Organizational learning and technological innovation: the distinct dimensions of novelty and meaningfulness that impact firm performance
This manuscript delineates technological innovation into the separate dimensions of novelty and meaningfulness to examine how a firm’s organizational learning modes of adaptive learning and experimental learning, together with unabsorbed slack resources, influence the effects of novelty and meaningfulness on firm financial performance. The multi-method empirical approach leverages secondary data from firm patent information and COMPUSTAT, and primary data from senior executives at 167 firms in various high-tech industries. The results indicate that adaptive learning heightens meaningfulness but diminishes novelty, whereas experimental learning harms meaningfulness. Additionally, firms’ unabsorbed slack resources moderate the relationships of experimental and adaptive learning with novelty. In particular, experimental learning enhances novelty only when a firm has sufficient unabsorbed slack to adjust resource levels in accordance with experimentation. Further, the results suggest that meaningfulness increases firm financial performance as represented by Tobin’s q, both independently and jointly when considered with novelty. These insights underscore the necessity of treating novelty and meaningfulness as separate dimensions of technological innovation that impact firm performance.
KeywordsExperimental learning Adaptive learning Slack resources Innovation novelty Innovation meaningfulness Shareholder value Organizational learning Firm performance
The third author acknowledes the financial support of the National Natural Science Foundation of China(71573079).
- Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park: Sage.Google Scholar
- Argote, L. (2012). Organizational learning: Creating, retaining and transferring knowledge. Springer Science & Business Media.Google Scholar
- Argyris, C., & Schon, D. A. (1978). Organizational learning: A theory of action perspective. Reading: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
- Hall, B. H., Jaffe, A. B., & Trajtenberg, M. (2001). The NBER patent citation data file: Lessons, insights and methodological tools. (No. 8498). National Bureau of Economic Research.Google Scholar
- Jaffe, A. B., & Trajtenberg, M. (2002). Patents, citations and innovations: A window on the knowledge economy. Boston: MIT Press.Google Scholar
- McGrath, R. G. (2001). Exploratory learning, innovative capacity, and managerial oversight. Academy of Management Journal, 44(1), 118–131.Google Scholar
- Singh, J. V. (1986). Performance, slack, and risk taking in organizational decision making. Academy of Management Journal, 29(3), 562–585.Google Scholar
- Weerawardena, J., Mort, G. S., Salunke, S., Knight, G., & Liesch, P. W. (2015). The role of the market sub-system and the socio-technical sub-system in innovation and firm performance: A dynamic capabilities approach. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43(2), 221–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar