Free Access

An Integrated Framework for Examining Innovation Alignment in Organizations

Ebru Dilan

http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0501-2273

Kadir Has University, Kadir Has Caddesi, Cibali, Istanbul, TR 34083, Turkey

E-mail Address: [email protected]

Corresponding author.

Search for more papers by this author

and

Mehmet N. Aydin

Kadir Has University, Kadir Has Caddesi, Cibali, Istanbul, TR 34083, Turkey

E-mail Address: [email protected]

Search for more papers by this author

https://doi.org/10.1142/S0219877019500391Cited by:7 (Source: Crossref)

This article is part of the issue:

Special Issue — Strategic Management in Emerging Economies: Innovation, Corporate Social Responsibility, and Sustainable Management

Abstract

Innovation has been promoted as a panacea to solve the long-standing problem of how organizations deal with complexities associated with uncertainty and instability in ever changing environments. information systems (IS) research focusing on innovation has adopted several perspectives to reveal a rich context in which the innovation surfaces as a phenomenon. Examination of a rich context may contribute to a better understanding of an extent to which uncertainty and instability can affect or be affected by innovation strategies that require various innovation efforts in an organization. In this regard, one of the most critical issues is to ensure that these innovation efforts can achieve a successful outcome via their strategic and structural alignment. In this research, we propose an integrated framework that addresses an innovation alignment issue by employing three high-level notions (strategic dimensions, structural characteristics, strategizing acts). The integrated framework has been used rigorously in two cases for an explorative purpose. Our interpretation of the evidence suggests that strategizing act, as a high-level notion has an explanatory power to articulate the associations between strategic dimensions and structural characteristics. Among other findings, we have observed that the closed, incremental and process-oriented innovation strategy is particularly relevant to the corporate level whereas radical, product-oriented, and partially open innovation strategy is associated with a more exclusive innovation structure.

Keywords:

References

Abernathy, W. J. and Utterback, J. M. [1978] Patterns of industrial innovation. Technology Review, 80, 7: 40–47. Google Scholar
Avital, M. and Te’Eni, D. [2009] From generative fit to generative capacity: Exploring an emerging dimension of information systems design and task performance. Information Systems Journal, 19, 4: 345–367. Crossref, Google Scholar
Bailey, D. E., Leonardi, P. M. and Barley, S. R. [2012] The lure of the virtual. Organization Science, 23: 1485–1504. Crossref, Google Scholar
Bantel, K. A. and Jackson, S. E. [1989] Top management and innovations in banking: Does the composition of the top team make a difference? Strategic Management Journal, 10, S1: 107–124. Crossref, Google Scholar
Barrett, M., Oborn, E., Orlikowski, W. J. and Yates, J. [2012] Reconfiguring boundary relations: Robotic innovations in pharmacy work. Organization Science, 23, 5: 1448–1466. Crossref, Google Scholar
Bessant, J., Lamming, R., Noke, H. and Phillips, W. [2005] Managing innovation beyond the steady state. Technovation, 25(12): 1366–1376. Crossref, Google Scholar
Bessant, J. and Tidd, J. (2007). Innovation and Entrepreneurship. John Wiley & Sons. Boer, H. and During, W. E. (2001). Innovation, what innovation? A comparison between product, process and organisational innovation. International Journal of Technology Management, 22, 1–3: 83–107. Google Scholar
Campbell, D. F. and Guttel, W. H. [2005] Knowledge production of firms: Research networks and the “scientification” of business R&D. International Journal of Technology Management, 31, 1–2: 152–175. Crossref, Google Scholar
Carayannis, E. G. and Campbell, D. F. [2006] Mode 3”: Meaning and implications from a knowledge systems perspective. Knowledge Creation, Diffusion, and Use in Innovation Networks and Knowledge Clusters. A Comparative Systems Approach Across the United States, Europe and Asia, pp. 1–25. Google Scholar
Carayannis, E. G. and Campbell, D. F. [2009] ‘Mode 3’ and ‘Quadruple Helix’: Toward a 21st century fractal innovation ecosystem. International Journal of Technology Management, 46, 3–4: 201–234. Crossref, Google Scholar
Carayannis, E. G. and Campbell, D. F. [2011] Open innovation diplomacy and a 21st century fractal research, education and innovation (FREIE) ecosystem: Building on the quadruple and quintuple helix innovation concepts and the “mode 3” knowledge production system. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 2, 3: 327. Crossref, Google Scholar
Chandler, A. D. [1990] Strategy and Structure: Chapters in the History of the Industrial Enterprise, Vol. 120. MIT Press. Google Scholar
Cheng, C. C. and Huizingh, E. K. [2014] When is open innovation beneficial? The role of strategic orientation. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 31, 6: 1235–1253. Crossref, Google Scholar
Chesbrough, H. W. [2006] Open Innovation: The New Imperative for Creating and Profiting from Technology. Harvard Business Press. Crossref, Google Scholar
Child, J. [1972] Organizational structure, environment and performance: The role of strategic choice. Sociology, 6, 1: 1–22. Crossref, Google Scholar
Cooper, J. R. [1998] A multidimensional approach to the adoption of innovation. Management Decision, 36, 8: 493–502. Crossref, Google Scholar
Cottam, A., Ensor, J. and Band, C. [2001] A benchmark study of strategic commitment to innovation. European Journal of Innovation Management, 4, 2: 88–94. Crossref, Google Scholar
Damanpour, F. [1987] The adoption of technological, administrative and ancillary innovations: Impact of organizational factors. Journal of Management, 13, 4: 675–688. Crossref, Google Scholar
Damanpour, F. [1991] Organizational innovation: A meta-analysis of effects of determinants and moderators. Academy of Management Journal, 34, 3: 555–590. Crossref, Google Scholar
Dewar, R. D. and Dutton, J. E. [1986] The adoption of radical and incremental innovations: An empirical analysis. Management Science, 32, 11: 1422–1433. Crossref, Google Scholar
Dilan, E. and Aydin, M. [2016] The drivers and implications of information system process innovations: A financial services case study. Yönetim Bilişim Sistemleri Dergisi, 1, 3: 118–128. Google Scholar
Duening, T. N. [2007] Enterprise process innovation — The ingredients are well known, but what is the recipe? International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management, 4, 1: 87–101. Link, Google Scholar
Dursun, M. E., O’Connell, J. F., Lei, Z. and Warnock-Smith, D. [2014] The transformation of a legacy carrier: A case study of Turkish Airlines. Journal of Air Transport Management, 40: 106–118, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jairtraman.2014.06.003. Crossref, Google Scholar
Etzkowitz, H. and Leydesdorff, L. [2000] The dynamics of innovation: From National Systems and “Mode 2” to a Triple Helix of university-industry-government relations. Research Policy, 29, 2: 109–123. Crossref, Google Scholar
Felin, T. and Zenger, T. R. [2014] Closed or open innovation? Problem solving and the governance choice. Research Policy, 43, 5: 914–925. Crossref, Google Scholar
Francis, D. and Bessant, J. [2005] Targeting innovation and implications for capability development. Technovation, 25, 3: 171–183. Crossref, Google Scholar
Gao, L. S. and Iyer, B. [2006] Analyzing complementarities using software stacks for software industry acquisitions. Journal of Management Information Systems, 23, 2: 119–147. Crossref, Google Scholar
Garcia, R. and Calantone, R. [2002] A critical look at technological innovation typology and innovativeness terminology: A literature review. Journal of Product Innovation Management: An International Publication of the Product Development & Management Association, 19, 2: 110–132. Crossref, Google Scholar
Greco, M., Grimaldi, M. and Cricelli, L. [2016] An analysis of the open innovation effect on firm performance. European Management Journal, 34, 5: 501–516. Crossref, Google Scholar
Greenwood, R. and Hinings, C. R. [1993] Understanding strategic change: The contribution of archetypes. Academy of Management Journal. Crossref, Google Scholar
Heising, W. [2012] The integration of ideation and project portfolio management — A key factor for sustainable success. International Journal of Project Management, 30, 5: 582–595. Crossref, Google Scholar
Henderson, R. M. and Clark, K. B. [1990] Architectural innovation: The reconfiguration of existing product technologies and the failure of established firms. Administrative Science Quarterly, 9–30. Crossref, Google Scholar
Hovgaard, A. and Hansen, E. [2004] Innovativeness in the forest products industry. Forest Products Journal, 54, 1. Google Scholar
Isaksson, V. and Hylving, L. (2017). The Effect of Anarchistic Actions in Digital Product Innovation Networks: The Case of “Over the Air” Software Updates. Google Scholar
Johannessen, J. A., Olsen, B. and Lumpkin, G. T. [2001] Innovation as newness: What is new, how new, and new to whom? European Journal of Innovation Management, 4, 1: 20–31. Crossref, Google Scholar
Jonsson, K., Westergren, U. H. and Holmström, J. [2008] Technologies for value creation: An exploration of remote diagnostics systems in the manufacturing industry. Information Systems Journal, 18, 3: 227–245. Crossref, Google Scholar
Knight, K. E. [1967] A descriptive model of the intra-firm innovation process. The Journal of Business, 40, 4: 478–496. Crossref, Google Scholar
Lavie, D., Kang, J. and Rosenkopf, L. [2011] Balance within and across domains: The performance implications of exploration and exploitation in alliances. Organization Science, 22, 6: 1517–1538. Crossref, Google Scholar
Lazzarotti, V., Bengtsson, L., Manzini, R., Pellegrini, L. and Rippa, P. [2017] Openness and innovation performance: An empirical analysis of openness determinants and performance mediators. European Journal of Innovation Management, 20, 3: 463–492. Crossref, Google Scholar
Lee, J. and Berente, N. [2012] Digital innovation and the division of innovative labor: Digital controls in the automotive industry. Organization Science, 23, 5: 1428–1447. Crossref, Google Scholar
Lyytinen, K., Yoo, Y. and Boland, R. J., Jr. , [2016] Digital product innovation within four classes of innovation networks. Information Systems Journal, 26, 1: 47–75. Crossref, Google Scholar
Martinez, M. S. (2016). Good Practices of the Lean Startup Methodology: Benefits, Challenges and Recommendations. Google Scholar
Matthyssens, P., Vandenbempt, K. and Berghman, L. [2006] Value innovation in business markets: Breaking the industry recipe. Industrial Marketing Management, 35, 6: 751–761. Crossref, Google Scholar
Meissner, J. O., Brunswicker, S., Schweikert, S. and Wolf, P. (2008, June). Scaffolding innovations: Implications of regional innovation barriers for platform-based innovation management improvement. In Technology Management Conference (ICE), 2008 IEEE International, IEEE, pp. 1–10. Google Scholar
Milling, P. M. and Stumpfe, J. [2000] Product and process innovation: A system dynamics-based analysis of the interdependencies. In 18th International Conference of the System Dynamics Society Sustainability in the Third Millennium, Bergen, Norway. Google Scholar
Mustonen-Ollila, E. and Lyytinen, K. [2004] How organizations adopt information system process innovations: A longitudinal analysis. European Journal of Information Systems, 13, 1: 35–51. Crossref, Google Scholar
Nambisan, S., Lyytinen, K., Majchrzak, A. and Song, M. [2017] Digital innovation management: Reinventing innovation management research in a digital world. MIS Quarterly, 41, 1. Crossref, Google Scholar
Nalebuff, B. J., Brandenburger, A. and Maulana, A. [1996] Co-Opetition. Harper Collins Business, London. Google Scholar
Nylén, D. and Holmström, J. [2015] Digital innovation strategy: A framework for diagnosing and improving digital product and service innovation. Business Horizons, 58, 1: 57–67. Crossref, Google Scholar
Oke, A., Burke, G. and Myers, A. [2007] Innovation types & performance in growing UK SMEs. International Journal of Operations and Production Management, 27, 7: 735–753. Crossref, Google Scholar
O’Reilly III, C. A. and Tushman, M. L. [2008] Ambidexterity as a dynamic capability: Resolving the innovator’s dilemma. Research in Organizational Behavior, 28: 185–206. Crossref, Google Scholar
O’Reilly III, C. A. and Tushman, M. L. [2011] Organizational ambidexterity in action: How managers explore and exploit. California Management Review, 53, 4: 5–22. Crossref, Google Scholar
Powell, W. W. and DiMaggio, P. J. [1991] The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis, University of Chicago Press, Chicago. Crossref, Google Scholar
Ries, E. [2011] The Lean Startup, Vol. 1. Crown Business, New York. Google Scholar
Ritala, P. and Hurmelinna Laukkanen, P. [2013] Incremental and radical innovation in coopetition — The role of absorptive capacity and appropriability. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 30, 1: 154–169. Crossref, Google Scholar
Rowley, J., Baregheh, A. and Sambrook, S. [2011] Towards an innovation–type mapping tool. Management Decision, 49, 1: 73–86. Crossref, Google Scholar
Saebi, T. and Foss, N. J. [2015] Business models for open innovation: Matching heterogeneous open innovation strategies with business model dimensions. European Management Journal, 33, 3: 201–213. Crossref, Google Scholar
Schilling, M. A. [2015] Technology shocks, technological collaboration and innovation outcomes. Organization Science, 26, 3: 668–686. Crossref, Google Scholar
Svahn, F., Mathiassen, L. and Lindgren, R. [2017] Embracing digital innovation in incumbent firms: how Volvo cars managed competing concerns. Mis Quarterly, 41, 1. Crossref, Google Scholar
Swanson, E. B. [1994] Information systems innovation among organizations. Management Science, 40, 9: 1069–1092. Crossref, Google Scholar
Thangamani, G. [2016] Modified approach to risk assessment — a case study on product innovation and development value chain. International Journal of Innovation, Management and Technology, 7, 1: 16. Crossref, Google Scholar
Tidd, J. [1993] Technological innovation, organizational linkages and strategic degrees of freedom. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 5, 3: 273–284. Crossref, Google Scholar
Tidd, J. [1997] Complexity, networks & learning: Integrative themes for research on innovation management. International Journal of Innovation Management, 1, 1: 1–21. Link, Google Scholar
Tidd, J. [2001] Innovation management in context: Environment, organization and performance. International Journal of Management Reviews, 3, 3: 169–183. Crossref, Google Scholar
Tidd, J., Bessant, J. and Pavitt, K. [2005] Managing Innovation Integrating Technological, Market and Organizational Change. John Wiley and Sons Ltd. Google Scholar
Tiwana, A., Konsynski, B. and Bush, A. A. [2010] Research commentary — Platform evolution: Coevolution of platform architecture, governance, and environmental dynamics. Information Systems Research, 21, 4: 675–687. Crossref, Google Scholar
Trott, P. [2005] Innovation Management and New Product Development. Prentice-Hall, Harlow. Google Scholar
Tuomi, I. [2002] Networks of Innovation. Oxford University Press, Oxford. Google Scholar
Tushman, M. L. and O’Reilly III, C. A. [1996] Ambidextrous organizations: Managing evolutionary and revolutionary change. California Management Review, 38, 4: 8–29. Crossref, Google Scholar
Utterback, J. M. [1971] The process of technological innovation within the firm. Academy of Management Journal, 14, 1: 75–88. Crossref, Google Scholar
Van de Ven, A. H., Polley, D. E., Garud, R. and Venkataraman, S. (1999). The innovation journey. Google Scholar
Vandenbosch, B., Saatcioglu, A. and Fay, S. [2006] Idea management: A systemic view. Journal of Management Studies, 43, 2: 259–288. Crossref, Google Scholar
Velamuri, V. K., Neyer, A. and Möslein, K. M. [2008] What influences the design of hybrid products? Lessons learned from the preventive health — care industry. In Proceedings of the 15th International Product Development Management Conference, Hamburg. Google Scholar
Westerski, A., Iglesias, C. A. and Nagle, T. [2011] The road from community ideas to organizational innovation: A life cycle survey of idea management systems. International Journal of Web Based Communities, 7, 4: 493–506. Crossref, Google Scholar
Xie, L. and Zhang, P. [2010] Idea management system for team creation. JSW, 5, 11: 1187–1194. Crossref, Google Scholar
Yin, R. K. [2013] Case Study Research: Design and Methods. Sage Publications. Google Scholar
Yoo, Y., Boland, R. J., Jr., Lyytinen, K. and Majchrzak, A. [2012] Organizing for innovation in the digitized world. Organization Science, 23, 5: 1398–1408. Crossref, Google Scholar
Yoo, Y., Henfridsson, O. and Lyytinen, K. [2010] Research commentary — the new organizing logic of digital innovation: An agenda for information systems research. Information Systems Research, 21, 4: 724–735. Crossref, Google Scholar