The role of institutional arbitrage in the search for product innovation: Firm level evidence from Norway

Abstract Evolutionary theorizing conceptualizes the discovery of new products as a successful outcome from searching for innovation in which firms combine new and old knowledge and resources. Prior research has shown that the propensity for discovering new products is greatest when firms cross a technological and/or organizational boundary in the search for new knowledge. In this paper, we add a new dimension to this literature: we examine whether, and to what extent, crossing a national boundary, as when firms use knowledge from network partners in foreign countries, influences the likelihood that firms will introduce new products into the market. Drawing on theorizing on institutional arbitrage in the literature on national innovation systems (NIS) and varieties of capitalism (VOC), we propose that companies that cross a national boundary in searching for innovation are significantly more likely to introduce new products. Detailed survey data on firms; data on their network partners, including their location; and regression analysis show that the use of knowledge from actors in foreign NIS has a positive influence on product innovation.

[1]  D. Third.  OECD/Eurostat . Oslo Manual-Guidelines for Collecting and Interpreting Technological Innovation Paris, France: , 2005 .

[2]  E. Huizingh.  Open innovation: State of the art and future perspectives , 2011 .

[3]  Marshall W. Meyer,et al.  Which Way through the Open Door? Reflections on the Internationalization of Chinese Firms , 2008, Management and Organization Review.

[4]  Jong de Jpj,et al.  Open innovation in SMEs : trends, motives and management challenges , 2009 .

[5]  B. Amable.  The Diversity Of Modern Capitalism , 2003 .

[6]  Walter W. Powell,et al.  Networks of Innovators , 2006 .

[7]  R. Nelson.  National Innovation Systems: A Comparative Analysis , 1993 .

[8]  R. Katila,et al.  SOMETHING OLD, SOMETHING NEW: A LONGITUDINAL STUDY OF SEARCH BEHAVIOR AND NEW PRODUCT INTRODUCTION , 2002 .

[9]  U. Lichtenthaler,et al.  A Capability-Based Framework for Open Innovation: Complementing Absorptive Capacity , 2009 .

[10]  A. Nerkar,et al.  Beyond local search: boundary‐spanning, exploration, and impact in the optical disk industry , 2001 .

[11]  Thomas Ritter,et al.  Dynamics of relationships and networks — creation, maintenance and destruction as managerial challenges , 2005 .

[12]  Geoffrey M. Hodgson,et al.  The Institutions , 2018, The Popular Arts.

[13]  Kenneth W. Koput,et al.  A Chaotic Model of Innovative Search: Some Answers, Many Questions , 1997 .

[14]  J. Storey,et al.  Managers' Theories About the Process of Innovation , 2004 .

[15]  F. Damanpour,et al.  Research on innovation in organizations: Distinguishing innovation-generating from innovation-adopting organizations , 2006 .

[16]  J. West,et al.  Open innovation : researching a new paradigm , 2008 .

[17]  L. Ngo,et al.  Winning through innovation and marketing: Lessons from Australia and Vietnam , 2011 .

[18]  Constance E. Helfat,et al.  Evolutionary trajectories in petroleum firm R&D , 1994 .

[19]  R. Katila.  New Product Search Over Time: Past Ideas in Their Prime? , 2002 .

[20]  William Hallagan,et al.  Effects of firm resources on growth in multinationality , 2007 .

[21]  A. Salter,et al.  Searching high and low: what types of firms use universities as a source of innovation? , 2004 .

[22]  A. Neely,et al.  Networking and Innovation: A Systematic Review of the Evidence , 2004 .

[23]  Alexandra Waluszewski,et al.  Knowledge and innovation in business and industry : the importance of using others , 2007 .

[24]  H. Håkansson,et al.  Learning in Networks , 1999 .

[25]  J. Fagerberg.  Schumpeter and the revival of evolutionary economics: an appraisal of the literature , 2003 .

[26]  Howard E. Aldrich,et al.  In defence of generalized Darwinism , 2008 .

[27]  Richard Deeg,et al.  Comparing capitalisms: understanding institutional diversity and its implications for international business , 2008 .

[28]  Kent D. Miller,et al.  Situational and institutional determinants of firms' R&D search intensity , 2007 .

[29]  D. Gann,et al.  How open is innovation , 2010 .

[30]  Martin Johanson,et al.  Institutions and business networks: A comparative analysis of the Chinese, Russian, and West European markets , 2007 .

[31]  Constance E. Helfat,et al.  INNOVATION OBJECTIVES, KNOWLEDGE SOURCES, AND THE BENEFITS OF BREADTH , 2010 .

[32]  Per Vagn Freytag,et al.  Business mating: Who chooses and who gets chosen? , 2005 .

[33]  Paul Israel,et al.  The Sources of Innovation , 1990 .

[34]  B. Verspagen,et al.  Systems of Innovation , 2009 .

[35]  P. Hall,et al.  Varieties of Capitalism , 2001 .

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

[37]  S. Winter,et al.  An evolutionary theory of economic change , 1983 .

[38]  R. Katila,et al.  Where do resources come from? The role of idiosyncratic situations , 2004 .

[39]  D. Teece,et al.  DYNAMIC CAPABILITIES AND STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT , 1997 .

[40]  S. Hart,et al.  Roles, role performance, and radical innovation competences , 2011 .

[41]  Minyuan Zhao,et al.  Doing R & D in Countries with Weak IPR Protection : Can Corporate Management Substitute for Legal Institutions ? , 2004 .

[42]  J. March.  Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning , 1991, STUDI ORGANIZZATIVI.

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

[44]  H. Håkansson,et al.  Economic use of knowledge , 2007 .

[45]  Johan Wiklund,et al.  The dual nature of innovative activity: How entrepreneurial orientation influences innovation generation and adoption , 2011 .

[46]  Sidney G. Winter,et al.  Schumpeterian Competition in Alternative Technological Regimes , 1983 .

[47]  Oliver Gassmann,et al.  Opening Up the Innovation Process: Towards an Agenda , 2006 .

[48]  Toby E. Stuart,et al.  Local search and the evolution of technological capabilities , 2007 .

[49]  Bengt-Åke Lundvall,et al.  National Systems of Innovation: towards a theory of innovation and interactive learning London: Pint , 1995 .

[50]  H. Chesbrough,et al.  Beyond High Tech: Early Adopters of Open Innovation in Other Industries , 2006 .

[51]  D. Teece.  Explicating dynamic capabilities: the nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance , 2007 .

[52]  Mario Pianta,et al.  Innovation and Employment , 2006 .

[53]  D. Faems,et al.  Book review: Open Innovation: Researching a New Paradigm / by H. Chesbrough, W. Vanhaverbeke and J. West. - Oxford University Press. - ISBN 978-0-19929072-7 , 2008 .

[54]  Keld Laursen.  Keep searching and you’ll find: what do we know about variety creation through firms’ search activities for innovation? , 2012 .

[55]  J. Fagerberg,et al.  The Oxford handbook of innovation , 2006 .

[56]  Louise Young,et al.  On cooperating: firms, relations and networks☆ , 2002 .