Management Innovation

Understanding of management innovation has been advanced in the last decade, but it is still a relatively under-researched topic, at least in comparison with that of technological innovation. This article introduces this volume on Management Innovation; it reviews critically, the multiple conceptual approaches to the topic, looks at the different research streams related to it, and considers the performance consequences or its occurrence. In the latter respect, the article analyzes the synergistic effects of co-adopting management and technological innovation. It also provides a robust theoretical foundation for addressing co-adoption, using a cross-disciplinary perspective. The article also notes that the literature on joint adoption has three blind spots: (i) the literature is fragmented into different, albeit complementary, frameworks and perspectives; (ii) the literature has mainly focused on technological performance, or other general performance, effects deriving from the introduction of management innovations, giving less attention to specific management innovation effects; and (iii) the literature so far has not looked at the joint adoption of specific pairs of technological and management innovations. Finally, as a general point, the article observes that it is surprising how little empirical research has so far gone into exploring the association between the adoption of management innovation and its performance outcomes.

This paper determines the performance consequences of the joint adoption of organizational and technological innovations. Using CIS data to analyse 2,837 technological innovators, it is empirically demonstrated that a firm’s co-adoption strategy leads to a premium technological performance thanks to the extra synergistic effects, or the generation of complementarities. Firms co-adopting outperform those adopting solely technological innovations. Therefore, the combination of technical and non-technical competencies, and the integration of a socio-technical system, creates exceptional innovation capabilities. The strategic adoption of solely technological innovation is not enough: in order to leverage the performance of technological innovation it should be integrated into the organization.

Unlike a large portion of previous innovation research that has focused on performance consequences of the adoption of technological innovations, this study focuses on the benefits gained from the implementation of managerial innovations. We examine the mediating role of managerial innovation implementation on the influences of technological process innovation capability and pressure from external stakeholders on environmental performance. We develop hypotheses and test them using survey data from 192 ISO 14001 certified facilities in the US. The results suggest that extent of implementation partially mediate the effect of process innovation capability but fully mediate the effect of external pressure on environmental performance. We discuss the implications of these findings for research and practice on the implementation of managerial innovations.

Organizational innovation is studied as an important source of competitive advantage both for firms and for territories. This relevance is related to the widening of the innovation concept, which is no longer limited to technology. However, the concept of organizational innovation is still considered ambiguous, and even the Oslo Manual recognizes that its referential definition is still at an exploratory level. The analysis of organizational innovation has been made further methodologically challenging by the fact that innovation processes are no longer understood as linear and predictive, but complex and variable. It follows that new studies and methods are required if we are to acquire a deeper knowledge of organizational innovation practices and their consequences for competitiveness. Consequently, this research has aimed to achieve a thorough understanding of how an organizational innovation process is developed and understood in practice; and to generate new theoretical insights about such processes for guiding future research. Grounded theory has been used as a suitable methodology for this inductive, longitudinal, field-based case study research. Already, preliminary results have helped us gain new theoretical insights about the suitability of the Oslo Manual’s definition in practice and about the value of the application of an innovation generation and adoption process perspective to the study of organizational innovation. Work is still in-progress to consolidate first results, to guarantee their confirmability and to facilitate their transfer.

This paper uses a longitudinal case study of an internally driven organizational innovation and redesign process at a scientific or public research organization (PRO) as a way of illustrating innovation dynamics that result from the need to formulate a new strategic mission for the organization as a response to wider environmental and institutional pressure. Based on in-depth interviews with key participants, supplemented by a review of project reports, contract archives, publications and press coverage, this paper illustrates that organizational renewal is a complex phenomenon in PROs and that innovations in essential elements of the formal structure, work practices and values can serve as important enablers of change in highly rigid work environments; it also shows that the introduction of certain management principles borrowed from private organizations may accelerate change by providing a strong basis for developing a shared collaborative organization in public research.

Scholars have proposed that taking risks is a key factor to explain innovation performance in organizations. However, the relationship between risk taking and innovation performance is generally examined from two unconnected perspectives. From a managerial perspective, entrepreneurial orientation and leadership theories are invoked to justify a positive relationship between risk taking and innovation. From an employees’ viewpoint, creativity theories suggest that a risk-taking climate influences innovative and creative behaviors. This study examines the possibility of a connection between managers’ risk-taking propensity, employees’ risk-taking climate, and innovation performance from both a theoretical and an empirical point of view. To do so, we draw on a dataset of 182 firms from the Spanish and Italian ceramic tile industry.

The objective of this paper is to gain an insight into the types of innovation that Spanish firms in arts, heritage and recreation undertook during the period 2006–2011. To achieve this aim we have examined which types of innovation –product, process, marketing and organizational–, have the highest share of the total, and how important organizational innovation is for these firms. The study is based on a sample of firms in the arts, heritage and recreation industries, based on a survey drawn up by the Spanish National Statistics Institute. Three important conclusions can be inferred from the results obtained in this paper for the Spanish case. The first is that, although these sectors are less innovative in technological product and process innovations than other industries (i.e. manufacturing and services), they have a similar share in the case of non-technological innovations (organizational and marketing). The second is that, in these sectors, organizational innovations take precedence, followed by marketing, process and product innovations. Therefore, and contrary to what is usually assumed, innovations in these industries are not focused on products. This second conclusion of the paper constitutes an important contribution to the analysis of the arts, heritage and recreation industries, where product innovation is seen as a distinctive feature. The third is that firms which carried out organizational innovations also undertook marketing innovations, showing that both types of innovations are highly correlated. This situation is not found for other types of innovations.

Widespread agreement exists for the need to improve innovation in organizations. Despite significant steps forward, inefficiencies remain and little has been accomplished in understanding how innovation can overcome these. Current research focuses on organizational innovations. Here we focus on organizational innovations’ objectives and adoption. The analysis is based on a sample of 10,796 Spanish businesses. Measures of organizational innovations and innovation objectives are based on the Oslo Manual. Statistical tests find a dynamic behavior in organizations, since 41.5 % have accomplished some organizational innovation in the period 2007–2009. Results reveal the real relation between organizational innovation objectives and adoption, with improving innovation skills being the most influential organizational innovation objective.

Management literature suggests that employee creativity can contribute substantially to organisational innovation, effectiveness and survival. In addition, the ability to innovate has also emerged as a basic strategic option. Innovation models express the need to implement specific human resource practices (HRP) for the development of skills, knowledge and innovation-oriented behaviours. Human resource practices can be extremely important when organisations intend to foster creativity and innovation which are key factors in competing effectively. With this aim in mind, we suggest that the existence of certain HRP such as training, performance appraisal and reward systems have a positive effect on creativity and innovation. Our results show that there is a positive relationship between HRP and innovation in both the processes and the products in the case under study. Some HRP such as autonomy, participation, training, career plans, and organised recruitment processes, appear as being strongly linked to creativity and innovation. The most important contribution of this paper refers to the mediating effect of creativity between certain human resources practices and innovation.

Unlike technological innovations, non-technological ones are relatively scarcely reported in the literature. Our study analyses the influence of cooperation with different external agents: (1) suppliers, (2) customers, (3) competitors, (4) experts and consultants, and (5) universities and public research centres on the development of these types of innovation, a distinction being made between organizational and marketing innovations. The results make it clear that such cooperation is significantly favourable to the development of both, but our analysis leads us to conclude that cooperation with suppliers is the most influential of the five.

This paper sheds light on the antecedents of management innovation adoption in firms, exploring the simultaneous co-adoption or concurrence with technological innovations. Analyzing 12,824 firms using Spanish CIS 2006 data, we elaborate on previous models (Ganter and Hecker (J Bus Res 66(5):575–584, 2012); Mol and Birkinshaw (J Bus Res 62(12):1269–1280, 2009)), extending them by incorporating two new elements: (1) a resource-based view framework and, (2) the complementarities and organizational integration generated from the simultaneous co-adoption of management and technological innovations. Our results partially confirm those found in the previous models but extend them by showing that management innovation is frequently accompanied by technological innovation, especially when firms are complex innovators. Significant cross-country differences arise, based on institutional environment variety.