IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cbr/cbrwps/wp431.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Variety of Search and Innovation: A Comparative Study of US Manufacturing and Knowledge Intensive Business Services Sectors

Author

Listed:
  • Cosh, A.
  • Zhang, J.

Abstract

Whilst the variety of search activities promotes innovation, there is a central tension between a firm's potential benefits from wide and diverse search activities and its ability to reap these potential benefits. In this paper, we argue that the potential and realised benefits from a firm' search activities are influenced not only by its resources and capabilities, but also by the nature of innovation activities at sector level. Drawing upon a statistical analysis of a large scale survey conducted in the US, we examine the impact of a firm's external search strategy along two dimensions (search intensity and direction) on its innovative performance. Our findings suggest that manufacturing firms tend to benefit from wide and diversified search activities whereas knowledge intensive business services (KIBS) firms tend to benefit from narrow and specialised search activities. Furthermore, when taking account of firm size and absorptive capacity, a more nuanced picture emerges. Implications and contributions to the innovation search literature are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Cosh, A. & Zhang, J., 2012. "Variety of Search and Innovation: A Comparative Study of US Manufacturing and Knowledge Intensive Business Services Sectors," Working Papers wp431, Centre for Business Research, University of Cambridge.
    • Handle: RePEc:cbr:cbrwps:wp431
    Note: PRO-1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.jbs.cam.ac.uk/cbrwp431/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Barras, Richard, 1993. "Interactive innovation in financial and business services: The vanguard of the service revolution," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 101-102, April.
    2. Deborah Dougherty, 1992. "Interpretive Barriers to Successful Product Innovation in Large Firms," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 3(2), pages 179-202, May.
    3. Grimpe, Christoph & Sofka, Wolfgang, 2009. "Search patterns and absorptive capacity: Low- and high-technology sectors in European countries," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(3), pages 495-506, April.
    4. Alan Hughes & Eric Wood, 1999. "Rerthinking Innovation Comparisons between Manufacturing and Services: The Experience of the CBR SME Surveys in the UK," Working Papers wp140, Centre for Business Research, University of Cambridge.
    5. Garud, Raghu & Karnoe, Peter, 2003. "Bricolage versus breakthrough: distributed and embedded agency in technology entrepreneurship," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 277-300, February.
    6. Ian Miles, 1995. "Innovation in Services," Chapters, in: Mark Dodgson & Roy Rothwell (ed.), The Handbook of Industrial Innovation, chapter 18, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    7. Anil K. Gupta & Paul E. Tesluk & M. Susan Taylor, 2007. "Innovation At and Across Multiple Levels of Analysis," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(6), pages 885-897, December.
    8. Aija Leiponen & Constance E. Helfat, 2010. "Innovation objectives, knowledge sources, and the benefits of breadth," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(2), pages 224-236, February.
    9. Tether, Bruce S. & Tajar, Abdelouahid, 2008. "Beyond industry-university links: Sourcing knowledge for innovation from consultants, private research organisations and the public science-base," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(6-7), pages 1079-1095, July.
    10. Michael Lubatkin & Zeki Simsek & Yan Ling & John F. Veiga, 2006. "Ambidexterity and Performance in Small-to Medium-Sized Firms : The Pivotal Role of Top Management Team Behavioral Integration," Post-Print hal-02311781, HAL.
    11. Drejer, Ina, 2004. "Identifying innovation in surveys of services: a Schumpeterian perspective," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 551-562, April.
    12. Bruce Tether, 2005. "Do Services Innovate (Differently)? Insights from the European Innobarometer Survey," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(2), pages 153-184.
    13. Graham Winch & Eric Schneider, 1993. "Managing The Knowledge‐Based Organization: The Case Of Architectural Practice," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(6), pages 923-937, November.
    14. Constance E. Helfat, 1994. "Firm-Specificity in Corporate Applied R&D," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(2), pages 173-184, May.
    15. Lee Fleming, 2001. "Recombinant Uncertainty in Technological Search," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(1), pages 117-132, January.
    16. Sofka, Wolfgang & Grimpe, Christoph, 2009. "Specialized search and innovation performance: evidence across Europe," ZEW Discussion Papers 09-016, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    17. James G. March, 1991. "Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 71-87, February.
    18. Royston Greenwood & Stan X. Li & Rajshree Prakash & David L. Deephouse, 2005. "Reputation, Diversification, and Organizational Explanations of Performance in Professional Service Firms," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 16(6), pages 661-673, December.
    19. Daniel A. Levinthal & James G. March, 1993. "The myopia of learning," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 14(S2), pages 95-112, December.
    20. Jon Sundbo, 1997. "Management of Innovation in Services," The Service Industries Journal, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(3), pages 432-455, July.
    21. Shaker A. Zahra & Harry J. Sapienza & Per Davidsson, 2006. "Entrepreneurship and Dynamic Capabilities: A Review, Model and Research Agenda," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(4), pages 917-955, June.
    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. Martin Backfisch, 2014. "Search Balance and Product and Process Innovations," MAGKS Papers on Economics 201461, Philipps-Universität Marburg, Faculty of Business Administration and Economics, Department of Economics (Volkswirtschaftliche Abteilung).
    2. Roberto Ganau & Eleonora Di Maria, 2014. "Determinants of technological innovation in SMEs. Firm-level factors, agglomeration economies and the role of KIBS providers," ERSA conference papers ersa14p820, European Regional Science Association.

    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. Peeters, T.J.G., 2013. "External knowledge search and use in new product development," Other publications TiSEM 300ebb34-b090-4210-b95e-f, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    2. 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.
    3. Criscuolo, Paola & Nicolaou, Nicos & Salter, Ammon, 2012. "The elixir (or burden) of youth? Exploring differences in innovation between start-ups and established firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 319-333.
    4. Brea, Edgar & Ford, Jerad A., 2023. "No silver bullet: Cognitive technology does not lead to novelty in all firms," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 122(C).
    5. Samina Karim & Aseem Kaul, 2015. "Structural Recombination and Innovation: Unlocking Intraorganizational Knowledge Synergy Through Structural Change," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(2), pages 439-455, April.
    6. 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.
    7. Gatti, Corrado & Volpe, Loredana & Vagnani, Gianluca, 2015. "Interdependence among productive activities: Implications for exploration and exploitation," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(3), pages 711-722.
    8. Leone, Maria Isabella & Messeni Petruzzelli, Antonio & Natalicchio, Angelo, 2022. "Boundary spanning through external technology acquisition: The moderating role of star scientists and upstream alliances," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 116(C).
    9. Faïz Gallouj & Maria Savona, 2010. "Towards a Theory of Innovation in Services: A State of the Art," Chapters, in: Faïz Gallouj & Faridah Djellal (ed.), The Handbook of Innovation and Services, chapter 1, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    10. Xiao, Fenglong & Shen, Yinjie, 2024. "Wolves at the door to the unknown: Innovation search and hedge fund activism," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(2).
    11. Ardito, Lorenzo & Messeni Petruzzelli, Antonio & Dezi, Luca & Castellano, Sylvaine, 2020. "The influence of inbound open innovation on ambidexterity performance: Does it pay to source knowledge from supply chain stakeholders?," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 321-329.
    12. Hannu Littunen & Timo Tohmo & Esa Storhammar, 2021. "Innovation among SMEs in Finland: The impact of stakeholder engagement and firm-level characteristics," Journal of Entrepreneurship, Management and Innovation, Fundacja Upowszechniająca Wiedzę i Naukę "Cognitione", vol. 17(4), pages 157-196.
    13. Shafique, Muhammad & Hagedoorn, John, 2022. "Look at U: Technological scope of the acquirer, technological complementarity with the target, and post-acquisition R&D output," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    14. Avimanyu Datta, 2011. "Combining Networks, Ambidexterity and Absorptive Capacity to Explain Commercialization of Innovations: A Theoretical Model from Review and Extension," Journal of Management and Strategy, Journal of Management and Strategy, Sciedu Press, vol. 2(4), pages 2-25, December.
    15. Buccieri, Dominic & Javalgi, Raj G. & Cavusgil, Erin, 2020. "International new venture performance: Role of international entrepreneurial culture, ambidextrous innovation, and dynamic marketing capabilities," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 29(2).
    16. Jenny Meyer, 2010. "Does Social Software Support Service Innovation?," International Journal of the Economics of Business, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(3), pages 289-311.
    17. Andreas Strobl & Kurt Matzler & Bright Adu Nketia & Viktoria Veider, 2020. "Individual innovation behavior and firm-level exploration and exploitation: how family firms make the most of their managers," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 14(4), pages 809-844, August.
    18. Lampert, Curba Morris & Kim, Minyoung, 2019. "Going far to go further: Offshoring, exploration, and R&D performance," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 376-386.
    19. Sebastian Raisch & Julian Birkinshaw & Gilbert Probst & Michael L. Tushman, 2009. "Organizational Ambidexterity: Balancing Exploitation and Exploration for Sustained Performance," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(4), pages 685-695, August.
    20. Wang, Pengfei & Van De Vrande, Vareska & Jansen, Justin J.P., 2017. "Balancing exploration and exploitation in inventions: Quality of inventions and team composition," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(10), pages 1836-1850.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    variety of search; open innovation; SME; manufacturing; Knowledge intensive business services; US survey;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • L25 - Industrial Organization - - Firm Objectives, Organization, and Behavior - - - Firm Performance
    • O14 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - Industrialization; Manufacturing and Service Industries; Choice of Technology
    • O32 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Management of Technological Innovation and R&D

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:cbr:cbrwps:wp431. 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: Ruth Newman (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.jbs.cam.ac.uk .

    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.