IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wsi/ijimxx/v22y2018i07ns1363919618500597.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Does Stronger R&D Capability Always Promote Better Innovation? The Moderating Role Of Knowledge Boundary Spanning Of R&D Network

Author

Listed:
  • YANHUI JIANG

    (Business School, Hunan University, Changsha, China)

  • CHONGYANG WEI

    (Business School, Hunan University, Changsha, China)

  • ZHI YANG

    (Business School, Hunan University, Changsha, China)

  • ULAGANATHAN SUBRAMANIAN

    (#x2020;UTB Business of School, Universiti Teknologi Brunei, Brunei)

Abstract

Setting the research background in China, this study draws on absorptive capacity, knowledge inertia and prospect theory to show the relationship between R&D capability and innovation performance which comprises exploitation and exploration. We propose that stronger R&D capability promotes exploitation performance but inhibits exploration performance. As exploitation represents immediate interest and exploration represents long-term interest, we introduce the notion of knowledge boundary spanning of R&D network to balance short-term and long-term benefits. The empirical results show that R&D capability and knowledge boundary spanning of R&D network complement each other for explorative innovation while they present trade-offs for exploitative innovation. This study contributes to existing literature on R&D capability–innovation performance, and it further extends our understanding by investigating the impact of knowledge boundary spanning of R&D network on the R&D capacity–innovation performance relationships. In addition, this study provides references on resources configuration to achieve different innovation strategies.

Suggested Citation

  • Yanhui Jiang & Chongyang Wei & Zhi Yang & Ulaganathan Subramanian, 2018. "Does Stronger R&D Capability Always Promote Better Innovation? The Moderating Role Of Knowledge Boundary Spanning Of R&D Network," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 22(07), pages 1-22, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:wsi:ijimxx:v:22:y:2018:i:07:n:s1363919618500597
    DOI: 10.1142/S1363919618500597
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.worldscientific.com/doi/abs/10.1142/S1363919618500597
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1142/S1363919618500597?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
    ---><---

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

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mustafa Batuhan Ayhan & Ercan Oztemel, 2011. "A methodology for measuring product innovation: a case study for a manufacturing system," International Journal of Manufacturing Technology and Management, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 24(1/2/3/4), pages 139-152.
    2. Raquel Ortega-Argilés & Rosina Moreno & Jordi Caralt, 2005. "Ownership structure and innovation: is there a real link?," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 39(4), pages 637-662, December.
    3. Srikanth Paruchuri & Micki Eisenman, 2012. "Microfoundations of Firm R&D Capabilities: A Study of Inventor Networks in a Merger," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 49(8), pages 1509-1535, December.
    4. Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, 2013. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 6, pages 99-127, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    5. Deborah Dougherty & Trudy Heller, 1994. "The Illegitimacy of Successful Product Innovation in Established Firms," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(2), pages 200-218, May.
    6. Kevin Zheng Zhou & Fang Wu, 2010. "Technological capability, strategic flexibility, and product innovation," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(5), pages 547-561, May.
    7. Yang, Kuo-Pin & Chou, Christine & Chiu, Yu-Jen, 2014. "How unlearning affects radical innovation: The dynamics of social capital and slack resources," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 152-163.
    8. Gunday, Gurhan & Ulusoy, Gunduz & Kilic, Kemal & Alpkan, Lutfihak, 2011. "Effects of innovation types on firm performance," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 133(2), pages 662-676, October.
    9. Chengyuan Wang & Biao Luo & Yong Liu & Zhengyun Wei, 2016. "The impact of executives’ perceptions of environmental threats and organizational slack on innovation strategies," Nankai Business Review International, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 7(2), pages 216-230, June.
    10. James G. March, 1991. "Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 71-87, February.
    11. Richard Blundell & Lorraine Dearden & Costas Meghir & Barbara Sianesi, 1999. "Human capital investment: the returns from education and training to the individual, the firm and the economy," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 20(1), pages 1-23, March.
    12. Beneito, Pilar, 2006. "The innovative performance of in-house and contracted R&D in terms of patents and utility models," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 502-517, May.
    13. Daniel A. Levinthal & James G. March, 1993. "The myopia of learning," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 14(S2), pages 95-112, December.
    14. Tim Swift, 2016. "The perilous leap between exploration and exploitation," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(8), pages 1688-1698, August.
    15. Kevin Zheng Zhou & Caroline Bingxin Li, 2012. "How knowledge affects radical innovation: Knowledge base, market knowledge acquisition, and internal knowledge sharing," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(9), pages 1090-1102, September.
    16. Deeds, David L. & Decarolis, DONA & Coombs, Joseph, 2000. "Dynamic capabilities and new product development in high technology ventures: An empirical analysis of new biotechnology firms," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 15(3), pages 211-229, May.
    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. Perez-Alaniz, Mauricio & Lenihan, Helena & Doran, Justin & Rammer, Christian, 2024. "Subsidising innovation outside or within firms' existing knowledge base: Which is best for radical innovation?," ZEW Discussion Papers 24-007, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.

    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. Chirico, Francesco & Duane Ireland, R. & Pittino, Daniel & Sanchez-Famoso, Valeriano, 2022. "Radical innovation in (multi)family owned firms," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 37(3).
    2. Barge-Gil, Andres & D'Este, Pablo & Herrera, Liliana, 2018. "Corporate scientists as the triggers of transitions towards firms' exploration research strategies," MPRA Paper 85415, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Atif Açıkgöz & Irem Demirkan & Gary P. Latham & Cemil Kuzey, 2021. "The Relationship Between Unlearning and Innovation Ambidexterity with the Performance of New Product Development Teams," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 30(4), pages 945-982, August.
    4. Cho, Sam Yul & Kim, Sang Kyun, 2017. "Horizon problem and firm innovation: The influence of CEO career horizon, exploitation and exploration on breakthrough innovations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(10), pages 1801-1809.
    5. Bai, Xuan & Wang, Qingtao & Sheng, Shibin & Li, Julie Juan, 2021. "Cross-level interpersonal ties and IJV innovation: Evidence from China," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 618-630.
    6. 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.
    7. Forés, Beatriz & Camisón, César, 2016. "Does incremental and radical innovation performance depend on different types of knowledge accumulation capabilities and organizational size?," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(2), pages 831-848.
    8. 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.
    9. Sirén, Charlotta & Kohtamäki, Marko, 2016. "Stretching strategic learning to the limit: The interaction between strategic planning and learning," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(2), pages 653-663.
    10. Yusuke Oh & Koji Takahashi, 2020. "R&D and Innovation: Evidence from Patent Data," Bank of Japan Working Paper Series 20-E-7, Bank of Japan.
    11. Alex Coad & Agustí Segarra-Blasco & Mercedes Teruel, 2021. "A bit of basic, a bit of applied? R&D strategies and firm performance," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 46(6), pages 1758-1783, December.
    12. Montserrat Manzaneque & Alfonso A. Rojo-Ramírez & Julio Diéguez-Soto & Maria J. Martínez-Romero, 2020. "How negative aspiration performance gaps affect innovation efficiency," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 54(1), pages 209-233, January.
    13. Choo Yeon Kim & Myung Sub Lim & Jae Wook Yoo, 2019. "Ambidexterity in External Knowledge Search Strategies and Innovation Performance: Mediating Role of Balanced Innovation and Moderating Role of Absorptive Capacity," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(18), pages 1-23, September.
    14. Ardito, Lorenzo & Messeni Petruzzelli, Antonio, 2017. "Breadth of external knowledge sourcing and product innovation: The moderating role of strategic human resource practices," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 261-272.
    15. Peng Xu & Heng Zhang & Guiyu Bai, 2019. "Research on the Differentiated Impact Mechanism of Parent Company Shareholding and Managerial Ownership on Subsidiary Responsive Innovation: Empirical Analysis Based on ‘Principal–Agent’ Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(19), pages 1-17, September.
    16. Dew, Nicholas & Read, Stuart & Sarasvathy, Saras D. & Wiltbank, Robert, 2008. "Outlines of a behavioral theory of the entrepreneurial firm," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 66(1), pages 37-59, April.
    17. Andreea N. Kiss & Dirk Libaers & Pamela S. Barr & Tang Wang & Miles A. Zachary, 2020. "CEO cognitive flexibility, information search, and organizational ambidexterity," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(12), pages 2200-2233, December.
    18. 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.
    19. José Andrade & Mário Franco & Luis Mendes, 2021. "Technological capacity and organisational ambidexterity: the moderating role of environmental dynamism on Portuguese technological SMEs," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 15(7), pages 2111-2136, October.
    20. Andrew D. Henderson & Melissa E. Graebner, 2020. "Entering a Golden Age of Sustained Superiority: Entrepreneurial Creation or Discovery?," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(6), pages 1432-1451, November.

    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:wsi:ijimxx:v:22:y:2018:i:07:n:s1363919618500597. 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: Tai Tone Lim (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.worldscinet.com/ijim/ijim.shtml .

    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.