A Knowledge-Based Model of Radical Innovation in Small Software Firms

In this paper, we adopt the lens of absorptive capacity (ACAP), defined by two dimensions--the knowledge base (consisting of knowledge diversity, depth, and linkages) and routines (consisting of sensing and experimentation)--to explain how a software firm's knowledge endowments influence its level of radical information technology innovation during a technological breakthrough. We distinguish three types of IT innovations--base, processes, and service innovation--that form an innovation ecology. We posit that (1) ACAP is a relational construct where the impact of the knowledge base is mediated by routines; (2) IT innovations are either externally adopted or internally generated; and (3) knowledge antecedents associated with different types of innovations differ. We hypothesize a three-step, mediated path (knowledge base → sensing → experimentation → innovation) for external innovation adoption, and a two-step path (knowledge diversity/depth → experimentation → innovation) for internal innovation creation to explain the software firm's level of radical innovation across three IT innovation types. We validate the model through a cross-sector study that examined how 121 small software firms innovated with Internet computing. We confirm the mediated nature of ACAP for external base innovations, which are driven by all three knowledge-based factors as follows: (1) knowledge depth (direct positive effect); (2) knowledge diversity (mediated three-step path), (3) knowledge linkages (mediated three step path). Process innovations are externally driven by a three-step mediated path for knowledge linkages, as well as being directly affected by knowledge diversity, but negatively and directly impeded by knowledge depth. Service innovations are not driven by any mediated influence of ACAP, but driven directly by knowledge diversity. At the same time, both service and process innovations are strongly influenced by prior IT innovations: base and/or service. Several directions for future studies of radical IT innovation are proposed.

[1]  S. Zahra,et al.  Absorptive Capacity: A Review, Reconceptualization, and Extension , 2002 .

[2]  Terry S. Overton,et al.  Estimating Nonresponse Bias in Mail Surveys , 1977 .

[3]  A. Subramanian.  Innovativeness: Redefining the concept , 1996 .

[4]  Suzanne D. Pawlowski,et al.  ERP systems as an enabler of sustained business process innovation: A knowledge-based view , 2007, J. Strateg. Inf. Syst..

[5]  K. Ramamurthy,et al.  A multi-attribute measure for innovation adoption: the context of imaging technology , 1999 .

[6]  Stefan H. Thomke,et al.  Managing Experimentation in the Design of New Products , 1998 .

[7]  G. Zaltman,et al.  Innovations and organizations , 2020, Organizational Innovation.

[8]  G. Dosi.  Technological Paradigms and Technological Trajectories: A Suggested Interpretation of the Determinants and Directions of Technical Change , 1982 .

[9]  Kalle Lyytinen,et al.  What's Wrong with the Diffusion of Innovation Theory , 2001, Diffusing Software Products and Process Innovations.

[10]  Cheryl Burke Jarvis,et al.  A Critical Review of Construct Indicators and Measurement Model Misspecification in Marketing and Consumer Research , 2003 .

[11]  N. Rosenberg.  Why do firms do basic research (with their own money) , 1990 .

[12]  H. Winklhofer,et al.  Index Construction with Formative Indicators: An Alternative to Scale Development , 2001 .

[13]  Judy A. Siguaw,et al.  Formative versus Reflective Indicators in Organizational Measure Development: A Comparison and Empirical Illustration , 2006 .

[14]  Kalle Lyytinen,et al.  Wakes of Innovation in Project Networks: The Case of Digital 3-D Representations in Architecture, Engineering, and Construction , 2007, Organ. Sci..

[15]  C. Fornell,et al.  Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. , 1981 .

[16]  Alfred G. Warner,et al.  BUYING VERSUS BUILDING COMPETENCE: ACQUISITION PATTERNS IN THE INFORMATION AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS INDUSTRY 1995–2000 , 2003 .

[17]  Robert G. Fichman,et al.  Going Beyond the Dominant Paradigm for Information Technology Innovation Research: Emerging Concepts and Methods , 2004, J. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[18]  Ralph Johnson,et al.  design patterns elements of reusable object oriented software , 2019 .

[19]  Jiatao Li,et al.  Knowledge Search in International Cooperative Ventures , 1999 .

[20]  S. West,et al.  A comparison of methods to test mediation and other intervening variable effects. , 2002, Psychological methods.

[21]  Robert J. Kauffman,et al.  Understanding evolution in technology ecosystems , 2008, Commun. ACM.

[22]  John W. Meyer,et al.  Institutionalized Organizations: Formal Structure as Myth and Ceremony , 1977, American Journal of Sociology.

[23]  Stefan H. Thomke,et al.  Modes of experimentation: an innovation process--and competitive--variable , 1998 .

[24]  Wendy K. Smith,et al.  A Structural Approach to Assessing Innovation: Construct Development of Innovation Locus, Type, and Characteristics , 2002, Manag. Sci..

[25]  David G. Messerschmitt,et al.  Software Ecosystem: Understanding an Indispensable Technology and Industry , 2003 .

[26]  F. Damanpour.  Organizational Size and Innovation , 1992 .

[27]  Boris Durisin,et al.  Absorptive capacity: Valuing a reconceptualization , 2007 .

[28]  John E. Mathieu,et al.  Clarifying conditions and decision points for mediational type inferences in Organizational Behavior , 2006 .

[29]  Kristopher J Preacher,et al.  Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models , 2008, Behavior research methods.

[30]  Michael Dinger,et al.  Absorptive Capacity and Information Systems Research: Review, Synthesis, and Directions for Future Research , 2012, MIS Q..

[31]  Sue A. Conger,et al.  INNOVATIONS : A CLASSIFICATION BY IT LOCUS OF IMPACT AND RESEARCH APPROACH , 2002 .

[32]  Kathleen M. Eisenhardt,et al.  DYNAMIC CAPABILITIES, WHAT ARE THEY? , 2000 .

[33]  P. Attewell.  Technology Diffusion and Organizational Learning: The Case of Business Computing , 1992 .

[34]  Kent Eriksson,et al.  The effect of experience and absorptive capacity on foreign market knowledge , 2003 .

[35]  Detmar W. Straub,et al.  Specifying Formative Constructs in Information Systems Research , 2007, MIS Q..

[36]  John Lawrence Stimpert.  Managerial Thinking and Large Diversified Firms , 1992 .

[37]  Wenpin Tsai.  Knowledge Transfer in Intraorganizational Networks: Effects of Network Position and Absorptive Capacity on Business Unit Innovation and Performance , 2001 .

[38]  Carolyn Y. Woo,et al.  Technology sourcing and output of established firms in a regime of encompassing technological change , 2003 .

[39]  Erja Mustonen-Ollila,et al.  Why organizations adopt information system process innovations: a longitudinal study using Diffusion of Innovation theory , 2003, Inf. Syst. J..

[40]  Marco Iansiti,et al.  Experience, experimentation, and the accumulation of knowledge: the evolution of R&D in the semiconductor industry , 2003 .

[41]  Chris F. Kemerer,et al.  The assimilation of software process innovations: an organizational learning perspective , 1997 .

[42]  Kristina Dahlin,et al.  When is an Invention Really Radical? Defining and Measuring Technological Radicalness , 2005 .

[43]  R. Bagozzi,et al.  Assessing method variance in multitrait-multimethod matrices: The case of self-reported affect and perceptions at work. , 1990 .

[44]  Judith R. Blau,et al.  Ideas, Complexity, and Innovation. , 1979 .

[45]  Varun Grover,et al.  Exploring Ambidextrous Innovation Tendencies in the Adoption of Telecommunications Technologies , 2007, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management.

[46]  D. Campbell,et al.  Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. , 1959, Psychological bulletin.

[47]  Kalle Lyytinen,et al.  Not All Innovations Are Created Equal: A Survey of Internet Computing as Disruptive Innovation in Systems Development Organizations , 2005, ICIS.

[48]  A. Arora,et al.  Evaluating technological information and utilizing it: Scientific knowledge, technological capability, and external linkages in biotechnology , 1994 .

[49]  P. Shrout,et al.  Mediation in experimental and nonexperimental studies: new procedures and recommendations. , 2002, Psychological methods.

[50]  R. Grant,et al.  Environments: Organizational Capability as Knowledge Integration , 2022 .

[51]  M. Lindell,et al.  Accounting for common method variance in cross-sectional research designs. , 2001, The Journal of applied psychology.

[52]  I. Cockburn,et al.  Absorptive Capacity, Coauthoring Behavior, and the Organization of Research in Drug Discovery , 2003 .

[53]  Robert G. Fichman,et al.  The Role of Aggregation in the Measurement of IT-Related Organizational Innovation , 2001, MIS Q..

[54]  K. Eisenhardt,et al.  The Art of Continuous Change : Linking Complexity Theory and Time-Paced Evolution in Relentlessly Shifting Organizations , 1997 .

[55]  M. Feldman,et al.  Reconceptualizing Organizational Routines as a Source of Flexibility and Change , 2003 .

[56]  Jacky Swan,et al.  A knowledge‐focused perspective on the diffusion and adoption of complex information technologies: the BPR example , 2000, Inf. Syst. J..

[57]  Daniel A. Levinthal,et al.  Innovation and Learning: The Two Faces of R&D , 1989 .

[58]  Chenggang Xu,et al.  Coordination and Experimentation in M‐Form and U‐Form Organizations , 2006, Journal of Political Economy.

[59]  W. Powell,et al.  The iron cage revisited institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields , 1983 .

[60]  Lawrence Loh,et al.  Diffusion of Information Technology Outsourcing: Influence Sources and the Kodak Effect , 1992, Inf. Syst. Res..

[61]  R. Germain.  The role of context and structure in radical and incremental logistics innovation adoption , 1996 .

[62]  Amy C. Edmondson,et al.  The Mixed Effects of Inconsistency on Experimentation in Organizations , 2004, Organ. Sci..

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

[64]  Chih-Chiang Chen,et al.  Knowledge sharing, absorptive capacity, and innovation capability: an empirical study of Taiwan's knowledge-intensive industries , 2007, J. Inf. Sci..

[65]  Kalle Lyytinen,et al.  The Disruptive Nature of Information Technology Innovations: The Case of Internet Computing in Systems Development Organizations , 2003, MIS Q..

[66]  Clayton M. Christensen.  The Innovator's Dilemma: When New Technologies Cause Great Firms to Fail , 2013 .

[67]  Gabriel Szulanski.  Exploring internal stickiness: Impediments to the transfer of best practice within the firm , 1996 .

[68]  Anil K. Gupta,et al.  Knowledge flows within multinational corporations , 2000 .

[69]  Kalle Lyytinen,et al.  Disruptive information system innovation: the case of internet computing , 2003, Inf. Syst. J..

[70]  M. Tushman,et al.  Technological Discontinuities and Organizational Environments , 1986 .

[71]  Marjorie A. Lyles,et al.  Absorptive capacity, learning, and performance in international joint ventures , 2001 .

[72]  Kristopher J Preacher,et al.  SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect effects in simple mediation models , 2004, Behavior research methods, instruments, & computers : a journal of the Psychonomic Society, Inc.

[73]  Kira Fabrizio.  Absorptive capacity and the search for innovation , 2009 .

[74]  Paul A. Pavlou,et al.  From IT Leveraging Competence to Competitive Advantage in Turbulent Environments: The Case of New Product Development , 2006, Inf. Syst. Res..

[75]  E. Hippel.  Sticky Information and the Locus of Problem Solving: Implications for Innovation , 1994 .

[76]  Robert J. Kauffman,et al.  Making Sense of Technology Trends in the Information Technology Landscape: A Design Science Approach , 2008, MIS Q..

[77]  Sree Nilakanta,et al.  Organizational innovativeness: Exploring the relationship between organizational determinants of innovation, types of innovations, and measures of organizational performance , 1996, Omega.

[78]  Omar El Sawy,et al.  Absorptive Capacity Configurations in Supply Chains: Gearing for Partner-Enabled Market Knowledge Creation , 2005, MIS Q..

[79]  Jan Pries-Heje,et al.  The High Speed Balancing Game: How Software Companies Cope with Internet Speed , 2004, Scand. J. Inf. Syst..

[80]  Izak Benbasat,et al.  Predicting Intention to Adopt Interorganizational Linkages: An Institutional Perspective , 2003, MIS Q..

[81]  S. Albers,et al.  Crisis Construction and Organizational Learning: Capability Building in Catching-Up at Hyundai Motor , 1998 .

[82]  J. Dutton,et al.  The Adoption of Radical and Incremental Innovations: An Empirical Analysis , 1986 .

[83]  Henk W. Volberda,et al.  Co-evolution of Firm Absorptive Capacity and Knowledge Environment: Organizational Forms and Combinative Capabilities , 1999 .

[84]  F. Damanpour.  Organizational Innovation: A Meta-Analysis Of Effects Of Determinants and Moderators , 1991 .

[85]  A. Lewin,et al.  Prolegomena on Coevolution: a Framework for Research on Strategy and New Organizational Forms , 1999 .

[86]  Peter M. Allen,et al.  Pharmaceutical discovery as a complex system of decisions: The case of front-loaded experimentation , 2006 .

[87]  E. B. Swanson,et al.  Information systems innovation among organizations , 1994 .

[88]  K. Eisenhardt,et al.  Competing on the Edge: Strategy as Structured Chaos , 1998 .

[89]  R. Katila,et al.  Technological acquisitions and the innovation performance of acquiring firms: a longitudinal study , 2001 .

[90]  Kurt A. Heppard,et al.  An empirical test of environmental, organizational, and process factors affecting incremental and radical innovation , 2003 .

[91]  Ping Wang,et al.  Community Learning in Information Technology Fashion , 2004, ICIS.

[92]  BoschFrans A. J. Van Den,et al.  Coevolution of Firm Absorptive Capacity and Knowledge Environment , 1999 .

[93]  Kalle Lyytinen,et al.  Internet computing as a disruptive information technology innovation: the role of strong order effects 1 , 2011, Inf. Syst. J..

[94]  Scott B. MacKenzie,et al.  Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. , 2003, The Journal of applied psychology.

[95]  Ruth N. Bolton.  Pretesting Questionnaires: Content Analyses of Respondents' Concurrent Verbal Protocols , 1993 .

[96]  Justin J. P. Jansen,et al.  Managing Potential and Realized Absorptive Capacity: How Do Organizational Antecedents Matter? , 2005 .

[97]  Andrea Fosfuri,et al.  Exploring the Antecedents of Potential Absorptive Capacity and Its Impact on Innovation Performance , 2008 .

[98]  G. Huber.  Organizational Learning: The Contributing Processes and the Literatures , 1991 .

[99]  B. Kogut,et al.  Knowledge of the Firm, Combinative Capabilities, and the Replication of Technology , 1992 .

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

[101]  Varun Grover,et al.  Empirical Evidence on Swanson's Tri-Core Model of Information Systems Innovation , 1997, Inf. Syst. Res..

[102]  Kim B. Clark,et al.  Architectural Innovation: The Reconfiguration of Existing Product Technologies and the Failure of , 1990 .

[103]  T. Pedersen,et al.  MNC knowledge transfer, subsidiary absorptive capacity, and HRM , 2003 .

[104]  A. Rangaswamy,et al.  Technological Opportunism and Radical Technology Adoption: An Application to E-Business , 2002 .

[105]  Richard W. Scamell,et al.  The effect of information sources and communication channels on the diffusion of innovation in a data base development environment , 1990 .

[106]  J. Ettlie,et al.  Organization Strategy and Structural Differences for Radical Versus Incremental Innovation , 1984 .

[107]  Detmar W. Straub,et al.  Validating Instruments in MIS Research , 1989, MIS Q..

[108]  Erja Mustonen-Ollila,et al.  How organizations adopt information system process innovations: a longitudinal analysis , 2004, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[109]  D. Mowery,et al.  Inward technology transfer and competitiveness: the role of national innovation systems , 1995 .

[110]  Sundar G. Bharadwaj,et al.  Information Technology Effects on Firm Performance as Measured by Tobin's q , 1999 .