IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/halshs-00727515.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Actions driving and legitimizing radical innovations in a large firm

Author

Listed:
  • Johansson Magnus

    (Institute for Innovation and Entrepreneurship, Université de Gothenburg, Suède - IIE - Institute for Innovation and Entrepreneurship, Université de Gothenburg, Suède - GU - Göteborgs Universitet = University of Gothenburg)

  • Rani Jeanne Dang

    (GREDEG - Groupe de Recherche en Droit, Economie et Gestion - UNS - Université Nice Sophia Antipolis (1965 - 2019) - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique - UniCA - Université Côte d'Azur)

  • Rick Middel

    (Institute for Innovation and Entrepreneurship, Université de Gothenburg, Suède - IIE - Institute for Innovation and Entrepreneurship, Université de Gothenburg, Suède - GU - Göteborgs Universitet = University of Gothenburg)

Abstract

In a longitudinal real time case study over 14 months, we follow the process of radical innovation in an incumbent Swedish firm. Applying institutional theory and the concept of legitimacy, we try to shed new light on the firm process of developing and implementing radical ideas. We deconstruct the black box of individual actions undertaken in the process and trace the effect of these actions on the development and legitimacy for the radical idea. We find that when an idea lack top management support and the process of innovation are interrupted, lower level employees' action can have a defining impact of the survival. In the literature there is a perceived need for a consistent view on how to organize the bottom up processes of innovation within a firm. Emerging from the qualitative grounded analysis we thus formalize these actions undertaken in a radical innovation process.

Suggested Citation

  • Johansson Magnus & Rani Jeanne Dang & Rick Middel, 2012. "Actions driving and legitimizing radical innovations in a large firm," Post-Print halshs-00727515, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:halshs-00727515
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://shs.hal.science/halshs-00727515
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://shs.hal.science/halshs-00727515/document
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mary Tripsas & Giovanni Gavetti, 2000. "Capabilities, cognition, and inertia: evidence from digital imaging," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(10‐11), pages 1147-1161, October.
    2. Andrew Hargadon & Angelo Fanelli, 2002. "Action and Possibility: Reconciling Dual Perspectives of Knowledge in Organizations," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 13(3), pages 290-302, June.
    3. Christensen, Clayton M., 1993. "The Rigid Disk Drive Industry: A History of Commercial and Technological Turbulence," Business History Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 67(4), pages 531-588, January.
    4. Andrew H. Van de Ven, 1986. "Central Problems in the Management of Innovation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(5), pages 590-607, May.
    5. Hubert Gatignon & Michael L. Tushman & Wendy Smith & Philip Anderson, 2002. "A Structural Approach to Assessing Innovation: Construct Development of Innovation Locus, Type, and Characteristics," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 48(9), pages 1103-1122, September.
    6. William E. Souder & Rudy K. Moenaert, 1992. "Integrating Marketing And R&D Project Personnel Within Innovation Projects: An Information Uncertainty Model," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(4), pages 485-512, July.
    7. Akira Takeishi & Yaichi Aoshima & Masaru Karube, 2010. "Reasons for Innovation: Legitimizing Resource Mobilization for Innovation in the Cases of the Okochi Memorial Prize Winners," Springer Books, in: Hiroyuki Itami & Ken Kusunoki & Tsuyoshi Numagami & Akira Takeishi (ed.), Dynamics of Knowledge, Corporate Systems and Innovation, chapter 0, pages 165-189, Springer.
    8. Gilbert, Richard J & Newbery, David M G, 1982. "Preemptive Patenting and the Persistence of Monopoly," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 72(3), pages 514-526, June.
    9. Michael Lounsbury & Mary Ann Glynn, 2001. "Cultural entrepreneurship: stories, legitimacy, and the acquisition of resources," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(6‐7), pages 545-564, June.
    10. Bledow, Ronald & Frese, Michael & Anderson, Neil & Erez, Miriam & Farr, James, 2009. "A Dialectic Perspective on Innovation: Conflicting Demands, Multiple Pathways, and Ambidexterity," Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Cambridge University Press, vol. 2(3), pages 305-337, September.
    11. Van de Ven, Andrew R., 1986. "Central Problems in the Management of Innovation," Agricultural Research Policy Seminar 139708, University of Minnesota Extension.
    12. Deborah Dougherty & Trudy Heller, 1994. "The Illegitimacy of Successful Product Innovation in Established Firms," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(2), pages 200-218, May.
    13. Lippi, Andrea, 2000. "One theory, many practices. Institutional allomorphism in the managerialist reorganization of Italian local governments," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 16(4), pages 455-477, December.
    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. Burgers, J. Henri & Jansen, Justin J.P. & Van den Bosch, Frans A.J. & Volberda, Henk W., 2009. "Structural differentiation and corporate venturing: The moderating role of formal and informal integration mechanisms," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 24(3), pages 206-220, May.
    2. Caroline A. Bartel & Raghu Garud, 2009. "The Role of Narratives in Sustaining Organizational Innovation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(1), pages 107-117, February.
    3. Cécile Fonrouge & Cécile Ayerbe, 2005. "Les transitions entre innovations : études de cas et proposition d'une grille d'interprétation," Post-Print halshs-00696111, HAL.
    4. Cécile Ayerbe & Cécile Fonrouge, 2005. "Les transitions entre innovations:études de cas et proposition d’une grille d’interprétation," Revue Finance Contrôle Stratégie, revues.org, vol. 8(2), pages 39-64, June.
    5. Birkinshaw, Julian & Ridderstråle, Jonas, 1999. "Fighting the corporate immune system: a process study of subsidiary initiatives in multinational corporations," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 8(2), pages 149-180, April.
    6. Brion, Sébastien & Mothe, Caroline & Sabatier, Mareva, 2007. "What impacts more on innovation : Organizational context or individual competences ?," MPRA Paper 10595, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. Da Mota de Pina E Cunha, A.M., 1998. "Determinants of Product Innovation in Organizations : Practices and Performance in the Portugese Financial Sector," Other publications TiSEM e6e4e56e-b72a-4392-8d79-f, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    8. Sébastien Brion & Caroline Mothe & Maréva Sabatier, 2010. "The Impact Of Organisational Context And Competences On Innovation Ambidexterity," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 14(02), pages 151-178.
    9. Markus Reihlen & Jan‐Florian Schlapfner & Monika Seeger & Hannah Trittin‐Ulbrich, 2022. "Strategic Venturing as Legitimacy Creation: The Case of Sustainability," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(2), pages 417-459, March.
    10. Andrew Hargadon & Angelo Fanelli, 2002. "Action and Possibility: Reconciling Dual Perspectives of Knowledge in Organizations," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 13(3), pages 290-302, June.
    11. Blazevic, Vera & Lievens, Annouk, 2004. "Learning during the new financial service innovation process: Antecedents and performance effects," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 57(4), pages 374-391, April.
    12. Blazevic, V. & Lievens, A., 2003. "Learning during the new financial service innovation process: antecedents and performance effects," Research Memorandum 023, Maastricht University, Maastricht Research School of Economics of Technology and Organization (METEOR).
    13. Lee Foster & Anna Wiewiora & Timothy Donnet, 2024. "Integrating Knowledge Management and Governance for Innovation Outcomes: A New Framework for Managing Innovation in a Project Environment," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 15(2), pages 7143-7170, June.
    14. Bouncken, Ricarda B. & Kraus, Sascha, 2013. "Innovation in knowledge-intensive industries: The double-edged sword of coopetition," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 66(10), pages 2060-2070.
    15. Sarooghi, Hessamoddin & Libaers, Dirk & Burkemper, Andrew, 2015. "Examining the relationship between creativity and innovation: A meta-analysis of organizational, cultural, and environmental factors," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 30(5), pages 714-731.
    16. J. P. Eggers & Sarah Kaplan, 2009. "Cognition and Renewal: Comparing CEO and Organizational Effects on Incumbent Adaptation to Technical Change," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(2), pages 461-477, April.
    17. Simon, Fanny & Tellier, Albéric, 2011. "How do actors shape social networks during the process of new product development?," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 29(5), pages 414-430.
    18. Martin Hoegl & Katharina Weinkauf & Hans Georg Gemuenden, 2004. "Interteam Coordination, Project Commitment, and Teamwork in Multiteam R&D Projects: A Longitudinal Study," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(1), pages 38-55, February.
    19. Kristina McElheran, 2015. "Do Market Leaders Lead in Business Process Innovation? The Case(s) of E-business Adoption," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 61(6), pages 1197-1216, June.
    20. Johnson, J. David, 2012. "Knowledge networks: Dilemmas and paradoxes," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 347-353.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Legitimacy; Radical Innovation; Actions;
    All these keywords.

    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:hal:journl:halshs-00727515. 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.