Abstract
PurposeKnowledge‐based assets and organizational learning capabilities are recognized to be critical for firm's innovation activities. The process of creating new knowledge requires acquiring useful data and information, and utilizing it effectively in its internal innovation activities. To manage external knowledge, firms need absorptive capacity. The purpose of this study is to present the concept of the firm's absorptive capacity as a multidimensional, dynamic construct consisting of capabilities for organizational knowledge processing.Design/methodology/approachThe paper draws on results from a large‐scale survey. The empirical data used in the study comprises of 217 Finnish firms from seven different industry sectors. The hypotheses were tested by means of hierarchical linear regression analysis.FindingsThe results of the empirical tests give some support to the view that it is not only the firm's knowledge stock but also its knowledge flows that are crucial for sustaining innovative performance. The regression estimation shows that knowledge‐utilization capabilities were reflected in the firm's innovative performance.Research limitations/implicationsAs the data used in the study was cross‐sectional, the causal relationships and the sustainability of innovative performance cannot be captured. Avenues for further research include the interaction between the firm's knowledge base, knowledge processes and innovativeness.Practical implicationsThis study emphasizes the importance of the firm's ability to utilize and renew its knowledge base effectively. In order to utilize externally generated knowledge, firms need an ability to internalize it and then combine the information and new insights with the existing knowledge base.Originality/valueAs only little empirical research has been conducted on the impact of knowledge‐processing capabilities on the firm's innovative performance, the empirical evidence reported here makes a valuable contribution in this highly important area.
Subject
Management of Technology and Innovation
Reference41 articles.
1. Argyris, C. and Schön, D. (1978), Organizational Learning: A Theory of Action Perspective, Addison‐Wesley, Reading, MA.
2. Armstrong, J.S. and Overton, T.S. (1977), “Estimating non‐response bias in mail surveys”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 14 No. 3, pp. 396‐402.
3. Barney, J.B. (1991), “Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage”, Journal of Management, Vol. 17 No. 1, pp. 99‐120.
4. Bontis, N., Crossan, M.M. and Hulland, J. (2002), “Managing an organizational learning system by aligning stocks and flows”, Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 39 No. 4, pp. 437‐69.
5. Brush, T.H., Bromiley, P. and Hendrickx, M. (1999), “The relative influence of industry and corporation on business segment performance: an alternative estimate”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 20 No. 6, pp. 519‐47.
Cited by
226 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献