IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v11y2019i18p4858-d264523.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Impact of the Openness of Firms’ External Search Strategies on Exploratory Innovation and Exploitative Innovation

Author

Listed:
  • Mingfeng Tang

    (School of Business Administration, Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, Chengdu 610074, China
    Bureau d’Économie Théorique et Appliquée, University of Strasbourg, 67085 Strasbourg, France)

  • Peng Xu

    (School of Business Administration, Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, Chengdu 610074, China)

  • Patrick Llerena

    (Bureau d’Économie Théorique et Appliquée, University of Strasbourg, 67085 Strasbourg, France)

  • Asghar Afshar Jahanshahi

    (CENTRUM Católica Graduate Business School, Lima 15023, Peru
    Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú, Lima 15023, Peru)

Abstract

Innovation activities of private firms are crucial for sustainable economic growth in every society. Therefore, the majority of firms around the world spend large amounts of capital (money, time, and human resources) in searching for novel innovative opportunities in the marketplace. In our study, we sought to understand how the openness of firms’ external search strategies (external search breadth and external search depth) affects firms’ innovation capabilities as measured by awareness, decision-making, interpretation, and implementation capability. Furthermore, using survey data collected from 112 Chinese manufacturing firms over a six-month period, this study conducted an empirical analysis about the association between firms’ innovation capabilities on the type of innovation (exploratory innovation vs. exploitative innovation). This study also provides important managerial insights for manufacturing companies.

Suggested Citation

  • Mingfeng Tang & Peng Xu & Patrick Llerena & Asghar Afshar Jahanshahi, 2019. "The Impact of the Openness of Firms’ External Search Strategies on Exploratory Innovation and Exploitative Innovation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(18), pages 1-20, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:18:p:4858-:d:264523
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/18/4858/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/18/4858/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Uriel Stettner & Dovev Lavie, 2014. "Ambidexterity under scrutiny: Exploration and exploitation via internal organization, alliances, and acquisitions," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(13), pages 1903-1929, December.
    2. Cohen, Wesley M & Levin, Richard C & Mowery, David C, 1987. "Firm Size and R&D Intensity: A Re-examination," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(4), pages 543-565, June.
    3. Dovev Lavie & Jingoo Kang & Lori Rosenkopf, 2011. "Balance Within and Across Domains: The Performance Implications of Exploration and Exploitation in Alliances," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(6), pages 1517-1538, December.
    4. James G. March, 1991. "Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 71-87, February.
    5. Michael Lubatkin & Zeki Simsek & Yan Ling & John F. Veiga, 2006. "Ambidexterity and Performance in Small-to Medium-Sized Firms : The Pivotal Role of Top Management Team Behavioral Integration," Post-Print hal-02311781, HAL.
    6. Lori Rosenkopf & Atul Nerkar, 2001. "Beyond local search: boundary‐spanning, exploration, and impact in the optical disk industry," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(4), pages 287-306, April.
    7. Asghar Afshar Jahanshahi & Stephen X. Zhang, 2015. "Real Options Reasoning and Innovative Performance in the Context of Dynamic Capabilities," Springer Books, in: Alexander Brem & Éric Viardot (ed.), Adoption of Innovation, edition 127, pages 181-196, Springer.
    8. Ulrich Lichtenthaler & Eckhard Lichtenthaler, 2009. "A Capability‐Based Framework for Open Innovation: Complementing Absorptive Capacity," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(8), pages 1315-1338, December.
    9. Caloffi, Annalisa & Mariani, Marco & Rossi, Federica & Russo, Margherita, 2018. "A comparative evaluation of regional subsidies for collaborative and individual R&D in small and medium-sized enterprises," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(8), pages 1437-1447.
    10. Glenn B. Voss & Zannie Giraud Voss, 2013. "Strategic Ambidexterity in Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises: Implementing Exploration and Exploitation in Product and Market Domains," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(5), pages 1459-1477, October.
    11. Bernhard Truffer & Lars Coenen, 2012. "Environmental Innovation and Sustainability Transitions in Regional Studies," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 46(1), pages 1-21, November.
    12. Asghar Afshar Jahanshahi & Alexander Brem, 2017. "Sustainability in SMEs: Top Management Teams Behavioral Integration as Source of Innovativeness," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-16, October.
    13. Fenfen Wei & Nanping Feng & Kevin H. Zhang, 2017. "Innovation Capability and Innovation Talents: Evidence from China Based on a Quantile Regression Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(7), pages 1-15, July.
    14. Paul Trott & Dap Hartmann, 2009. "Why 'Open Innovation' Is Old Wine In New Bottles," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 13(04), pages 715-736.
    15. Justin J. P. Jansen & Frans A. J. Van Den Bosch & Henk W. Volberda, 2006. "Exploratory Innovation, Exploitative Innovation, and Performance: Effects of Organizational Antecedents and Environmental Moderators," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(11), pages 1661-1674, November.
    16. Mingfeng Tang & Grace Walsh & Daniel Lerner & Markus A. Fitza & Qiaohua Li, 2018. "Green Innovation, Managerial Concern and Firm Performance: An Empirical Study," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(1), pages 39-51, January.
    17. Alexander Brem, 2017. "Creativity and routine: conceptual considerations on managing organisational ambidexterity in entrepreneurial ventures," International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation Management, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 21(3), pages 261-273.
    18. Limaj, Everist & Bernroider, Edward W.N., 2019. "The roles of absorptive capacity and cultural balance for exploratory and exploitative innovation in SMEs," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 137-153.
    19. Zi-Lin He & Poh-Kam Wong, 2004. "Exploration vs. Exploitation: An Empirical Test of the Ambidexterity Hypothesis," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(4), pages 481-494, August.
    20. Peter J. Lane & Michael Lubatkin, 1998. "Relative absorptive capacity and interorganizational learning," Post-Print hal-02311860, HAL.
    21. Alexander Brem & Rogelio Puente-Díaz & Marine Agogué, 2017. "Creativity and Innovation: State of the Art and Future Perspectives for Research," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Alexander Brem & Rogelio Puente-Diaz & Marine Agogué (ed.), The Role of Creativity in the Management of Innovation State of the Art and Future Research Outlook, chapter 1, pages 1-12, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    22. Zeki Simsek, 2009. "Organizational Ambidexterity: Towards a Multilevel Understanding," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(4), pages 597-624, June.
    23. Laursen, Keld & Salter, Ammon, 2004. "Searching high and low: what types of firms use universities as a source of innovation?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(8), pages 1201-1215, October.
    24. Sidney G. Winter, 2000. "The Satisficing Principle in Capability Learning," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(10‐11), pages 981-996, October.
    25. Henrich R. Greve, 2007. "‘Exploration and exploitation in product innovation’," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 16(5), pages 945-975, October.
    26. Koryak, Oksana & Lockett, Andy & Hayton, James & Nicolaou, Nicos & Mole, Kevin, 2018. "Disentangling the antecedents of ambidexterity: Exploration and exploitation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 413-427.
    27. Alexander Brem & Éric Viardot (ed.), 2015. "Adoption of Innovation," Springer Books, Springer, edition 127, number 978-3-319-14523-5, July.
    28. Marcus Wagner, 2009. "The links of sustainable competitiveness and innovation with openness and user integration: an empirical analysis," International Journal of Innovation and Sustainable Development, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 4(4), pages 314-329.
    29. Wesley M. Cohen & Richard C. Levin & David C. Mowery, 1987. "Firm Size and R&D Intensity: A Re-Examination," NBER Working Papers 2205, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    30. Nicolaj Siggelkow & Daniel A. Levinthal, 2003. "Temporarily Divide to Conquer: Centralized, Decentralized, and Reintegrated Organizational Approaches to Exploration and Adaptation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 14(6), pages 650-669, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Luo, Yuanda & Xiong, Guobao & Mardani, Abbas, 2022. "Environmental information disclosure and corporate innovation: The “Inverted U-shaped” regulating effect of media attention," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 453-463.
    2. Qichao Zhang & Zhenzhong Ma & Long Ye & Ming Guo & Shuzhen Liu, 2021. "Future Work Self and Employee Creativity: The Mediating Role of Informal Field-Based Learning for High Innovation Performance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-17, January.
    3. Wu, Haizhen & Han, Zhao'an & Zhou, Yong, 2021. "Optimal degree of openness in open innovation: A perspective from knowledge acquisition & knowledge leakage," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    4. Yu Zhang & Xuechun Zhang & Hao Zhang & Lusi A, 2022. "The Influence of External Knowledge Searches on Enterprises’ Innovation Performance: A Meta-Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(13), pages 1-23, July.
    5. Alexander Brem & Rogelio Puente-Díaz, 2020. "Creativity, Innovation, Sustainability: A Conceptual Model for Future Research Efforts," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-5, April.
    6. Yuan Ni & Jia Wang & Cui Li, 2022. "The Power of Sustainability in the “Black Swan” Event: Entrepreneurial Cognition of Top Management Team and Dual Business Model Innovation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(6), pages 1-22, March.
    7. José Pedro Carreón-Gutiérrez & José Manuel Saiz-Álvarez, 2019. "Product Newness, Low Competition, Recent Technology, and Export Orientation as Predictors for Entrepreneurial Growth Aspirations," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(20), pages 1-20, October.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Martin Owusu Ansah & Nicholas Addai-Boamah & Abeeku Bylon Bamfo & Lucy Afeafa Ry-Kottoh, 2022. "Organizational ambidexterity and financial performance in the banking industry: evidence from a developing economy," Journal of Financial Services Marketing, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 27(3), pages 250-263, September.
    2. Úbeda-García, Mercedes & Claver-Cortés, Enrique & Marco-Lajara, Bartolomé & Zaragoza-Sáez, Patrocinio, 2020. "Toward a dynamic construction of organizational ambidexterity: Exploring the synergies between structural differentiation, organizational context, and interorganizational relations," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 363-372.
    3. Solís-Molina, Miguel & Hernández-Espallardo, Miguel & Rodríguez-Orejuela, Augusto, 2018. "Performance implications of organizational ambidexterity versus specialization in exploitation or exploration: The role of absorptive capacity," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 181-194.
    4. Marina Estrada-Cruz & Noelia Rodriguez-Hernández & Antonio J. Verdú-Jover & Jose Maria Gómez-Gras, 2022. "The effect of competitive intensity on the relationship between strategic entrepreneurship and organizational results," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 18(1), pages 1-24, March.
    5. Fourné, Sebastian P.L. & Rosenbusch, Nina & Heyden, Mariano L.M. & Jansen, Justin J.P., 2019. "Structural and contextual approaches to ambidexterity: A meta-analysis of organizational and environmental contingencies," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 37(5), pages 564-576.
    6. Marina Estrada-Cruz & Noelia Rodriguez-Hernández & Antonio J. Verdú-Jover & Jose Maria Gómez-Gras, 0. "The effect of competitive intensity on the relationship between strategic entrepreneurship and organizational results," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-24.
    7. Katharina Stelzl & Maximilian Röglinger & Katrin Wyrtki, 2020. "Building an ambidextrous organization: a maturity model for organizational ambidexterity," Business Research, Springer;German Academic Association for Business Research, vol. 13(3), pages 1203-1230, November.
    8. Olga Kassotaki, 2022. "Review of Organizational Ambidexterity Research," SAGE Open, , vol. 12(1), pages 21582440221, March.
    9. Partanen, Jukka & Kohtamäki, Marko & Patel, Pankaj C. & Parida, Vinit, 2020. "Supply chain ambidexterity and manufacturing SME performance: The moderating roles of network capability and strategic information flow," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 221(C).
    10. Angeloantonio Russo & Rosamartina Schena, 2021. "Ambidexterity in the context of SME alliances: Does sustainability have a role?," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(2), pages 606-615, March.
    11. Mavroudi, Eva & Kesidou, Effie & Pandza, Krsto, 2023. "Effects of ambidextrous and specialized R&D strategies on firm performance: The contingent role of industry orientation," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    12. Osiyevskyy, Oleksiy & Shirokova, Galina & Ritala, Paavo, 2020. "Exploration and exploitation in crisis environment: Implications for level and variability of firm performance," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 227-239.
    13. Shuwaikh, Fatima & Brintte, Souad & Khemiri, Sabrina, 2022. "The impact of dynamic ambidexterity on the performance of organizations: Evidence from corporate venture capital investing in North America," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 200(C), pages 991-1009.
    14. Khan, Zaheer & Lew, Yong Kyu & Marinova, Svetla, 2019. "Exploitative and exploratory innovations in emerging economies: The role of realized absorptive capacity and learning intent," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 499-512.
    15. Lampert, Curba Morris & Kim, Minyoung, 2019. "Going far to go further: Offshoring, exploration, and R&D performance," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 376-386.
    16. Céline Bérard & Marc Fréchet, 2020. "Organizational antecedents of exploration and exploitation in SMEs: The role of structural and resource attributes," Post-Print halshs-02570775, HAL.
    17. Wang, Pengfei & Van De Vrande, Vareska & Jansen, Justin J.P., 2017. "Balancing exploration and exploitation in inventions: Quality of inventions and team composition," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(10), pages 1836-1850.
    18. Peeters, T.J.G., 2013. "External knowledge search and use in new product development," Other publications TiSEM 300ebb34-b090-4210-b95e-f, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    19. Carolina Rojas-Córdova & Amanda J. Williamson & Julio A. Pertuze & Gustavo Calvo, 2023. "Why one strategy does not fit all: a systematic review on exploration–exploitation in different organizational archetypes," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 17(7), pages 2251-2295, October.
    20. Ye Jin Lee & Kwangsoo Shin & Eungdo Kim, 2019. "The Influence of a Firm’s Capability and Dyadic Relationship of the Knowledge Base on Ambidextrous Innovation in Biopharmaceutical M&As," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(18), pages 1-17, September.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:18:p:4858-:d:264523. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.