IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

How does the second-order learning process moderate the relationship between innovation inputs and outputs of large Korean firms?


  • Hyojung Kim


  • Namgyoo Park


  • Jeonghwan Lee



We investigate how the second-order learning process moderates the relationship between innovation performance and two types of knowledge seeking behavior, namely exploration and exploitation. We reinvestigate the second-order learning process of the top 100 Korean firms from 1997 to 2007 by capturing CEO turnover, board turnover, and R&D alliances. We argue that the current findings about exploration and exploitation should be reclassified in terms of innovation input and output. We suggest that researchers investigate the organizational learning process to understand the link between innovation inputs and outputs. Our empirical results show that while innovation inputs are not related to exploratory outputs, the second-order learning process reshapes the relationship between both exploration/exploitation type innovation inputs and exploratory innovation outputs, and that the new focus of organizational learning process can refine current innovation literature. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Suggested Citation

  • Hyojung Kim & Namgyoo Park & Jeonghwan Lee, 2014. "How does the second-order learning process moderate the relationship between innovation inputs and outputs of large Korean firms?," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 31(1), pages 69-103, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:kap:asiapa:v:31:y:2014:i:1:p:69-103
    DOI: 10.1007/s10490-013-9352-x

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

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

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. T. S. Breusch & A. R. Pagan, 1980. "The Lagrange Multiplier Test and its Applications to Model Specification in Econometrics," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 47(1), pages 239-253.
    2. Burgelman, Robert A., 2002. "Strategy as Vector and the Inertia of Co-evolutionary Lock-in," Research Papers 1745, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    3. Autio, Erkko & Kanninen, Sami & Gustafsson, Robin, 2008. "First- and second-order additionality and learning outcomes in collaborative R&D programs," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 59-76, February.
    4. Yan Zhang & Haiyang Li & Michael A Hitt & Geng Cui, 2007. "R&D intensity and international joint venture performance in an emerging market: moderating effects of market focus and ownership structure," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 38(6), pages 944-960, November.
    5. Wesley M. Cohen & Richard R. Nelson & John P. Walsh, 2002. "Links and Impacts: The Influence of Public Research on Industrial R&D," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 48(1), pages 1-23, January.
    6. Atul Nerkar, 2003. "Old Is Gold? The Value of Temporal Exploration in the Creation of New Knowledge," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(2), pages 211-229, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


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

    Cited by:

    1. Zhi Yang & Xuemin Zhou & Pengcheng Zhang, 2015. "Discipline versus passion: Collectivism, centralization, and ambidextrous innovation," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 32(3), pages 745-769, September.
    2. Ashok, Mona & Narula, Rajneesh & Martinez-Noya, Andrea, 2016. "How do collaboration and investments in knowledge management affect process innovation in services?," MERIT Working Papers 039, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).


    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:kap:asiapa:v:31:y:2014:i:1:p:69-103. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Sonal Shukla) or (Rebekah McClure). General contact details of provider: .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.