Is knowledge exchange and combination always useful for innovation?

Using the resource-based view, this paper aims to provide a better understanding of the effect of knowledge on innovation. With this general aim in mind, we relate knowledge’s nature (tacit vs. explicit) and the process (e.g., knowledge exchange and combination) to innovation. Using a sample of 105 marketing and 176 R&D managers from 105 innovative firms, we find a positive linear effect of tacit knowledge on innovation and a U-shaped relationship between knowledge exchange and combination and innovation. We also find an enhancing effect of tacit knowledge on the first part of the curvilinear relationship between knowledge exchange and combination and innovation.: R&D, patents, knowledge, inventions

Listen to the market: Do its complexity and signals make companies more innovative

This paper analyzes four modes of innovation that differ in their scope of newness – innovation generation and adoption–, and in their degree of change –radical and incremental innovations. Building a theoretical model based on the Market Orientation (MO) and contingency theory literatures and utilizing a unique sample of innovating firms, we find that MO positively influence the number incremental generation and adoption of innovations. We also find that environmental complexity moderates the relationship between MO and radical and incremental innovation generation and adoption. That is, we have found that high environmental complexity enhances the introduction of radical and incremental internally generated innovations and harms the introduction of incremental innovation adoptions for market oriented firm. These findings add to the innovation and MO literatures. Our results also have important implications for both commercial activities and R&D policies adopted by firms.taking place in this sector enhances its potential as a showcase for processes of anticipation and adaptation to the environment. In addition, the paper aims to shed some light on the question of whether strategy potentially moderates the MO-performance link. Finally, the principal implications of our findings are discussed.Market orientation, environmental complexity, innovation

How does knowledge matter patenting inventions?

While there is robust empirical evidence that firm patenting is positively associated with various measures of overall performance and competitiveness, less is known about what determines the patenting choice. For this reason, this paper examines whether R&D expenditure and the type of knowledge used in the invention determine the decision to patent. With this aim, we use a sample of firms and the European Patent Office to analyse how the combination of R&D expenditure and knowledge codifiability, observability and simplicity influences the patent decision. Our results contribute to the literature and assist R&D managers by showing that both R&D and codified knowledge have a positive impact on the number of inventions patented by a firm, while observable knowledge has a negative impact on patents. Furthermore, we find that the effect of R&D expenditure on the propensity to patent inventions is negatively moderated by knowledge observability and simplicity.: R&D, patents, knowledge, invent

Do best and worst innovative companies differ in terms of intellectual capital, knowledge and radicalness?

This paper differentiates “best innovative companies” from “worst innovative companies” and it takes into account three separate bodies of literature— intellectual capital, knowledge-based view, and innovation literatures. Based on a sample of 181 firms which belong to manufacturing and services industries, our findings show that best innovative performers companies (considering both financial and non-financial dimensions of innovation success) present systematically higher scores for all dimensions of intellectual capital: human, organizational and social capital) than worst innovation performers. Knowledge exchange and combination seems to be characteristic of most successful innovators, but no differences in systemic, tacit, complex and not observable knowledge have been found for these companies. Finally, regarding radicalness, firms with more innovation success provide new products or services that incorporates a new technology and new customer benefits (uniqueness), while firms with less innovation success laughs new products or services which are unfamiliar or difficult to understand by customers.Mobile-shopping

Social capital and knowledge in interorganizational networks: Their joint effect on innovation

This research analyzes the effects of interorganizational links on innovation using a comprehensive framework that integrates three research streams: social capital, knowledge based view and innovation. Using data from 143 R&D and/or marketing departments of innovative manufacturing and service companies, our results show that while knowledge complexity, per se, exerts a clear influence on the degree of innovations radicalness, the effect of knowledge tacitness appears only when it is combined with social capital. Similarly, the mere existence of strong cooperation agreements (relational social capital) does not guarantee more radical innovations. It is only when this social capital is combined with tacit knowledge that it really produces more innovative products. We also find that such radical products have an important impact on firm performance.: Innovation; radicalness; social capital; knowledge complexity; knowledge tacitness; firm performance

Do best and worst innovative companies differ in terms of intellectual capital, knowledge and radicalness?

This paper differentiates “best innovative companies” from “worst innovative companies” and it takes into account three separate bodies of literature— intellectual capital, knowledge-based view, and innovation literatures. Based on a sample of 181 firms which belong to manufacturing and services industries, our findings show that best innovative performers companies (considering both financial and non-financial dimensions of innovation success) present systematically higher scores for all dimensions of intellectual capital: human, organizational and social capital) than worst innovation performers. Knowledge exchange and combination seems to be characteristic of most successful innovators, but no differences in systemic, tacit, complex and not observable knowledge have been found for these companies. Finally, regarding radicalness, firms with more innovation success provide new products or services that incorporates a new technology and new customer benefits (uniqueness), while firms with less innovation success laughs new products or services which are unfamiliar or difficult to understand by customers.Mobile-shopping

Sombras, pero también luces, de los síntomas de TDAH para el emprendimiento

Existe una preocupación por investigar la relación entre los síntomas del TDAH y la actividad emprendedora, encontrando un impacto positivo en la intención y acción emprendedora; pero desconociéndose las implicaciones en el rendimiento de estos síntomas. Utilizando una muestra de emprendedores españoles, esta investigación encuentra que los síntomas impulsivos e hiperactivos del TDAH conducen en gran medida al desempeño empresarial a través de la orientación emprendedora, mientras que los síntomas de falta de atención no ayudan a mejorar dicho desempeño. Estos resultados sugieren que las ventajas de rendimiento pueden derivarse de una mayor capacidad innovadora, proactividad y asunción de riesgos

How social capital and knowledge affect innovation

This research analyzes the effects of interorganizational links on radical innovation using a comprehensive framework that integrates three research streams: social capital, the knowledge-based view and innovation. Incorporating data from 143 companies of innovative manufacturing and service industries, our results show that while knowledge complexity per se exerts a clear influence on radical innovation, the effect of knowledge tacitness appears only in combination with social capital. Similarly, the mere existence of strong cooperation agreements (relational social capital) does not guarantee more radical innovations, only when combining high levels of social capital with tacit knowledge does this antecedent produce more radical innovation

Does family involvement in management reduce the risk of business failure? The moderating role of entrepreneurial orientation

This study explores the question of whether—and under which circumstances—family involvement helps avoid business failure. We hypothesize that it is family involvement in management, rather than ownership, which reduces the risk of failure during economic downturns; however, this effect is negatively affected by the firm’s entrepreneurial orientation (EO). We argue that EO hinders reaching consensuses on and commitment to family-centered goals, which are focused on long-term survival. We analyze 369 manufacturing firms in Spain from 2007 to 2013, and find that family involvement in management reduces the risk of business failure, but this effect decreases as EO increases

Does Family Involvement in Management Reduce the Risk of Business Failure? The Moderating Role of Entrepreneurial Orientation

This study explores the question of whether - and under which circumstances - family involvement helps avoid business failure. We hypothesize that it is family involvement in management, rather than ownership, which reduces the risk of failure during economic downturns; however, this effect is negatively affected by the firm's entrepreneurial orientation (EO). We argue that EO hinders reaching consensuses on and commitment to family-centered goals, which are focused on long-term survival. We analyze 369 manufacturing firms in Spain from 2007 to 2013, and find that family involvement in management reduces the risk of business failure, but this effect decreases as EO increases.The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship and/or publication of this article: This study has been partially supported by financial aid from the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness (Projects ECO2012-36160, ECO2014-58799-R and ECO2015-67296-R) and from the Project S2015/HUM-3417 (cofinanced by the Communtiy of Madrid and European Social Fund)