Search

Considering the universal competitive pressures, it is imperative for the organizations to be more dynamic and innovative. The viability of companies is dependent on innovation and organizational culture is regarded as an important component in realizing the objective of product innovation. The study examines the association between ambidextrous organizational culture and product innovation outcomes through mediation of contextual ambidexterity. By pursuing the snowball sampling technique, pre-established structural questionnaires were distributed among the top management of IT and Telecom sector, 125 valid questionnaires were considered for data analysis purpose. The collected data was analyzed using Smart PLS software and measurement model was assessed with respect to reliability and validity. Structural model was assessed for hypothesis testing using bootstrapping technique. Results indicated that organizational diversity significantly and positively affect new product innovation outcomes i.e., incremental, radical product innovation, and speed to market, whereas shared vision positively affect incremental product innovation. Indirect effects results indicated that significant positive partial mediation of contextual ambidexterity exists between organizational diversity and new product innovation outcomes, i.e., radical innovation and speed to market. Whereas full and significant positive mediation role of contextual ambidexterity exists between shared vision and new product innovation outcomes i.e., radical innovation outcomes and speed to market. At last, no significant mediation role of contextual ambidexterity exists between organizational diversity and incremental innovation outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Corporate strategy development is a well-oiled and recurring process in most established companies. Innovation strategy, however, especially for radical innovation, is new and unknown territory. This creates challenges for companies with radical innovation ambitions. We followed the innovation strategy work of nine large organisations, finding that they all struggle with the process and how to link innovation with corporate strategy in a meaningful way, while at the same time not hampering the innovative ambitions of the organisation. We identify two main challenges of gravitation and a lignment, and develop a framework aimed at asking the questions necessary for increasing awareness about inherent business challenges, and how to overcome them at the intersection between corporate and innovation strategy work. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The resilience of organizations is increasingly dependent on their ability to develop radical innovation capabilities. While the literature documents numerous cases of organizations that already have radical innovation capabilities, the question of organizational devices that can be used to stimulate the emergence of such capabilities remains poorly addressed. Specifically, training for innovation and creativity has been proposed as a means to foster innovation capabilities; however, there has been little empirical evidence concerning the long‐term impacts of such training. To fill this gap, this article aims to document and evaluate the efforts of the research institute of a major Canadian energy company to provide training for innovation and creativity to initiate a radical innovation capability. We rely on a longitudinal study over the span of 18 months, where we observed 128 h of training and conducted 70 semi‐structured interviews with a sample of 40 researchers. We found that training for creativity and innovation has the potential to develop individual creative skills for exploration, to catalyze and federate collective action through common methods and a shared sense of what innovation entails, and to help create a common language and vocabulary between the different groups or divisions of an organization to talk about exploration. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Journal of Financial, Accounting & Managerial Studies is the property of Journal of Financial, Accounting & Managerial Studies and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The aim of this paper is a theoretical reflection which attempt is to define the breakthrough and disruptive innovation phenomena. For many years, scholars have studied the different forms of innovation and have provided new definitions and proposed different approaches to this topic. An issue discussed in this work is the differences between disruptive and breakthrough innovations, which can be perceived as similar but are producing different effects in the industry and market structure, and as well in the product structure and the technological approach to develop an innovation. This paper aims to develop a univocal meaning in the literature, differentiating the two phenomena, and provides a framework for the analysis of the different forms of technological change, studying its pervasive influence on our economy.

This study investigates how entrepreneurs and innovators engage the future, and it reflects on how strategic foresight (also called futures studies) can contribute to innovation and entrepreneurship. The literature emphasizes the importance of planning for the future, but not much attention has been given to how entrepreneurs view, forecast and incorporate the future, and how this influences their innovation and creativity. The study found that entrepreneurs are disconnected from the future, and do not take it seriously. The future is mostly left to unfold, and it appears as a surprise. Entrepreneurs use simple methods to engage the future, and their understanding of it is vague. There is a lack of leadership and coordination around the future, and very little intervention around the future. Entrepreneurs recognize a general connection between the future and innovation, but they fail to see the relationship between innovation and futures studies. Futures studies are central to innovation, especially radical innovation, but entrepreneurs do not exploit it. Incremental innovation is predominant, and this leads to the conclusion that entrepreneurship is dysfunctional, to the extent that radical innovation is an important part of entrepreneurship and futures shaping. The study essentially surfaces a number of obscure philosophical positions regarding the relationship between entrepreneurship, innovation and the future.

Yüksek inovasyon içeren ürünlerde tüketicilerin algıladıkları risk yüksektir. Özellikle yüksek teknoloji ürünlerinde satın alma risk seviyesi bireyin ürünü tercih etme risk seviyesini aşabilir. Bu nedenle yüksek teknoloji ürünleri satan markaların tüketicilerin risk algısını azaltma stratejileri uygulaması gerekmektedir. Bu çalışmada yüksek teknoloji ürünlerine sahip olan markaların belirli ürünleri için gerçekleştirdikleri radikal ve artımsal inovatif ürün özelliklerine karşı tüketicilerin tutumları incelenmiştir. Tüketici tutumlarının incelenmesi için sosyal medya kullanıcılarının markaların lansman döneminde üç ay boyunca artımsal ve radikal ürün özellikleri ile ilgili Twitter üzerinden yaptıkları paylaşımlar çekilerek veri seti oluşturulmuştur. Bu araştırmada, sosyal medya verileri üzerinde duygu analizi yapılarak tüketicilerin tutumları elde edilmiştir. Araştırma sonuçlarına göre kullanıcıların markaların radikal veya artımsal inovatif özellik içeren ürünleri hakkında yaptıkları paylaşımlarda, rakip firmaların ürünleri ile bu markaların ürünlerini kıyasladıkları görülmektedir. İki farklı marka takipçilerinin paylaşımları karşılaştırıldığında artımsal inovasyon destekleyicilerinin iki farklı markaya karşı farklı tutumlar sergiledikleri ve bu tutumların genel olarak pozitif olduğu bulgusuna ulaşılmıştır.

To date, there has been little agreement in the literature on what exactly constitutes radical drug innovation and how to properly measure this important construct. Without a validated measure, our ability to understand radical drug innovations, explain their origins, and demonstrate their implications for management and health policy is limited. This paper addresses the problem of radical drug innovation measurement, provides evidence of the limitations associated with the current state of the art, and offers a new method based on German health technology assessments (HTA). Data was obtained for 147 drugs authorized by the European Medicines Agency from 2011 to 2016. The innovativeness of these drugs was assessed using current measures of radical drug innovation compared with the newly developed measure. Findings indicate that current measures of radical drug innovation are associated with very inconsistent outcomes and do not appear to measure what they purport to measure. This study argues that assessing therapeutic value (as measured by the German HTA) is particularly important, given that drug novelty alone does not conclusively indicate whether a drug will deliver therapeutic value. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Existing theories of organisational behaviour have addressed the relationship between the role of leadership behaviour of project manager and outcomes of subordinates in developing new products (e.g., improving innovation speed and new product performance). However, only a small number of researchers have investigated the impact of leadership behaviour on the fuzzy front end. Specifically, the role of leadership behaviour in reducing uncertainty in the fuzzy front end for each innovation type has been largely overlooked. Apart from employing the path-goal theory and using survey research, this research collects data from the food & beverage, pharmaceutical, and biotechnology industries in Thailand (N = 2 4 4) and analyses the data with structural equation modeling. Our results can contribute how the leadership behaviour of project manager impacts on development of each type of product innovation. The findings reveal that the directive path-goal behaviour of project managers helps to reduce uncertainty in the fuzzy front end during incremental innovation development. In contrast, achievement-oriented behaviour of project managers helps to reduce uncertainty in the fuzzy front end during radical innovation development. Additionally, reducing uncertainty in the fuzzy front end can enhance the new product performance of these two types of innovation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) is considering the adoption of e-sports (i.e., organised competitive video gaming), which could be considered a radical innovation as it deviates in many areas from traditional sports (e.g., online game play format, lack of high physical exertion, complicated intellectual property rights for each game, etc.). However, collaboration with firms familiar with the innovation (e.g., National Association of Collegiate eSports - NACE) might mitigate risks surrounding the radical innovation. Thus, the purpose of this paper was to investigate whether a potential association between the NCAA and NACE would be advantageous to both organisations. Through a deductive qualitative content analysis underpinned by Rogers's (2003) innovation characteristics (e.g., complexity, compatibility and relative advantage), several themes emerged: physical exertion, e-sports structure, amateurism, eligibility, compensation, profitability, and diversity and gender equity. These themes are discussed while identifying the benefits and issues surrounding a NCAA/NACE collegiate e-sports adoption and collaboration. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Digtalization is leading to wide-ranging changes for the economy and is considered as one of the main drivers of innovation. Ever-shorter innovation cycles, high volatility and increased cost pressure are just some of the effects that companies have to face as a result of digitalization. In order to remain competitive in the long term, companies not only have to continuously develop existing products and services, but also exploit the innovation potential of new technologies. This poses new challenges for innovation management, since the company must work on the development of radical or even disruptive innovations in addition to the popular development of incremental innovations. The simultaneous promotion of incremental and radical innovations is also known as ambidexterity. The development of incremental innovations has been established for years in most companies. However, many companies do not have the required know-how about the development of radical innovations and the realization of ambidexterity. One important step on the way to an ambidextrous innovation management is the analysis of the initial situation in the company. Often there is uncertainty about which areas and tasks have to be considered and should be designed in the sense of ambidexterity. Therefore, this paper develops a maturity model for an ambidextrous innovation management. For this purpose, a systematic literature analysis of existing maturity models in innovation management will be conducted and its understanding of innovation will be compared. Since most maturity models do not explicitly differentiate between radical innovations or primarily consider incremental innovations, requirements for the innovation management of radical innovations and ambidexterity were derived in the course of a further systematic literature analysis. Based on this database, a maturity model for an ambidextrous innovation management could be derived, which is subdivided into 26 tasks with 5 different levels each. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Kepes is the property of Universidad de Caldas and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

• Failure is neglected in transitions scholarship. • Four core biases can explain this relative neglect. • Nine relevant perspectives offer possible building blocks. • Three families of perspectives are distinguished. • Four suggestions for research and governance emerge. In this paper, we offer a comprehensive and interdisciplinary review of 'failure' in transitions research. What is meant by failure, and is the community biased against it? How is failure explained through different perspectives? How can failures be addressed more appropriately in transitions studies? We synthesize a large body of evidence spanning transitions studies, innovation studies, science and technology studies, organisation and management studies, policy studies and the history of technology to probe and sharpen these questions. We examine within these literatures the instances and possibilities of success with transitions and discuss why this may be problematic, organising our analysis around four types of bias (selection, cognitive, interpretive, and prescription). In addition, we review three 'families' of framings of failure put forward in and around the socio-technical transitions literature, notably discrete failure events, systemic failings and processual accounts of failure, and discuss how they can be constructively put to work. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Prior corporate governance research focuses much attention on formal factors yet ignores such informal factors as social capital in the relationships between large shareholders and managers. Based on social capital theory, this study examines whether and in which circumstances social capital in the large shareholder–manager relationship affects firms' radical innovation performance. Specifically, we propose that the relational dimension (i.e., relational trust) and the cognitive dimension (i.e., shared goals) of social capital influence firms' radical innovation, and that these effects are moderated by internal managerial risk-taking and external environmental uncertainty. Drawing on data from 182 Chinese firms, we find that firms' radical innovation has an inverted U-shaped relationship with relational trust between large shareholders and managers, and is positively related with their shared goals. Moreover, managerial risk-taking positively moderates the relationship between shared goals and radical innovation, whereas environmental uncertainty negatively moderates this relationship. Lastly, we find that environmental uncertainty positively moderates the inverted U-shaped relationship between relational trust and radical innovation. Overall, this study contributes to existing literature by not only finding the differential effects of distinct social capital dimensions on firm radical innovation but also revealing how these effects depend on internal and external contingency factors (i.e. risk-taking and environmental uncertainty). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

While previous studies have tried to disentangle how the structure of an organization influences its capability to innovate, the results obtained to date are inconclusive and often contradictory. As a result, it is difficult to generalize the conclusions of previous research. In this regard, some authors have pointed out that it is necessary to consider mediating variables to explain how the structure of the organization or some of its characteristics affect innovation. Since the effects of an organic structure must be investigated in conjunction with firm-specific capabilities, such as those related to organizational learning processes, this study considered the role of generative learning as an explanatory variable. Generative learning has the potential to question the current norms of the organization, going beyond simple improvements, in a process that involves intuition, attention, dialogue and inquiry. Using a sample of 251 companies, this study provides empirical evidence of the mediating role of generative learning in the relationship between organic structure and radical innovation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Empirical research has confirmed positive effects of organizational ambidexterity for companies' long-term performance. More recent research has shifted the focus from organizational level exploration and exploitation to the individual in order to understand psychological micro-foundations of individual ambidexterity. However, our current knowledge on how knowledge flows within individual ambidexterity are initiated and affect performance outcomes is limited. This study thus strives to shed light on the topic by introducing two mechanisms, namely ambidextrous knowledge seeking and ambidextrous knowledge offering, that capture how knowledge flows within individual ambidexterity are initiated. Based on survey-data from 415 employees, findings from structural equation modeling provide first empirical evidence that the focal constructs significantly affect knowledge accumulation on the department level as well as its performance. Finally, results from additional moderation analysis indicate, that ambidextrous knowledge offering leads to higher performance effects in environments characterized by the pursuit of radical innovations, while ambidextrous knowledge seeking is rather suited for environments with a focus on innovating incrementally. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Over the past few decades, the impact of customer integration on radical new product (RNP) innovation has been extensively investigated. To date, this important topic presents inconsistent empirical findings that must be converged. In this paper, our systematic literature review addresses these inconsistencies by taking a consolidated view of customer integration's effects on the development of RNPs. This extensive review of 153 empirical papers has two main objectives. First, we provide the primary reasons for inconsistent findings by scrutinizing the operationalizations of customer types (i.e., current customers, potential customers, ordinary users, or users with domain-specific skills) and RNPs (i.e., technological innovativeness, or both technological and market innovativeness) used in the studies, as well as the different perspectives on customer integration [i.e., customer-based idea evaluation, participation in direct and indirect idea generation, research and development (R&D) partnerships with customers, having a customer orientation, and disseminating customer knowledge via R&D-marketing collaborations]. Second, we present a synthesized view on factors in the sphere of the innovating company and the customer that influence customer integration's success along three phases of the radical innovation development process (i.e., discovery, incubation, and acceleration). Finally, we present avenues for future research and discuss managerial implications of our synthesized view. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Revista de Ciencias Sociales (13159518) is the property of Revista de Ciencias Sociales de la Universidad del Zulia Venezuela and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

With the advent of the big data era, some new quantitative tools for enterprise radical innovation research have also emerged. The use of algorithms in machine learning can improve the deficiencies of the current methods of evaluating the technological innovation capability of enterprises. Based on the characteristics of radical innovation and the evaluation mode of traditional innovation performance, an evaluation index system of enterprise radical innovation performance is constituted by six dimensions of resources, technology, product, management, commercial value and social value, and a performance evaluation model of enterprise radical innovation is established by applying the BP neural network. Through model training and simulation verification on radical innovation performance evaluation of the sample enterprises, the results show that the method has high reliability and the model has good generalization ability. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The extant literature affirms that passion is important for entrepreneurs' success. However, the related studies have failed to explain how and when entrepreneurial passion (EP) affects firms' radical innovation (RI). The current study explores the connections between EP and firms' RI and mediation of exploratory learning (EL) in this relationship. Moreover, we investigate the moderating role of the Zhong–Yong thinking (ZYT) of Chinese entrepreneurs. Findings from 310 new Chinese enterprises demonstrate that EP directly influences RI and indirectly through EL. ZYT of entrepreneurs can likewise reinforce the connection between their EP and RI via EL. Lastly, we discuss the theoretical and practical implications of our findings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The authors examine the effect of customer clusters on a firm's innovation. They argue that knowledge leveraged from customer clusters can help the firm develop innovations. The authors specifically concentrate on the effect of a firm's geographical proximity and diversity of customer clusters on innovation outcomes. In addition to showing the importance of customer cluster proximity on firm innovation, they explore the effect of customer cluster heterogeneity on innovation in an international marketing environment. They test the theoretical model using multicountry data (N = 288) drawn from the U.K. innovation survey implemented by the Economic and Social Research Council, which collected the data across five European countries. Theoretical constructs operate largely as hypothesized and explain a substantial proportion of the variation in the different innovation outcomes tested. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Peter Drucker in 1954 said that there are two distinguishing features of the business: marketing and innovation. In the very first edition of the Journal of Marketing Management, Keith Blois examined the influence of customers and competitors in the new product development process, concluding that the widely referenced process models were insufficient for capturing external inputs central to the progress from the generation of ideas to eventual market launch and growth. In the intervening period numerous authors have published research on "product innovation" with the alternative conceptualisations process centre stage. Much of this research, however, is rooted in theories intrinsically concerned with incremental product development and most of that relating to physical consumer goods. More recently, some product innovation research has turned to the specific issue of radical innovation, concluding again that the traditional "stage" models are a necessary but insufficient conceptual framework for analysis. At the same time, the conceptual foundations of marketing have been strengthened by the discussion of the role of interaction, markets and networks. This paper is located where these trends in marketing and innovation research intersect by examining the marketing competences required for radical product innovation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• The significance of radical innovations for sustainability is elucidated from the perspective of diverse discourses. • Grassroots innovation (GI) as a radical innovation paradigm with unconventional agents, goals and practices. • A research gap in the systematic analysis and assessment of the sustainability of GIs persists. • A meta-theoretical framework for assessing the sustainability of radical innovation and GI is proposed. • It integrates the culture and tools of diverse discourses and takes a systems thinking view on the evaluation of innovation. Diverse discourses converge into the importance of broadening the focus of sustainability innovations from merely cleaner technologies to more radical, paradigmatic innovations. Here, we focus on grassroots innovation (GI) as a radical innovation paradigm whose agents, goals and practices are fundamentally different from conventional innovation. Researchers typically attribute GIs the potential to influence the transition toward more sustainable production and consumption. Through a systematic literature review, we find that a research gap in the systematic analysis of GIs' sustainability persists. We thus propose a meta-theoretical framework to systematise the sustainability assessment of GIs across three system levels: product, organisational model and socio-technical system. Our framework delineates how the theory and tools from sustainability assessment and sustainable business models may enrich sustainability transitions studies in the analysis of grassroots, and more broadly, radical innovation, providing a systems thinking view and increasing the credibility and reflexivity of sustainability arguments in transition studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]