IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ris/sphecs/0402.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Impact Of Open Innovation Practices And Moderating Effect Of Inter-Organizational Networks On Innovation Performance Of Large Firms In Sri Lanka

Author

Listed:
  • R.N. , WEERASINGHE

    (University of Sri Jayewardenepura)

  • A.K.W. , JAYAWARDANE

    (University of Moratuwa, Katubedda, Moratuwa)

  • U.A.S., YAPA

    (University of Sri Jayewardenepura, Nugegoda)

Abstract

Innovation plays a prominent role in the contemporary world. It brings novel products and services to the market while exploring new ways of production, distribution, marketing and impacts all other aspects of organizations including human behaviour through hard as well as soft methods. Open innovation has been introduced as a new paradigm in innovation management. This study examines the impact of open innovation on innovation performance of the listed companies in Sri Lanka with the moderating effect of inter-organizational networks. Open innovation practices have been recognized in this study in two folds – as outside-in open innovation and inside-out open innovation Data were collected through a survey among 165 top-level managers of listed companies in Sri Lanka. The sample was selected using purposive and snowballing sampling methods. After testing the validity and the reliability of the instrument and collected data, simple regression analysis was conducted to test the hypotheses. The study findings indicate that both outside-in open innovation and inside-out open innovation positively and significantly impact innovation performance. Further, results show that inter-organization networks positively moderate the effect of both inside-out open innovation and outside-in open innovation on innovation performance.

Suggested Citation

  • R.N. , Weerasinghe & A.K.W. , Jayawardane & U.A.S., Yapa, 2021. "The Impact Of Open Innovation Practices And Moderating Effect Of Inter-Organizational Networks On Innovation Performance Of Large Firms In Sri Lanka," Annals of Spiru Haret University, Economic Series, Universitatea Spiru Haret, vol. 21(3), pages 29-58.
    • Handle: RePEc:ris:sphecs:0402
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://anale.spiruharet.ro/index.php/economics/article/view/1094/pdf
    File Function: Full text
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Xie, Xuemei & Fang, Liangxiu & Zeng, Saixing, 2016. "Collaborative innovation network and knowledge transfer performance: A fsQCA approach," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(11), pages 5210-5215.
    2. Lazaric Nathalie & Lorenz Edward, 1998. "Trust and Economic Learning: Compte rendu par Cecile Gode-Sanchez," Journal des Economistes et des Etudes Humaines, De Gruyter, vol. 8(2-3), pages 353-362, June.
    3. Hanna Kuittinen & Kaisu Puumalainen & Ari Jantunen & Kalevi Kyläheiko & Satu Pätäri, 2013. "Coping with uncertainty - exploration, exploitation, and collaboration in R%D," International Journal of Business Innovation and Research, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 7(3), pages 340-361.
    4. L. Ranmuthumalie Silva & Elvira Uyarra & Ray Oakey, 2012. "Academic Entrepreneurship in a Resource-Constrained Environment: Diversification and Synergistic Effects," International Studies in Entrepreneurship, in: David B. Audretsch & Erik E. Lehmann & Albert N. Link & Alexander Starnecker (ed.), Technology Transfer in a Global Economy, edition 127, chapter 0, pages 73-97, Springer.
    5. Zhang, Guiyang & Tang, Chaoying, 2017. "How could firm's internal R&D collaboration bring more innovation?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 299-308.
    6. Belderbos, René & Cassiman, Bruno & Faems, Dries & Leten, Bart & Van Looy, Bart, 2014. "Co-ownership of intellectual property: Exploring the value-appropriation and value-creation implications of co-patenting with different partners," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(5), pages 841-852.
    7. Alexander McKelvie & Johan Wiklund & Anna Brattström, 2018. "Externally Acquired or Internally Generated? Knowledge Development and Perceived Environmental Dynamism in New Venture Innovation," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 42(1), pages 24-46, January.
    8. Nathalie Lazaric & Edward Lorenz (ed.), 1998. "Trust and Economic Learning," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 1127, March.
    9. James G. March, 1991. "Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 71-87, February.
    10. Ikujiro Nonaka, 1994. "A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Knowledge Creation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(1), pages 14-37, February.
    11. 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.
    12. Nathalie Lazaric & Edward Lorenz, 1998. "The Economics of Trust and Learning," Post-Print halshs-00483661, HAL.
    13. Berchicci, Luca, 2013. "Towards an open R&D system: Internal R&D investment, external knowledge acquisition and innovative performance," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 117-127.
    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. Jeffrey Cummings, 2003. "Knowledge Sharing : A Review of the Literature," World Bank Publications - Books, The World Bank Group, number 19060.
    2. Mark Lorenzen, 2007. "Social Capital and Localised Learning: Proximity and Place in Technological and Institutional Dynamics," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 44(4), pages 799-817, April.
    3. Demetris Vrontis & Alkis Thrassou & Gabriele Santoro & Armando Papa, 2017. "Ambidexterity, external knowledge and performance in knowledge-intensive firms," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 42(2), pages 374-388, April.
    4. Vanhaverbeke, W.P.M. & Beerkens, B.E. & Duysters, G.M., 2003. "Explorative and exploitative learning strategies in technology-based alliance networks," Working Papers 03.22, Eindhoven Center for Innovation Studies.
    5. TINA M. Jose Vega & Dennis M. López, 2012. "Evaluating The Effect Of Industry Specialist Duration On Audit Quality And Audit Fees," Working Papers 0023, College of Business, University of Texas at San Antonio.
    6. Lee, Cheng-Yu & Wang, Ming-Chao & Huang, Yen-Chih, 2015. "The double-edged sword of technological diversity in R&D alliances: Network position and learning speed as moderators," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 33(6), pages 450-461.
    7. Santoro, Gabriele & Bresciani, Stefano & Papa, Armando, 2020. "Collaborative modes with Cultural and Creative Industries and innovation performance: The moderating role of heterogeneous sources of knowledge and absorptive capacity," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 92.
    8. Elsner, Wolfram & Hocker, Gero & Schwardt, Henning, 2009. "Simplistic vs. Complex Organization: Markets, Hierarchies, and Networks in an 'Organizational Triangle'," MPRA Paper 14315, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. Zhang, Haisu & Wu, Fang & Cui, Anna Shaojie, 2015. "Balancing market exploration and market exploitation in product innovation: A contingency perspective," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 297-308.
    10. Paul E. Bierly & Fariborz Damanpour & Michael D. Santoro, 2009. "The Application of External Knowledge: Organizational Conditions for Exploration and Exploitation," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(3), pages 481-509, May.
    11. Jensen, Are & Clausen, Tommy H., 2017. "Origins and emergence of exploration and exploitation capabilities in new technology-based firms," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 163-175.
    12. Lee, Jeoung Yul & Xiao, Shufeng(Simon) & Choi, Byungchul, 2021. "Unpacking the drivers of emerging market firms’ international joint venture formation: The interplay between technological innovation strategies and home- and host-institutional pressures," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 378-392.
    13. Rabab H. Saleh & Christopher M. Durugbo & Soud M. Almahamid, 2023. "What makes innovation ambidexterity manageable: a systematic review, multi-level model and future challenges," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 17(8), pages 3013-3056, November.
    14. Johannes W. F. C. van Lieshout & Andre H. J. Nijhof & Gijs J. W. Naarding & Robert J. Blomme, 2021. "Connecting strategic orientation, innovation strategy, and corporate sustainability: A model for sustainable development through stakeholder engagement," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(8), pages 4068-4080, December.
    15. Nonaka, Ikujiro & Kodama, Mitsuru & Hirose, Ayano & Kohlbacher, Florian, 2014. "Dynamic fractal organizations for promoting knowledge-based transformation – A new paradigm for organizational theory," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 137-146.
    16. Dennys Eduardo Rossetto & Roberto Carlos Bernardes & Felipe Mendes Borini & Cristiane Chaves Gattaz, 2018. "Structure and evolution of innovation research in the last 60 years: review and future trends in the field of business through the citations and co-citations analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 115(3), pages 1329-1363, June.
    17. SUN, Yu-tao & ZHANG, Chen & WANG, Jin-min, 2022. "How to Benefit from Balancing External Knowledge Acquisition? A Chinese EIT Industry Case," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 178(C).
    18. Ng, Stephen C.H. & Rungtusanatham, Johnny M. & Zhao, Xiande & Lee, T.S., 2015. "Examining process management via the lens of exploitation and exploration: Reconceptualization and scale development," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 1-15.
    19. J. Andrei Villarroel & John E. Taylor & Christopher L. Tucci, 2013. "Innovation and learning performance implications of free revealing and knowledge brokering in competing communities: insights from the Netflix Prize challenge," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 19(1), pages 42-77, March.
    20. Brea, Edgar & Ford, Jerad A., 2023. "No silver bullet: Cognitive technology does not lead to novelty in all firms," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 122(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    innovation; open innovation; innovation performance; large firms; Sri Lanka;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D02 - Microeconomics - - General - - - Institutions: Design, Formation, Operations, and Impact

    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:ris:sphecs:0402. 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: Aurelian A BONDREA or Constantin Mecu The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask Constantin Mecu to update the entry or send us the correct address (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ffuspro.html .

    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.