/pdf/the-use-of-knowledge-for-technological-innovation-within-341vly7nmj.pdf

The Use of Knowledge for Technological Innovation Within Diversified Firms

Although an entrepreneur's initial strategy choices have a critical effect on a new venture's survival, growth, and long-term performance, few studies have explored how pre-founding experience influences these choices. Founders who over rely on their historical industry experiences may simply replicate the strategies of legacy firms. In turn, little is known about how founders can break these experience-based constraints, if they exist. In an empirical analysis of 120 prospective entrants in air transportation from 1995–2005 we find that a founder's past experience strongly constrains choices, and the effect depends on the form of experience and type of strategy choice. Diversity of experience, at the level of the founder and founding team, lessens these constraints. Our results have valuable implications for research in strategy and entrepreneurship. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

The genesis of strategy in new ventures: escaping the constraints of founder and team knowledge

This study examines how the performance experience of actors shapes the stability and variability of routine performances. We argue that experience in performing a routine provides actors with greater understandings of the routine and its context, which provides an overall stabilizing effect on routine performances, but experience also heightens actors' capacity to adjust performances in response to changes in contextual constraints. Our analyses of routine performances in the waste collection sector are generally consistent with the arguments. Our findings also highlight differences in how actors' experience affects responsiveness to different forms of change in contextual constraints. These findings help to extend our understanding of the micro-foundations of routines.

Examining the Stability and Variability of Routine Performances: The Effects of Experience and Context Change

This study examines how designing for product development influences project performance in distinct technological environments. Drawing on a series of computational experiments and paired-case comparisons of six product development projects, we specifically examine how new product development performance is affected by project design and the technological environment. By triangulating across the computational experiments and case studies, we find the existence of performance trade-offs in product development as well as the importance of performance priorities in influencing project design. These findings permit us to elaborate on existing contingency-based perspectives of new product development and put forward a novel mediating model. In this mediating model of product development, we suggest that the technological environment shapes performance priorities, which in turn influence project design and ultimately the performance outcomes of new product development efforts. This model further highlights that project designs can evolve as a function of performance outcomes, although this process can be inhibited by the presence of design evolution constraints. This research contributes significantly to our understanding of designing projects for new product development.

Michael J. Fern

Papers

The Use of Knowledge for Technological Innovation Within Diversified Firms

The genesis of strategy in new ventures: escaping the constraints of founder and team knowledge

Examining the Stability and Variability of Routine Performances: The Effects of Experience and Context Change

Organizing for Product Development Across Technological Environments: Performance Trade-offs and Priorities