IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wsi/ijimxx/v23y2019i04ns136391961950035x.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Managing Knowledge-Related Barriers To Technological Innovation Through Exploitative And Explorative Organisational Strategies

Author

Listed:
  • NUTTANEEYA (ANN) TORUGSA

    (Ratchasuda College, Mahidol University, 111 Moo 6 Phuttamonthon 4 Road, Salaya, Nakhon Pathom 73170, Thailand†Australian Innovation Research Centre, Tasmanian School of Business and Economics, University of Tasmania Private Bag, 108, Hobart Tasmania 7001, Australia)

  • WAYNE O’DONOHUE

    (#x2021;Department of Employment Relations and Human Resources, Griffith University, Gold Coast Campus, Queensland 4222, Australia)

Abstract

This study uses data from a sample of 31,948 European innovating firms to examine the impact that knowledge-related barriers to technological innovation have on the link between the level of such innovation and firm performance, and, to investigate the role of “exploitative” and “explorative” organisational strategies in moderating such impact. Exploitative strategies are measured by the level of organisational innovations, and exploratory strategies are measured by the level of methods for fostering workplace creativity. Using moderated hierarchical regression, the results reveal a negative effect of the interaction between technological innovation and related knowledge constraints on firm performance. They also reveal that the negative interaction effect becomes positive at high levels of organisational innovations and creativity-fostering methods. The study findings thus indicate the need for managers of technologically innovative firms to implement both exploitative and explorative organisational strategies. Doing so could help minimise the negative effects of knowledge-related barriers to technological innovation, and in turn promote innovation-based competitiveness and business success.

Suggested Citation

  • Nuttaneeya (Ann) Torugsa & Wayne O’Donohue, 2019. "Managing Knowledge-Related Barriers To Technological Innovation Through Exploitative And Explorative Organisational Strategies," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 23(04), pages 1-20, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:wsi:ijimxx:v:23:y:2019:i:04:n:s136391961950035x
    DOI: 10.1142/S136391961950035X
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.worldscientific.com/doi/abs/10.1142/S136391961950035X
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1142/S136391961950035X?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. Fariborz Damanpour & Shanthi Gopalakrishnan, 2001. "The Dynamics of the Adoption of Product and Process Innovations in Organizations," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(1), pages 45-65, January.
    2. Ballot, Gérard & Fakhfakh, Fathi & Galia, Fabrice & Salter, Ammon, 2015. "The fateful triangle: Complementarities in performance between product, process and organizational innovation in France and the UK," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 217-232.
    3. Koson Sapprasert & Tommy Høyvarde Clausen, 2012. "Organizational innovation and its effects," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 21(5), pages 1283-1305, October.
    4. Bj–rn Johnson & Edward Lorenz & Bengt-Åke Lundvall, 2002. "Why all this fuss about codified and tacit knowledge?," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 11(2), pages 245-262.
    5. D’Este, Pablo & Iammarino, Simona & Savona, Maria & von Tunzelmann, Nick, 2012. "What hampers innovation? Revealed barriers versus deterring barriers," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 482-488.
    6. James G. March, 1991. "Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 71-87, February.
    7. Ikujiro Nonaka, 1994. "A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Knowledge Creation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(1), pages 14-37, February.
    8. 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.
    9. Nuttaneeya Ann Torugsa & Anthony Arundel & Wayne O’Donohue, 2016. "Inter-Firm Collaboration And Innovation Performance For New-To-Market Products — The Moderating Role Of Technological And Skills-Related Knowledge Assets," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 20(06), pages 1-22, August.
    10. Nathalie Greenan, 2003. "Organisational change, technology, employment and skills: an empirical study of French manufacturing," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 27(2), pages 287-316, March.
    11. Donate, Mario J. & Sánchez de Pablo, Jesús D., 2015. "The role of knowledge-oriented leadership in knowledge management practices and innovation," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(2), pages 360-370.
    12. Fariborz Damanpour & Kathryn A. Szabat & William M. Evan, 1989. "The Relationship Between Types Of Innovation And Organizational Performance," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(6), pages 587-602, November.
    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. Turner, Karynne L. & Monti, Alberto & Annosi, Maria Carmela, 2021. "Disentangling the effects of organizational controls on innovation," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 57-69.
    2. 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.
    3. Manuel Guisado-González & Len Tiu Wright & Manuel Guisado-Tato, 2017. "Product–process matrix and complementarity approach," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 42(3), pages 441-459, June.
    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. Mohamed Ali Ben Halima & Nathalie Greenan & Joseph Lanfranchi, 2021. "Organisational changes and long-term sickness absence and injury leave: a difference in difference approach," TEPP Working Paper 2021-05, TEPP.
    7. 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.
    8. 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.
    9. 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.
    10. 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.
    11. 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.
    12. Arranz, N. & Arroyabe, M.F. & Li, Jun & de Arroyabe, J.C. Fernandez, 2019. "An integrated model of organisational innovation and firm performance: Generation, persistence and complementarity," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 270-282.
    13. Ben Halima, Mohamed Ali & Greenan, Nathalie & Lanfranchi, Joseph, 2023. "Getting sick for profit? The impact of cumulative ICT and management changes on long term sickness absence," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 212(C), pages 659-688.
    14. 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.
    15. Owusu Sarpong & Peter Teirlinck, 2018. "The influence of functional and geographical diversity in collaboration on product innovation performance in SMEs," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 43(6), pages 1667-1695, December.
    16. Mai, Nhat Chi, 2020. "Unpacking the process of overseas knowledge recontextualisation in returnee entrepreneurship - a learning perspective : a study of returnee entrepreneurs in Vietnam," OSF Preprints y5psh, Center for Open Science.
    17. 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.
    18. Olivia Fachrunnisa & Ardian Adhiatma & Heru Kurnianto Tjahjono, 2020. "Cognitive Collective Engagement: Relating Knowledge-Based Practices and Innovation Performance," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 11(2), pages 743-765, June.
    19. Camisón, César & Villar-López, Ana, 2014. "Organizational innovation as an enabler of technological innovation capabilities and firm performance," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 67(1), pages 2891-2902.
    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).

    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:23:y:2019:i:04:n:s136391961950035x. 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.