Innovation ambidexterity of open firms. The role of internal relational social capital

ABSTRACT The success of the open innovation (OI) paradigm is still debated and literature is searching for its determinants. Although firms’ internal social context is crucial to explain the success or failure of OI practices, such context is still poorly investigated. The aim of the paper is to analyse whether internal social capital (SC), intended as employees’ propensity to interact and work in groups in order to solve innovation issues, mediates the relationship between OI practices and innovation ambidexterity (IA). Results, based on a survey research developed in Finland, Italy and Sweden, suggest that collaborations with different typologies of partners (scientific and business) achieve good results in terms of IA, through the partial mediation of the internal SC.

[1]  Y. Doz.  THE USE OF ALLIANCES IN IMPLEMENTING TECHNOLOGY STRATEGIES , 2009 .

[2]  Mohan Subramaniam,et al.  The Influence of Intellectual Capital on the Types of Innovative Capabilities , 2005 .

[3]  Helle Alsted Søndergaard,et al.  Neither invented nor shared here: The impact and management of attitudes for the adoption of open innovation practices , 2014 .

[4]  Fredrik Von Corswant,et al.  Coordinating customers and proactive suppliers: A case study of supplier collaboration in product development , 2002 .

[5]  Alvaro López-Cabrales,et al.  Leveraging the innovative performance of human capital through HRM and social capital in Spanish firms , 2011 .

[6]  Martin Natter,et al.  Understanding a firm's openness decisions in innovation , 2012 .

[7]  Ali E. Akgün,et al.  Emotional and learning capability and their impact on product innovativeness and firm performance , 2007 .

[8]  Chiara Verbano,et al.  Open innovation and new issues in R&D organization and personnel management , 2012 .

[9]  W. Vanhaverbeke,et al.  Choosing Governance Modes for External Technology Sourcing , 2006 .

[10]  Eoin Whelan,et al.  Creating Employee Networks That Deliver Open Innovation , 2011 .

[11]  Gabriel Jacobs,et al.  On the reliability (or otherwise) of SIC codes , 2003 .

[12]  Joaquín Alegre,et al.  A measurement scale for product innovation performance , 2006 .

[13]  Cheryl Burke Jarvis,et al.  The problem of measurement model misspecification in behavioral and organizational research and some recommended solutions. , 2005, The Journal of applied psychology.

[14]  L. Bengtsson,et al.  Open to a Select Few? Matching Partners and Knowledge Content for Open Innovation Performance , 2015 .

[15]  R. Hogarth,et al.  Why Forecasts Fail. What to Do Instead , 2010 .

[16]  Daniel A. Levinthal,et al.  ABSORPTIVE CAPACITY: A NEW PERSPECTIVE ON LEARNING AND INNOVATION , 1990 .

[17]  M. Tushman,et al.  Ambidextrous Organizations: Managing Evolutionary and Revolutionary Change , 1996 .

[18]  Keld Laursen,et al.  Linking Customer Interaction and Innovation: The Mediating Role of New Organizational Practices , 2011, Organ. Sci..

[19]  Yu-An Huang,et al.  R&D sourcing strategies: Determinants and consequences , 2009 .

[20]  Diana Adler,et al.  Using Multivariate Statistics , 2016 .

[21]  Sabine Brunswicker,et al.  Beyond Open Innovation in Large Enterprises: How Do Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises (SMEs) Open Up to External Innovation Sources? , 2011 .

[22]  W. A. Lucas,et al.  Best Practices for Industry-University Collaboration , 2010 .

[23]  Henry Chesbrough,et al.  Open Innovation: The New Imperative for Creating and Profiting from Technology , 2003 .

[24]  B. Dankbaar,et al.  Creating a climate for inter-organizational networking through people management , 2010 .

[25]  Marian Garcia Martinez,et al.  Open innovation strategies in the food and drink industry: determinants and impact on innovation performance , 2014, Int. J. Technol. Manag..

[26]  Oliver Gassmann,et al.  Towards a Theory of Open Innovation: Three Core Process Archetypes , 2004 .

[27]  P. Janeiro,et al.  Open innovation: Factors explaining universities as service firm innovation sources ☆ , 2013 .

[28]  F. Wynstra,et al.  Managing supplier involvement in product development:: Three critical issues , 2001 .

[29]  B. Looy,et al.  Interorganizational collaboration and innovation: Toward a portfolio approach , 2005 .

[30]  M. Tushman,et al.  Exploration and Exploitation Within and Across Organizations , 2010 .

[31]  A. Bullinger,et al.  Open Innovation and Firm Performance: The Mediating Role of Social Capital , 2013 .

[32]  R. Bagozzi,et al.  On the evaluation of structural equation models , 1988 .

[33]  S. Ghoshal,et al.  Social Capital and Value Creation: The Role of Intrafirm Networks , 1998 .

[34]  Sally Davenport,et al.  Collaborative research programmes: building trust from difference , 1998 .

[35]  Helle Alsted Søndergaard,et al.  Using Internal Coupling Activities To Enhance The Effectiveness Of Open Innovation , 2013 .

[36]  W. Vanhaverbeke,et al.  Managing open innovation projects with science-based and market-based partners , 2014 .

[37]  Gino Cattani,et al.  The Relational Antecedents of Project-Entrepreneurship: Network Centrality, Team Composition and Project Performance , 2009 .

[38]  Philippe Aghion,et al.  Academic Freedom, Private-Sector Focus, and the Process of Innovation , 2005 .

[39]  Balaji R. Koka,et al.  The Reification of Absorptive Capacity: A Critical Review and Rejuvenation of the Construct , 2006 .

[40]  E. von Hippel,et al.  Sources of Innovation , 2016 .

[41]  S. Croom.  The dyadic capabilities concept: examining the processes of key supplier involvement in collaborative product development , 2001 .

[42]  Peter Moran.  Structural vs. relational embeddedness: social capital and managerial performance , 2005 .

[43]  James C. Anderson,et al.  STRUCTURAL EQUATION MODELING IN PRACTICE: A REVIEW AND RECOMMENDED TWO-STEP APPROACH , 1988 .

[44]  Links between internal and external cooperation in product development: An exploratory study , 2004 .

[45]  Malte Brettel,et al.  Performance Effects of Exploratory and Exploitative Innovation Strategies and the Moderating Role of External Innovation Partners , 2013 .

[46]  S. Ghoshal,et al.  Social Capital, Intellectual Capital, and the Organizational Advantage , 1998 .

[47]  J. Birkinshaw,et al.  Organizational Ambidexterity: Antecedents, Outcomes, and Moderators , 2008 .

[48]  Michael Tushman,et al.  Organizational Ambidexterity: IBM and Emerging Business Opportunities , 2009 .

[49]  Ken G. Smith,et al.  The interplay between exploration and exploitation. , 2006 .

[50]  Raffaella Manzini,et al.  Firm-Specific Factors and the Openness Degree: a Survey of Italian Firms , 2011 .

[51]  V. Parida,et al.  Inbound Open Innovation Activities in High‐Tech SMEs: The Impact on Innovation Performance , 2012 .

[52]  L. Pellegrini,et al.  Is your open-innovation successful? The mediating role of a firm's organizational and social context , 2015 .

[53]  Hsing-Er Lin,et al.  Investigating the Role of Leadership and Organizational Culture in Fostering Innovation Ambidexterity , 2011, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management.

[54]  Arie Y. Lewin,et al.  Microfoundations of Internal and External Absorptive Capacity Routines , 2011, Organ. Sci..

[55]  A. Salter,et al.  Open for innovation: the role of openness in explaining innovation performance among U.K. manufacturing firms , 2006 .

[56]  J. Hagedoorn.  Understanding the rationale of strategic technology partnering: Nterorganizational modes of cooperation and sectoral differences , 1993 .

[57]  D. A. Kenny,et al.  The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. , 1986, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[58]  Augustine A. Lado,et al.  Inter‐organizational communication as a relational competency: Antecedents and performance outcomes in collaborative buyer–supplier relationships , 2008 .

[59]  Chih-Hsing Liu.  The processes of social capital and employee creativity: empirical evidence from intraorganizational networks , 2013 .