IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0256751.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Research on dual innovation incentive mechanism in terms of organizations’ differential knowledge absorptive capacity

Author

Listed:
  • Xuejiao An
  • Lin Qi
  • Jian Zhang
  • Xinran Jiang

Abstract

Differences in the capacity for absorption between different organizations will have an important impact on an organization’s choices of innovation exploration and exploitive innovation strategies. Organizations need to explore correct strategic decisions under different policies for long-term development. This study with limited rational first-mover and late-mover organizations as the research object, based on the evolutionary game theory model, using visualization system deduced first-mover and late-mover organizations in the knowledge absorptive capacity differences and incentive policies under the condition of different strategies selection process. The research shows that the rationality of policy incentive setting has a direct impact on the choice of organizational dual innovation strategy with different knowledge absorption capacities. The market pattern is stable and organizational knowledge absorption capacity is different. The higher the policy incentive level is, the more the organization is inclined to carry out exploratory innovation activities. Under the environment of stable market structure, different organizational knowledge absorption capacity, and no policy incentive, late-mover cannot adopt exploratory innovation strategy alone. When the market pattern is stable and the absorptive capacity of the organization is different, whether the late-mover can adopt the exploratory innovation strategy depends on the policy incentive level. In this case, the optimal situation is to have the opportunity to change to exploratory innovation at the same time as the first-movers.

Suggested Citation

  • Xuejiao An & Lin Qi & Jian Zhang & Xinran Jiang, 2021. "Research on dual innovation incentive mechanism in terms of organizations’ differential knowledge absorptive capacity," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(8), pages 1-17, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0256751
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0256751
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0256751
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0256751&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0256751?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. James G. March, 1991. "Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 71-87, February.
    2. Saul Lach, 2002. "Do R&D Subsidies Stimulate or Displace Private R&D? Evidence from Israel," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 50(4), pages 369-390, December.
    3. Chen, Yan, 2017. "Dynamic ambidexterity: How innovators manage exploration and exploitation," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 60(3), pages 385-394.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Evers, Natasha & Andersson, Svante, 2021. "Predictive and effectual decision-making in high-tech international new ventures – A matter of sequential ambidexterity," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 30(1).
    2. Medhanie Gaim & Nils Wåhlin & Miguel Pina e Cunha & Stewart Clegg, 2018. "Analyzing competing demands in organizations: a systematic comparison," Journal of Organization Design, Springer;Organizational Design Community, vol. 7(1), pages 1-16, December.
    3. Lirios Alos-Simo & Antonio J. Verdu-Jover & Jose M. Gomez-Gras, 2020. "The Dynamic Process of Ambidexterity in Eco-Innovation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-17, March.
    4. Gao, Yuchen & Hu, Yimei & Liu, Xielin & Zhang, Huanren, 2021. "Can public R&D subsidy facilitate firms’ exploratory innovation? The heterogeneous effects between central and local subsidy programs," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(4).
    5. Samila, Sampsa & Sorenson, Olav, 2010. "Venture capital as a catalyst to commercialization," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(10), pages 1348-1360, December.
    6. Wenhong Zhao & Te Yang & Karen D. Hughes & Yixin Li, 2021. "Entrepreneurial alertness and business model innovation: the role of entrepreneurial learning and risk perception," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 17(2), pages 839-864, June.
    7. Montealegre, Ramiro & Iyengar, Kishen, 2021. "Managing digital business platforms: A continued exercise in balancing renewal and refinement," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 64(1), pages 51-59.
    8. Tommy Clausen, 2008. "Do subsidies have positive impacts on R&D and innovation activities at the firm level?," Working Papers on Innovation Studies 20070615, Centre for Technology, Innovation and Culture, University of Oslo.
    9. Lysander Weiss & Dominik Kanbach, 2022. "Toward an integrated framework of corporate venturing for organizational ambidexterity as a dynamic capability," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 72(4), pages 1129-1170, December.
    10. Lina Liu & Bo Yu & Weiwei Wu, 2019. "The Formation and Effects of Exploitative Dynamic Capabilities and Explorative Dynamic Capabilities: An Empirical Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-21, May.
    11. Ashrafi, Amir & Zareravasan, Ahad, 2022. "An ambidextrous approach on the business analytics-competitive advantage relationship: Exploring the moderating role of business analytics strategy," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 179(C).
    12. Beniamino Callegari & Ranvir S. Rai, 2021. "Blending in: A Case Study of Transitional Ambidexterity in the Financial Sector," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-18, February.
    13. Xinwei Ye & Lei Ma & Junwen Feng & Yang Cheng & Zheng Liu, 2018. "Impact of Technology Habitual Domain on Ambidextrous Innovation: Case Study of a Chinese High-Tech Enterprise," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-21, December.
    14. Arman Avadikyan & Gilles Lambert & Christophe Lerch, 2016. "A Multi-Level Perspective on Ambidexterity: The Case of a Synchrotron Research Facility," Working Papers of BETA 2016-44, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    15. Henri A. Schildt & Markku V.J. Maula & Thomas Keil, 2005. "Explorative and Exploitative Learning from External Corporate Ventures," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 29(4), pages 493-515, July.
    16. Giuliani, Elisa & Martinelli, Arianna & Rabellotti, Roberta, 2016. "Is Co-Invention Expediting Technological Catch Up? A Study of Collaboration between Emerging Country Firms and EU Inventors," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 192-205.
    17. Insoo Cho & Peter F. Orazem, 2021. "How endogenous risk preferences and sample selection affect analysis of firm survival," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 56(4), pages 1309-1332, April.
    18. Tomasz Helbin & Amy Van Looy, 2021. "Is Business Process Management (BPM) Ready for Ambidexterity? Conceptualization, Implementation Guidelines and Research Agenda," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-25, February.
    19. Son K. Lam & Thomas E. DeCarlo & Ashish Sharma, 2019. "Salesperson ambidexterity in customer engagement: do customer base characteristics matter?," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 47(4), pages 659-680, July.
    20. Alan Hevner & Isabelle Comyn-Wattiau & Jacky Akoka & Nicolas Prat, 2018. "A pragmatic approach for identifying and managing design science research goals and evaluation criteria," Post-Print hal-02283783, HAL.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:plo:pone00:0256751. 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    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.