The dynamics of product innovation and firm competences
TL;DR: This study examines how product innovation contributes to the renewal of the firm through its dynamic and reciprocal relation with the firm's competences through field research in five high-tech firms of varying age, size, and level of diversification.
Abstract: This study examines how product innovation contributes to the renewal of the firm through its dynamic and reciprocal relation with the firm's competences Field research in five high-tech firms of varying age, size, and level of diversification is combined with analysis of existing theory to develop the findings of the study Based on the notion that new products are created by linking competences relating to technologies and customers, a typology is derived that classifies new product projects based on whether a new product can draw on existing competences, or whether it requires competences the firm does not yet have Following organizational learning theory, these options are conceptualized as exploitation and exploration These organizational learning concepts are used to gain a dynamic and path-dependent view of product innovation and firm development, and to reveal the unique nature and challenges of different types of product innovation Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd
Citations
More filters
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors examined how aspects of intellectual capital influenced various innovative capabilities in organizations and found that human, organizational, and social capital and their interrelationships selectively influenced incremental and radical innovative capabilities.
Abstract: We examined how aspects of intellectual capital influenced various innovative capabilities in organizations. In a longitudinal, multiple-informant study of 93 organizations, we found that human, organizational, and social capital and their interrelationships selectively influenced incremental and radical innovative capabilities. As anticipated, organizational capital positively influenced incremental innovative capability, while human capital interacted with social capital to positively influence radical innovative capability. Counter to our expectations, however, human capital by itself was negatively associated with radical innovative capability. Interestingly, social capital played a significant role in both types of innovation, as it positively influenced incremental and radical innovative capabilities. It is widely accepted that an organization’s capability to innovate is closely tied to its intellectual capital, or its ability to utilize its knowledge resources. Several studies have underscored how new products embody organizational knowledge (e.g., Stewart, 1997), described innovation as a
3,008 citations
TL;DR: In this article, the authors review various literature streams to develop a comprehensive model that covers research into the antecedents, moderators, and outcomes of organizational ambidexterity, defined as an organization's ability to be aligned and efficient in its management of today's business demands while simultaneously being adaptive to changes in the environment.
2,207 citations
Cites background from "The dynamics of product innovation ..."
...Subsequent studies have adopted and further developed the exploitative and exploratory innovation categories (Atuahene-Gima, 2005; Benner & Tushman, 2003; Danneels, 2002; Holmqvist, 2004; Smith & Tushman, 2005)....
[...]
...…from technological change to organization design, have discussed the need for firms to achieve a balance between exploitation and exploration activities (Benner & Tushman, 2003; Burgelman, 1991; Eisenhardt & Martin, 2000; Gupta, Smith, & Shalley, 2006; Tushman & O’Reilly, 1996; Volberda, 1996)....
[...]
Posted Content•
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors examined how environmental aspects (i.e., dynamism and competitiveness) moderate the effectiveness of exploratory and exploitative innovation and found that exploratory innovation is more effective in dynamic environments whereas exploiting competitive environments is more beneficial to a unit's financial performance.
Abstract: textResearch on exploration and exploitation is burgeoning, yet our understanding of the antecedents and consequences of both activities remains rather unclear. We advance the growing body of literature by focusing on the apparent differences of exploration and exploitation and examining implications for using formal (i.e. centralization and formalization) and informal (i.e. connectedness) coordination mechanisms. This study further examines how environmental aspects (i.e. dynamism and competitiveness) moderate the effectiveness of exploratory and exploitative innovation. Results indicate that centralization negatively affects exploratory innovation while formalization positively influences exploitative innovation. Interestingly, connectedness within units appears to be an important antecedent of both exploratory and exploitative innovation. Furthermore, our findings reveal that pursuing exploratory innovation is more effective in dynamic environments whereas pursuing exploitative innovation is more beneficial to a unit’s financial performance in more competitive environments. Through this richer explanation and empirical assessment, we contribute to a greater clarity and better understanding of how ambidextrous organizations coordinate the development of exploratory and exploitative innovation in organizational units and successfully respond to multiple environmental conditions.
2,177 citations
TL;DR: In this paper, a research model is developed encompassing antecedents and consequences of dynamic capabilities in an integrated framework, and several issues surrounding its conceptualization remain ambivalent, and the authors identify three component factors which reflect the common features of dynamic capability across firms and which may be adopted and further developed into a measurement construct in future research.
Abstract: The notion of dynamic capabilities complements the premise of the resource-based view of the firm, and has injected new vigour into empirical research in the last decade Nonetheless, several issues surrounding its conceptualization remain ambivalent In light of empirical advancement, this paper aims to clarify the concept of dynamic capabilities, and then identify three component factors which reflect the common features of dynamic capabilities across firms and which may be adopted and further developed into a measurement construct in future research Further, a research model is developed encompassing antecedents and consequences of dynamic capabilities in an integrated framework Suggestions for future research and managerial implications are also discussed
1,987 citations
Cites background from "The dynamics of product innovation ..."
...studies pertinent to dynamic capabilities have largely focused on new product development only as an internal enabler for firm change and renewal (Dougherty 1992; Daneels 2002)....
[...]
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors examined how environmental aspects (i.e., dynamism and competitiveness) moderate the effectiveness of exploratory and exploitative innovation and found that exploratory innovation is more effective in dynamic environments, whereas exploiting competitive environments is more beneficial to a unit's financial performance.
Abstract: Research on exploration and exploitation is burgeoning, yet our understanding of the antecedents and consequences of both activities remains rather unclear. We advance the growing body of literature by focusing on the apparent differences of exploration and exploitation and examining implications for using formal (i.e., centralization and formalization) and informal (i.e., connectedness) coordination mechanisms. This study further examines how environmental aspects (i.e., dynamism and competitiveness) moderate the effectiveness of exploratory and exploitative innovation. Results indicate that centralization negatively affects exploratory innovation, whereas formalization positively influences exploitative innovation. Interestingly, connectedness within units appears to be an important antecedent of both exploratory and exploitative innovation. Furthermore, our findings reveal that pursuing exploratory innovation is more effective in dynamic environments, whereas pursuing exploitative innovation is more beneficial to a unit's financial performance in more competitive environments. Through this richer explanation and empirical assessment, we contribute to a greater clarity and better understanding of how ambidextrous organizations coordinate the development of exploratory and exploitative innovation in organizational units and successfully respond to multiple environmental conditions.
1,968 citations
References
More filters
01 Feb 2009
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors describe the process of inducting theory using case studies from specifying the research questions to reaching closure, which is a process similar to hypothesis-testing research.
Abstract: Building Theories From Case Study Research - This paper describes the process of inducting theory using case studies from specifying the research questions to reaching closure. Some features of the process, such as problem definition and construct validation, are similar to hypothesis-testing research. Others, such as within-case analysis and replication logic, are unique to the inductive, case-oriented process. Overall, the process described here is highly iterative and tightly linked to data. This research approach is especially appropriate in new topic areas. The resultant theory is often novel, testable, and empirically valid. Finally, framebreaking insights, the tests of good theory (e.g., parsimony, logical coherence), and convincing grounding in the evidence are the key criteria for evaluating this type of research.
40,005 citations
TL;DR: The dynamic capabilities framework as mentioned in this paper analyzes the sources and methods of wealth creation and capture by private enterprise firms operating in environments of rapid technological change, and suggests that private wealth creation in regimes of rapid technology change depends in large measure on honing intemal technological, organizational, and managerial processes inside the firm.
Abstract: The dynamic capabilities framework analyzes the sources and methods of wealth creation and capture by private enterprise firms operating in environments of rapid technological change. The competitive advantage of firms is seen as resting on distinctive processes (ways of coordinating and combining), shaped by the firm's (specific) asset positions (such as the firm's portfolio of difftcult-to- trade knowledge assets and complementary assets), and the evolution path(s) it has aflopted or inherited. The importance of path dependencies is amplified where conditions of increasing retums exist. Whether and how a firm's competitive advantage is eroded depends on the stability of market demand, and the ease of replicability (expanding intemally) and imitatability (replication by competitors). If correct, the framework suggests that private wealth creation in regimes of rapid technological change depends in large measure on honing intemal technological, organizational, and managerial processes inside the firm. In short, identifying new opportunities and organizing effectively and efficiently to embrace them are generally more fundamental to private wealth creation than is strategizing, if by strategizing one means engaging in business conduct that keeps competitors off balance, raises rival's costs, and excludes new entrants. © 1997 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
27,902 citations
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors define a leadership event as a perceived segment of action whose meaning is created by the interactions of actors involved in producing it, and present a set of innovative methods for capturing and analyzing these contextually driven processes.
Abstract: �Traditional, hierarchical views of leadership are less and less useful given the complexities of our modern world. Leadership theory must transition to new perspectives that account for the complex adaptive needs of organizations. In this paper, we propose that leadership (as opposed to leaders) can be seen as a complex dynamic process that emerges in the interactive “spaces between” people and ideas. That is, leadership is a dynamic that transcends the capabilities of individuals alone; it is the product of interaction, tension, and exchange rules governing changes in perceptions and understanding. We label this a dynamic of adaptive leadership, and we show how this dynamic provides important insights about the nature of leadership and its outcomes in organizational fields. We define a leadership event as a perceived segment of action whose meaning is created by the interactions of actors involved in producing it, and we present a set of innovative methods for capturing and analyzing these contextually driven processes. We provide theoretical and practical implications of these ideas for organizational behavior and organization and management theory.
22,673 citations
21,313 citations
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors explore the usefulness of analyzing firms from the resource side rather than from the product side, in analogy to entry barriers and growth-share matrices, the concepts of resource position barrier and resource-product matrices are suggested.
Abstract: Summary The paper explores the usefulness of analysing firms from the resource side rather than from the product side. In analogy to entry barriers and growth-share matrices, the concepts of resource position barrier and resource-product matrices are suggested. These tools are then used to highlight the new strategic options which naturally emerge from the resource perspective.
18,677 citations