In this paper, we argue that the ability of a firm to recognize the value of new, external information, assimilate it, and apply it to commercial ends is critical to its innovative capabilities. We label this capability a firm's absorptive capacity and suggest that it is largely a function of the firm's level of prior related knowledge. The discussion focuses first on the cognitive basis for an individual's absorptive capacity including, in particular, prior related knowledge and diversity of background. We then characterize the factors that influence absorptive capacity at the organizational level, how an organization's absorptive capacity differs from that of its individual members, and the role of diversity of expertise within an organization. We argue that the development of absorptive capacity, and, in turn, innovative performance are history- or path-dependent and argue how lack of investment in an area of expertise early on may foreclose the future development of a technical capability in that area. We formulate a model of firm investment in research and development (R&D), in which R&D contributes to a firm's absorptive capacity, and test predictions relating a firm's investment in R&D to the knowledge underlying technical change within an industry. Discussion focuses on the implications of absorptive capacity for the analysis of other related innovative activities, including basic research, the adoption and diffusion of innovations, and decisions to participate in cooperative R&D ventures. **

/pdf/absorptive-capacity-a-new-perspective-on-learning-and-1n1c9gg9x0.pdf

Absorptive capacity: a new perspective on learning and innovation

Scholars of the theory of the firm have begun to emphasize the sources and conditions of what has been described as “the organizational advantage,” rather than focus on the causes and consequences of market failure. Typically, researchers see such organizational advantage as accruing from the particular capabilities organizations have for creating and sharing knowledge. In this article we seek to contribute to this body of work by developing the following arguments: (1) social capital facilitates the creation of new intellectual capital; (2) organizations, as institutional settings, are conducive to the development of high levels of social capital; and (3) it is because of their more dense social capital that firms, within certain limits, have an advantage over markets in creating and sharing intellectual capital. We present a model that incorporates this overall argument in the form of a series of hypothesized relationships between different dimensions of social capital and the main mechanisms and proces...

https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdfplus/259373.pdf

Social Capital, Intellectual Capital, and the Organizational Advantage

This paper focuses on dynamic capabilities and, more generally, the resource-based view of the firm. We argue that dynamic capabilities are a set of specific and identifiable processes such as product development, strategic decision making, and alliancing. They are neither vague nor tautological. Although dynamic capabilities are idiosyncratic in their details and path dependent in their emergence, they have significant commonalities across firms (popularly termed ‘best practice’). This suggests that they are more homogeneous, fungible, equifinal, and substitutable than is usually assumed. In moderately dynamic markets, dynamic capabilities resemble the traditional conception of routines. They are detailed, analytic, stable processes with predictable outcomes. In contrast, in high-velocity markets, they are simple, highly experiential and fragile processes with unpredictable outcomes. Finally, well-known learning mechanisms guide the evolution of dynamic capabilities. In moderately dynamic markets, the evolutionary emphasis is on variation. In high-velocity markets, it is on selection. At the level of RBV, we conclude that traditional RBV misidentifies the locus of long-term competitive advantage in dynamic markets, overemphasizes the strategic logic of leverage, and reaches a boundary condition in high-velocity markets. Copyright © 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

/pdf/dynamic-capabilities-what-are-they-3cn0mb9rpo.pdf

Dynamic capabilities, what are they?

This paper answers the question, "Why do organizations process information?" Uncertainty and equivocality are defined as two forces that influence information processing in organizations. Organization structure and internal systems determine both the amount and richness of information provided to managers. Models are proposed that show how organizations can be designed to meet the information needs of technology, interdepartmental relations, and the environment. One implication for managers is that a major problem is lack of clarity, not lack of data. The models indicate how organizations can be designed to provide information mechanisms to both reduce uncertainty and resolve equivocality.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdfplus/2631846.pdf

Organizational information requirements, media richness and structural design

The primary purpose of this article is to clarify the nature of the entrepreneurial orientation (EO) construct and to propose a contingency framework for investigating the relationship between EO and firm performance. We first explore and refine the dimensions of EO and discuss the usefulness of viewing a firm's EO as a multidimensional construct. Then, drawing on examples from the EO-related contingencies literature, we suggest alternative models (moderating effects, mediating effects, independent effects, interaction effects) for testing the EO-performance relationship.

Clarifying the Entrepreneurial Orientation Construct and Linking It To Performance

Examines how organizations identify and respond to conditions of stability and change and classifies responses as appropriate or dysfunctional. Using case study and historical survey approaches, the authors formulate conclusions about organizations themselves, individual organization members, and sub-organizational combinations of members. These three perspectives correspond to the organization's goals, individual career aspirations, and internal politicking. Technical progress and development of new organizational forms proceed in tandem; advancement in either field augurs movement in the other field. The inventor requires a suitable milieu and new technology enables further sophisticated forms of organization. Matching the rise of modern industrial concerns, technological research and development has been increasingly professionalized and financially supported by large corporations and government. Firms in (then) newly created industries, such as electronics, face a unique difficulty. Unlike counterparts in established fields, new firms in these industries must respond to rapidly changing market conditions without the benefit of a management experienced in the exigencies of that sector. The authors examine common new-industry responses to planning needs. These include the transfer of technical staff to the sales force and assignment of user needs research to research and development staff. Two important organizational approaches are identified. The mechanistic approach, suitable for stable industries, is marked by precise definition of member function and is highly hierarchical. The organic approach is more appropriate to industries undergoing change and is characterized by fluid definitions of function and interactions that are equally lateral as they are vertical. (CAR)

The Management of Innovation

PREFACE TO THE THIRD EDITION 1. INTRODUCTION PART ONE: THE EXTERNAL CIRCUMSTANCES 2. THE ORGANIZATION OF INNOVATION 3. THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE ELECTRONICS INDUSTRY, AND THE SCOTTISH COUNCIL'S SCHEME 4. THE MARKET CONTEXT PART TWO: ORGANIZATION AND CHANGE 5. MANAGEMENT STRUCTURES AND SYSTEMS 6. MECHANISITIC AND ORGANIC SYSTEMS OF MANAGEMENT 7. WORKING ORGANIZATION, POLITICAL SYSTEM, AND AND STATUS STRUCTURE WITHIN THE CONCERN 8. THE LABORATORY AND THE WORKSHOP 9. INDUSTRIAL SCIENTISTS AND MANAGERS: PROBLEMS OF POWER AND STATUS PART THREE: DIRECTION AND THE SHAPING OF MANAGEMENT CONDUCT: 10. THE MEN AT THE TOP 11. THE SHAPING OF WORK RELATIONSHIPS 12. THE CODES OF PRACTICE IN MANAGEMENT CONDUCT REFERENCES INDEX.

The management of innovation

The Management of Innovation.

Mechanistic and Organic Systems of Management

In their most general form, the findings of this research can be put into two statements: Technical progress and organizational development are aspects of one and the same trend in human affairs; and the persons who work to make these processes actual are also their victims.

Tom Burns

Papers

The Management of Innovation

The management of innovation

The Management of Innovation.

Mechanistic and Organic Systems of Management

The Organization of Innovation