IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jbrese/v132y2021icp56-66.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Investigating the relationship between innovation strategy and performance

Author

Listed:
  • Kahn, Kenneth B.
  • Candi, Marina

Abstract

This research investigates how firm size and the type of offering (product or service) moderate the relationship between innovation strategy and performance. The results from two studies involving samples of managers of firms in the United States show that firm size and type of offering do indeed moderate the relationships between innovation strategy and performance and that dual moderating effects exist. The results challenge prevailing notions on expected benefits of exploration and exploitation strategies for smaller to larger firms. Nonlinear moderating effects by firm size are revealed, which offer more nuanced insights than those presented in existing research. Moreover, while it is generally presumed that service firms benefit primarily from an exploitation innovation strategy, the findings indicate that service firms actually benefit from an exploration innovation strategy regardless of size. The findings further suggest that the performance implications of innovation ambidexterity vary across contexts. Managerial and research implications are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Kahn, Kenneth B. & Candi, Marina, 2021. "Investigating the relationship between innovation strategy and performance," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 56-66.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jbrese:v:132:y:2021:i:c:p:56-66
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.04.009
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0148296321002472
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.04.009?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Messeni Petruzzelli, Antonio & Ardito, Lorenzo & Savino, Tommaso, 2018. "Maturity of knowledge inputs and innovation value: The moderating effect of firm age and size," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 190-201.
    2. Cohen, Wesley M & Klepper, Steven, 1996. "Firm Size and the Nature of Innovation within Industries: The Case of Process and Product R&D," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 78(2), pages 232-243, May.
    3. Michael Lubatkin & Zeki Simsek & Yan Ling & John F. Veiga, 2006. "Ambidexterity and Performance in Small-to Medium-Sized Firms : The Pivotal Role of Top Management Team Behavioral Integration," Post-Print hal-02311781, HAL.
    4. Jan Van Den Ende & Nachoem Wunberg, 2001. "The Organization of Innovation in the Presence of Networks and Bandwagons in the New Economy," International Studies of Management & Organization, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 31(1), pages 30-45, March.
    5. Messeni Petruzzelli, Antonio, 2019. "Trading knowledge for status: Conceptualizing R&D alliance formation to achieve ambidexterity," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 36-42.
    6. Jörn Block & Andreas Kuckertz, 2018. "Seven principles of effective replication studies: strengthening the evidence base of management research," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 68(4), pages 355-359, November.
    7. Juha Uotila & Markku Maula & Thomas Keil & Shaker A. Zahra, 2009. "Exploration, exploitation, and financial performance: analysis of S&P 500 corporations," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(2), pages 221-231, February.
    8. James G. March, 1991. "Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 71-87, February.
    9. Zi-Lin He & Poh-Kam Wong, 2004. "Exploration vs. Exploitation: An Empirical Test of the Ambidexterity Hypothesis," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(4), pages 481-494, August.
    10. Wesley M. Cohen & Richard R. Nelson & John P. Walsh, 2000. "Protecting Their Intellectual Assets: Appropriability Conditions and Why U.S. Manufacturing Firms Patent (or Not)," NBER Working Papers 7552, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. Cenamor, Javier & Parida, Vinit & Wincent, Joakim, 2019. "How entrepreneurial SMEs compete through digital platforms: The roles of digital platform capability, network capability and ambidexterity," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 196-206.
    12. Felício, J. Augusto & Caldeirinha, Vítor & Dutra, Ademar, 2019. "Ambidextrous capacity in small and medium-sized enterprises," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 607-614.
    13. Boris Groysberg & Linda-Eling Lee, 2009. "Hiring Stars and Their Colleagues: Exploration and Exploitation in Professional Service Firms," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(4), pages 740-758, August.
    14. Ardito, Lorenzo & Messeni Petruzzelli, Antonio & Dezi, Luca & Castellano, Sylvaine, 2020. "The influence of inbound open innovation on ambidexterity performance: Does it pay to source knowledge from supply chain stakeholders?," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 321-329.
    15. Zoltan Acs & David Audretsch, 1990. "Innovation and Small Firms," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262011131, December.
    16. Pavitt, Keith & Robson, Michael & Townsend, Joe, 1987. "The Size Distribution of Innovating Firms in the UK: 1945-1983," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(3), pages 297-316, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Saemundsson, Rögnvaldur & Candi, Marina & Sigurjonsson, Throstur Olaf, 2022. "The influence of performance feedback and top management team orientation on decisions about R&D in technology-based firms," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 113(C).
    2. Denicolai, Stefano & Previtali, Pietro, 2023. "Innovation strategy and digital transformation execution in healthcare: The role of the general manager," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 121(C).
    3. Candi, Marina & Kitagawa, Fumi, 2022. "Performance implications of business model centrality over technology-based firms’ life courses," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    4. Jiang, Zihao & Liu, Zhiying, 2022. "Policies and exploitative and exploratory innovations of the wind power industry in China: The role of technological path dependence," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 177(C).
    5. Mike Eom & Mookwon Jung & Jung Chul Park, 2023. "Are overconfident CEOs better able to transform innovation into firm value?—Evidence from the United States," International Finance, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(2), pages 241-258, August.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Frank T. Rothaermel & Maria Tereza Alexandre, 2009. "Ambidexterity in Technology Sourcing: The Moderating Role of Absorptive Capacity," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(4), pages 759-780, August.
    2. Andreea N. Kiss & Dirk Libaers & Pamela S. Barr & Tang Wang & Miles A. Zachary, 2020. "CEO cognitive flexibility, information search, and organizational ambidexterity," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(12), pages 2200-2233, December.
    3. Lee, In Hyeock & Lévesque, Moren, 2023. "Do resource-constrained early-stage firms balance their internal resources across business activities? If so, should they?," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 159(C).
    4. Youngtak M. Kim & John R. Busenbark & Seung-Hwan Jeong & Son K. Lam, 2022. "The performance impact of marketing dualities: a response surface approach to resolving empirical challenges," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 50(5), pages 915-940, September.
    5. Mavroudi, Eva & Kesidou, Effie & Pandza, Krsto, 2023. "Effects of ambidextrous and specialized R&D strategies on firm performance: The contingent role of industry orientation," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    6. Candi, Marina & Kitagawa, Fumi, 2022. "Performance implications of business model centrality over technology-based firms’ life courses," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    7. Armin Anzenbacher & Marcus Wagner, 2020. "The role of exploration and exploitation for innovation success: effects of business models on organizational ambidexterity in the semiconductor industry," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 16(2), pages 571-594, June.
    8. Gastaldi, Luca & Lessanibahri, Sina & Tedaldi, Gianluca & Miragliotta, Giovanni, 2022. "Companies’ adoption of Smart Technologies to achieve structural ambidexterity: an analysis with SEM," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    9. Gatti, Corrado & Volpe, Loredana & Vagnani, Gianluca, 2015. "Interdependence among productive activities: Implications for exploration and exploitation," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(3), pages 711-722.
    10. Ioniţă Cătălin Gabriel, 2022. "Exploration vs. Exploitation: How Innovation Strategies Impact Firm Performance and Competitive Advantage," Proceedings of the International Conference on Business Excellence, Sciendo, vol. 16(1), pages 31-46, August.
    11. Marina Estrada-Cruz & Noelia Rodriguez-Hernández & Antonio J. Verdú-Jover & Jose Maria Gómez-Gras, 2022. "The effect of competitive intensity on the relationship between strategic entrepreneurship and organizational results," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 18(1), pages 1-24, March.
    12. Juha Uotila, 2018. "Punctuated equilibrium or ambidexterity: dynamics of incremental and radical organizational change over time," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 27(1), pages 131-148.
    13. Shuwaikh, Fatima & Brintte, Souad & Khemiri, Sabrina, 2022. "The impact of dynamic ambidexterity on the performance of organizations: Evidence from corporate venture capital investing in North America," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 200(C), pages 991-1009.
    14. Venugopal, Aparna & Krishnan, T.N. & Upadhyayula, Rajesh Srinivas & Kumar, Manish, 2020. "Finding the microfoundations of organizational ambidexterity - Demystifying the role of top management behavioural integration," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 1-11.
    15. Lennerts, Silke & Schulze, Anja & Tomczak, Torsten, 2020. "The asymmetric effects of exploitation and exploration on radical and incremental innovation performance: An uneven affair," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 121-134.
    16. Jürgen Weibler & Tobias Keller, 2011. "Ambidextrie in Abhängigkeit von Führungsverantwortung und Marktwahrnehmung: Eine empirische Analyse des individuellen Arbeitsverhaltens in Unternehmen," Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research, Springer, vol. 63(2), pages 155-188, March.
    17. Michelle Rogan & Marie Louise Mors, 2014. "A Network Perspective on Individual-Level Ambidexterity in Organizations," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(6), pages 1860-1877, December.
    18. Hsu, Chia-Wen & Lien, Yung-Chih & Chen, Homin, 2013. "International ambidexterity and firm performance in small emerging economies," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 58-67.
    19. Marina Estrada-Cruz & Noelia Rodriguez-Hernández & Antonio J. Verdú-Jover & Jose Maria Gómez-Gras, 0. "The effect of competitive intensity on the relationship between strategic entrepreneurship and organizational results," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-24.
    20. Matthews, Lane & Heyden, Mariano L.M. & Zhou, Dan, 2022. "Paradoxical transparency? Capital market responses to exploration and exploitation disclosure," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(1).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jbrese:v:132:y:2021:i:c:p:56-66. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jbusres .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.