IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ids/ijeima/v10y2009i2p122-137.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Reasons for incomplete innovation implementation: why do they matter?

Author

Listed:
  • Eelko K.R.E. Huizingh
  • Maryse J. Brand

Abstract

Many organisational innovations, such as e-commerce, can be adopted at multiple levels. This implies that experiences at one level may influence the intention to adopt the next level. In this paper, we investigate 98 companies where innovation implementation is incomplete and study how the level of implementation relates to the intention to further adopt the innovation. Our findings show that the usual association of incomplete implementation with failure is not correct. In over a third of the companies that we surveyed, the implementation is not yet finished. Furthermore, the results highlight the importance of taking into account the reason for incomplete implementation. When the implementation is unfinished, the degree of implementation is negatively related to the intention to further adopt. When either the implementation process or the innovation failed, implementation is not related to intention. We also find a strong and positive direct effect of unfinished implementation on intention.

Suggested Citation

  • Eelko K.R.E. Huizingh & Maryse J. Brand, 2009. "Reasons for incomplete innovation implementation: why do they matter?," International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation Management, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 10(2), pages 122-137.
    • Handle: RePEc:ids:ijeima:v:10:y:2009:i:2:p:122-137
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.inderscience.com/link.php?id=25178
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    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:ids:ijeima:v:10:y:2009:i:2:p:122-137. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Sarah Parker (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.inderscience.com/browse/index.php?journalID=7 .

    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.