Institutional pressures and the diffusion of organisational innovation: evidence from Brazilian firms

ABSTRACT The aim of this paper is to present empirical evidence on the influence of institutional pressures and the role of legitimacy when it comes to the diffusion of organisational innovations. Based on institutional and organisational innovation theory, three types of institutional pressures were measured: mimetic, normative and coercive. Using data from over 17.000 Brazilian companies collected between 2008 and 2014, statistical analysis demonstrated that mimetic pressures had no influence on the diffusion of organisational innovations; that the main force behind the diffusion of organisational innovations was normative institutional pressures; and that coercive pressures had no impact on the diffusion of organisational innovations in general or on green innovations specifically. These results contradict previous empirical research and the current understanding of institutional pressures and organisational innovation.

[1]  Ana Beatriz Lopes de Sousa Jabbour,et al.  The green bullwhip effect, the diffusion of green supply chain practices, and institutional pressures: evidence from the automotive sector , 2016 .

[2]  Bruce Tether,et al.  Beyond industry–university links: Sourcing knowledge for innovation from consultants, private research organisations and the public science-base , 2008 .

[3]  Fariborz Damanpour,et al.  Footnotes to Research on Management Innovation , 2014 .

[4]  Onno Bouwmeester,et al.  Consultants as legitimizers: exploring their rhetoric , 2011 .

[5]  Julian Birkinshaw,et al.  The Role of External Involvement in the Creation of Management Innovations , 2014 .

[6]  Johannes Meuer,et al.  Archetypes of Inter-firm Relations in the Implementation of Management Innovation: A Set-theoretic Study in China’s Biopharmaceutical Industry , 2014 .

[7]  Panorama da Inovação Organizacional em países selecionados: uma análise de indicadores da Community Innovation Survey (CIS) e Pesquisa de Inovação (PINTEC) , 2017 .

[8]  J. Birkinshaw,et al.  Management innovation , 2005, IEEE Engineering Management Review.

[9]  Sanja Pekovic,et al.  From quality to innovation: Evidence from two French Employer Surveys , 2009 .

[10]  Jasna Prester,et al.  Are Innovative Organizational Concepts Enough For Fostering Innovation , 2012 .

[11]  Daniel Paulino Lopes,et al.  Organizational Innovation : A Comparative Analysis Between Brazil and Portugal , 2012 .

[12]  Eric Abrahamson.  Managerial Fads and Fashions: The Diffusion and Rejection of Innovations , 1991 .

[13]  B. Obeidat,et al.  The impact of knowledge management on innovation: An empirical study on Jordanian consultancy firms , 2016 .

[14]  Mark C. Suchman.  Managing Legitimacy: Strategic and Institutional Approaches , 1995 .

[15]  W. Scott.  'Institutionalized Organizations: Formal Structure as Myth and Ceremony', American Journal of Sociology, 83, pp. 340-63. , 2016 .

[16]  J. Clapp.  The Privatization of Global Environmental Governance: ISO 14000 and the Developing World , 1998 .

[17]  Barry M. Staw,et al.  What Bandwagons Bring: Effects of Popular Management Techniques on Corporate Performance, Reputation, and CEO Pay , 2000 .

[18]  Sanja Pekovic,et al.  The Determinants of ISO 9000 Certification: A Comparison of the Manufacturing and Service Sectors , 2010 .

[19]  A. Hecker,et al.  Deciphering antecedents of organizational innovation , 2013 .

[20]  F. Darus,et al.  CSR Web Reporting: The Influence of Ownership Structure and Mimetic Isomorphism , 2013 .

[21]  Michaela A. Balzarova,et al.  ISO 26000 and supply chains--On the diffusion of the social responsibility standard , 2008 .

[22]  Pamela S. Tolbert,et al.  Institutional Sources of Change in the Formal Structure of Organizations: The Diffusion of Civil Service Reform, 1880-1935 , 1983 .

[23]  J. Birkinshaw,et al.  The sources of management innovation: When firms introduce new management practices , 2009 .

[24]  Devi R. Gnyawali,et al.  Co-opetition between giants: Collaboration with competitors for technological innovation , 2011 .

[25]  B. Cassiman,et al.  Open innovation: Are inbound and outbound knowledge flows really complementary? , 2016 .

[26]  Eric Abrahamson,et al.  Management Fashion: Lifecycles, Triggers, and Collective Learning Processes , 1999 .

[27]  Maria Ester Dal Poz,et al.  Rede de cooperação tecnológica da PETROBRAS e universidades e das suas áreas de tecnologia: panorama atual e perspectivas , 2017 .

[28]  Mary J. Benner.  Dynamic or Static Capabilities? Process Management Practices and Response to Technological Change† , 2009 .

[29]  Sten Jönsson.  Institutions and Organizations , 1997 .

[30]  Ricardo Gouveia Rodrigues,et al.  EXTERNAL RELATIONSHIPS IN THE ORGANIZATIONAL INNOVATION , 2016 .

[31]  David L. Deephouse,et al.  Does Isomorphism Legitimate? , 1996 .

[32]  Yann Le Jeune,et al.  The Impact of Knowledge Management on Innovation , 2014 .

[33]  Shaomin Li,et al.  National Adoption of International Accounting Standards: An Institutional Perspective , 2010 .

[34]  K. P. Parboteeah,et al.  Innovation in Emerging Markets: The Role of Management Consulting Firms , 2014 .

[35]  P. Drucker,et al.  The Future of Management , 2008 .

[36]  Vanita Ahuja,et al.  Benefits of collaborative ICT adoption for building project management , 2009 .

[37]  John Micklethwait,et al.  The witch doctors : what the management gurus are saying, why it matters and how to make sense of it , 1996 .

[38]  A. C. Q. Barbosa,et al.  Management and organizational innovation in Brazil: evidence from technology innovation surveys , 2013 .

[39]  C. Mazza,et al.  Haute couture or pret-a-porter: Creating and diffusing management practices through the popular press , 1998 .

[40]  Maria Bengtsson,et al.  A systematic review of research on coopetition: Toward a multilevel understanding , 2016 .

[41]  J. Christiaens,et al.  Can Resource Dependence and Coercive Isomorphism Explain Nonprofit Organizations’ Compliance With Reporting Standards? , 2011 .

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

[43]  Eric W. K. Tsang,et al.  How do internal capabilities and external partnerships affect innovativeness? , 2009 .

[44]  E. Rogers,et al.  Diffusion of innovations , 1964, Encyclopedia of Sport Management.

[45]  T. Parsons.  SUGGESTIONS FOR A SOCIALOGICAL APPROCH TO THE THEORY OF ORGANIZATIONS , 1956 .

[46]  Knut Blind,et al.  ISO 9001 and product innovation: A literature review and research framework , 2016 .

[47]  James D. Westphal,et al.  Customization or Conformity? An Institutional and Network Perspective on the Content and Consequences of TQM Adoption , 1997 .

[48]  Natàlia Cugueró-Escofet,et al.  The Impact of ABC Costing Systems to Solve Managerial Cost Problems: A Real Improvement, a Fad or a Fashion? , 2016 .

[49]  Stephen J. Jaros,et al.  Models of Management: Work, Authority, and Organization in a Comparative Perspective , 1994 .

[50]  M. Larson.  The Rise of Professionalism: A Sociological Analysis , 1977 .

[51]  Andrew von Nordenflycht.  What Is a Professional Service Firm? Toward a Theory and Taxonomy of Knowledge-Intensive Firms , 2010 .

[52]  Dalius Serafinas,et al.  The adoption of ISO 9001 standard within higher education institutions in Lithuania: innovation diffusion approach , 2018 .

[53]  Zhongju Liao.  Institutional pressure, knowledge acquisition and a firm's environmental innovation , 2018 .

[54]  Eric Abrahamson,et al.  Employee-management Techniques: Transient Fads or Trending Fashions? , 2008 .

[55]  J. Mair,et al.  Capturing the dynamics of the sharing economy: Institutional research on the plural forms and practices of sharing economy organizations , 2017 .

[56]  Georg Reischauer.  Industry 4.0 as policy-driven discourse to institutionalize innovation systems in manufacturing , 2018, Technological Forecasting and Social Change.

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

[58]  Kazuhiro Asakawa,et al.  Types of R&D Collaborations and Process Innovation: The Benefit of Collaborating Upstream in the Knowledge Chain , 2016 .

[59]  Jose Luis Beltran Guerrero,et al.  ISO 9000 quality system certification and its impact on product and process innovation performance , 2014 .

[60]  Daniel Capaldo Amaral,et al.  Agile project management and stage-gate model-A hybrid framework for technology-based companies , 2016 .

[61]  Third Edition,et al.  THE MEASUREMENT OF SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNOLOGICAL ACTIVITIES: PROPOSED GUIDELINES FOR COLLECTING AND INTERPRETING INNOVATION DATA , 2005 .

[62]  Mário Franco,et al.  External knowledge sources as antecedents of organizational innovation in firm workplaces: a knowledge-based perspective , 2018, J. Knowl. Manag..

[63]  Andrea Fosfuri,et al.  Necessity as the mother of ‘green’ inventions: Institutional pressures and environmental innovations , 2013 .

[64]  Á. Triguero,et al.  Leaders and Laggards in Environmental Innovation: An Empirical Analysis of SMEs in Europe , 2016 .

[65]  A. Alchian.  Uncertainty, Evolution, and Economic Theory , 1950, Journal of Political Economy.

[66]  Karl Wennberg,et al.  Problemistic Search and International Entrepreneurship , 2008 .

[67]  Alberto Bayo‐Moriones,et al.  The impact of ISO 9000 and EFQM on the use of flexible work practices , 2011 .