Learning orientation, firm innovation capability, and firm performance
Introduction
Innovation is closely related to organizational learning. Thompson [1] defines innovation as the generation, acceptance, and implementation of new ideas, processes, products, or services. According to Zaltman et al. [2] and Rogers [3], [4], it is an idea, practice, or material artifact perceived as new by the relevant unit of adoption. Amabile et al. [5] define innovation as the successful implementation of creative ideas within an organization (see also Ref. [6]). The innovation process involves the acquisition, dissemination, and use of new knowledge [7], [8], [9], [10]. There seems to be wide agreement that learning climate and firm innovation are highly correlated, and many authors have called for an examination of how they are linked [6], [7], [11], [12].
A systematic study of the relationship between learning orientation and firm innovation has not been carried out for two reasons. First, there is no general consensus on how to define and operationalize the learning orientation construct. Most researchers have viewed it as a single dimension, and different scales have been used to measure it. Few empirical studies have systematically examined the measurement properties of this construct. Second, the role of learning orientation in firm innovativeness remains unclear [13]. Hurley and Hult [6] propose an antecedent role, but empirical evidence on the relationship is imperative.
The present study investigates the relationships among learning orientation, firm innovativeness, and firm performance, through a model drawn from organizational learning theory and the new product literature. A construct of learning orientation is developed based on the literature. Learning orientation is proposed to be an important antecedent of firm innovativeness, which in turn influences firm performance. Four components of learning orientation are identified: commitment to learning, shared vision, open-mindedness, and intraorganizational knowledge sharing. Data were collected from 187 US firms to test the model.
In the next section, the conceptual framework is presented, and a set of testable hypotheses is proposed. Methods of the study are then introduced, which include information about the sample, study measures, data analysis, and test results. Following a discussion of the results, implications and limitations are offered.
Section snippets
The framework and hypotheses
The framework in Fig. 1 was derived from the literature on organizational learning and innovation [3], [4], [6], [14], [15], [16]. Researchers have concluded that organizational learning is associated with the development of new knowledge, which is crucial for firm innovation capability and firm performance [6]. An organization committed to learning is likely to possess state-of-the-art technology [17], which leads to greater innovation capability in both products and processes. Furthermore,
Data
The data used to test the hypotheses are drawn from a survey of senior executives from a broad spectrum of US industries. A sample of 400 R&D vice presidents was randomly drawn from the CorpTech Directory of Technology Companies. The sample frame covered a range of manufacturing and services industries, including chemicals, machinery, electronic, instruments, computer and data processing, engineering, and management services. Each informant was asked to evaluate the operation of a single
Measure validation
Fig. 1 illustrates the proposed latent variable model, showing all structural paths. Before testing this model, a series of tests was performed to establish the unidimensionality of the measures.
Discussion and implications
In this study, a framework for studying learning orientation, innovation capability, and firm performance was developed. The model was tested using data collected from large US firms. The results support all but one of the hypotheses and reveal that learning orientation is critical for innovation and performance. Based on the findings, a number of guidelines can be offered to both scholars and practitioners regarding the role of learning orientation in firm innovation.
Clearly, learning
Limitations and future research directions
This study emphasizes the importance of learning orientation and links it with innovation and performance, but it does not address the issue of how organizational learning should be carried out. Future research could identify the antecedents of learning orientation and construct a comprehensive framework of both antecedents and consequences. For example, many studies have explored learning from other firms through strategic alliance and other intraorganizational forms [50]. Future research can
References (50)
- et al.
A global learning organization structure and market information processing
J Bus Res
(1997) - et al.
Global organizational learning capacity in purchasing: construct and measurement
J Bus Res
(1997) - et al.
A theoretical perspective of the antecedents and consequences of organizational learning in marketing channels
J Bus Res
(1996) - et al.
Learning from strategic success and failure
J Bus Res
(1987) - et al.
New products: what separates winners from losers?
J Prod Innovation Manage
(1987) A composite indicator of a firm's innovativeness. An empirical analysis based on survey data for Swiss manufacturing
Res Policy
(1996)Bureaucracy and innovation
Adm Sci Q
(1965)- et al.
Innovations and organizations
(1973) Diffusion of innovations
(1983)Diffusion of innovations
(1995)
Assessing the work environment for creativity
Acad Manage J
Innovation, market orientation, and organizational learning: an integration and empirical examination
J Mark
Organizational innovation: a meta-analysis of effects of determinants and moderators
Acad Manage J
Testing two contrasting structural models of innovativeness in a contractual network
Hum Commun Res
Organizational improvisation and organizational memory
Acad Manage Rev
A resource-based view of product development
Acad Manage Rev
Interorganizational links and innovation: the case of hospital services
Acad Manage J
Framework for market-based organizational learning: linking values, knowledge, and behavior
J Acad Mark Sci
Profiles of product innovators among large U.S. manufacturers
Manage Sci
Product development: past research, present findings, and future directions
Acad Manage Rev
Organizational decline and innovation: a contingency framework
Acad Manage Rev
Determinants of new firm performance: a review and meta-analysis
J Prod Innovation Manage
Strategic orientation of the firm and new firm performance
J Mark Res
Managing the international strategic sourcing process as a market-driven organizational learning system
Decis Sci
Organizational learning: a review of the literature with implications for HRD professionals
Hum Resour Dev
Cited by (1916)
The key role of innovation and organizational resilience in improving business performance: A mixed-methods approach
2024, International Journal of Information ManagementProximity or alienation? Can knowledge type influence the relationship between proximity and enterprise innovation performance?
2024, Technological Forecasting and Social ChangeTechnological innovation and eco-efficiency in manufacturing companies: Does Co-innovation orientation matter?
2024, Journal of Cleaner ProductionThe interplay of lean practices and digitalization on organizational learning systems and operational performance
2024, International Journal of Production EconomicsWillingness to implement innovative solutions for creating information-based added value in food value chains
2024, Journal of Cleaner ProductionHow can prosocial silence be golden? The roles of commitment to learning and organizational support
2024, Learning Organization