Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A Dynamic Learning Perspective on Innovation Control: Balancing Freedom and Constraint

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Innovation and Capacity Building

Abstract

Recent research has highlighted innovation as a dynamic, cyclical and continuous process tied to multiple levels within organisations. This chapter approaches the control of innovation from a dialectic perspective by presenting practical managerial solutions to combine individual, team and organisational elements for the purpose of controlling resources with flexible, self-organising processes. The study reveals that diverse phases of the innovation that proceeds as a multi-level process have distinct demands with respect to innovation control. The early phase should be supported by indirect control mechanisms, with idea development guided in a free and supportive manner; the concept phase should be agitated by the organisation seeking multiple options and a defined shared goal; and the project development phase should have direct mechanisms with which to control execution and resources.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Adams, R., Bessant, J., & Phelps, R. (2006). Innovation management measurement: A review. International Journal of Management Reviews, 8(1), 21–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bledow, R., Frese, M., Anderson, N., Erez, M., & Farr, J. (2009a). A dialectic perspective on innovation: Conflicting demands, multiple pathways, and ambidexterity. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 2(3), 305–337.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bledow, R., Frese, M., Anderson, N., Erez, M., & Farr, J. (2009b). Extending and refining the dialectic perspective on innovation: There is nothing as practical as a good theory; nothing as theoretical as a good practice. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 2(3), 363–373.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brav, A., Andersson, K., & Lantz, A. (2009). Group initiative and self-organizational activities in industrial work groups. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 18(3), 347–377.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chebbi, H., Yahiaoui, D., & Thrassou, A. (2017). Multi-country collaborative innovation in the internationalisation process. International Marketing Review, 34(1), 109–137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chenhall, R. H. (2003). Management control systems design within its organizational context: Findings from contingency-based research and directions for the future. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 28(2–3), 127–168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chesbrough, H. W. (2003). Open innovation: The new imperative for creating and profiting from technology. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chiesa, V., Frattini, F., Lamberti, L., & Noci, G. (2009). Exploring management control in radical innovation projects. European Journal of Innovation Management, 12(4), 416–443.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davila, A., Foster, G., & Oyon, D. (2009). Accounting and control, entrepreneurship and innovation: Venturing into new research opportunities. European Accounting Review, 18(2), 281–311.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 532–550.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fjeldstad, Ø. D., Snow, C. C., Miles, R. E., & Lettl, C. (2012). The architecture of collaboration. Strategic Management Journal, 33(6), 734–750.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flyvbjerg, B. (2006). Five misunderstandings about case-study research. Qualitative Inquiry, 12(2), 219–245.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Franco, M., & Bourne, M. (2003). Factors that play a role in “managing through measures”. Management Decision, 41(8), 698–710.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Franco-Santos, M., Lucianetti, L., & Bourne, M. (2012). Contemporary performance measurement systems: A review of their consequences and a framework for research. Management Accounting Research, 23(2), 79–119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haustein, E., Luther, R., & Schuster, P. (2014). Management control systems in innovation companies: A literature based framework. Journal of Management Control, 24(4), 343–382.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henri, J. F. (2006). Management control systems and strategy: A resource-based perspective. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 31(6), 529–558.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hutzschenreuter, J. (2009). Management control in small and medium-sized enterprises. Wiesbaden: Gabler.

    Google Scholar 

  • James, L., Guile, D., & Unwin, L. (2013). Learning and innovation in the knowledge-based economy: Beyond clusters and qualifications. Journal of Education and Work, 26(3), 243–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Janssen, S., Moeller, K., & Schlaefke, M. (2011). Using performance measures conceptually in innovation control. Journal of Management Control, 22(1), 107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kovács, G., & Spens, K. M. (2005). Abductive reasoning in logistics research. International Journal of Physical Distribution and Logistics Management, 35(2), 132–144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Labitzke, G., Svoboda, S., & Schultz, C. (2014). The role of dedicated innovation functions for innovation process control and performance—an empirical study among hospitals. Creativity and Innovation Management, 23(3), 235–251.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mäkimattila, M. (2014). Organizing for systemic innovations—research on knowledge, interaction and organizational interdependencies. Doctoral dissertation, Lappeenranta University of Technology.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mäkimattila, M., Melkas, H., & Uotila, T. (2013). Dynamics of openness in innovation processes—A case study in the Finnish food industry. Knowledge and Process Management, 20(4), 243–255.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Malmi, T., & Brown, D. A. (2008). Management control systems as a package—Opportunities, challenges and research directions. Management Accounting Research, 19(4), 287–300.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • March, J. G. (1991). Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization Science, 2(1), 71–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merchant, K. A., & Van der Stede, W. A. (2007). Management control systems: Performance measurement, evaluation and incentives. Harlow: Pearson Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nudurupati, S. S., & Bititci, U. S. (2005). Implementation and impact of IT-supported performance measurement systems. Production Planning and Control, 16(2), 152–162.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pålshaugen, Ø. (2009). How to generate knowledge from single case research on innovation? International Journal of Action Research, 5(3), 231–254.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prajogo, D. I., & Ahmed, P. K. (2006). Relationships between innovation stimulus, innovation capacity, and innovation performance. R&D Management, 36(5), 499–515.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Revellino, S., & Mouritsen, J. (2009). The multiplicity of controls and the making of innovation. European Accounting Review, 18(2), 341–369.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Santoro, G., Vrontis, D., Thrassou, A., and Dezi, L. (2017). The internet of things: Building a knowledge management system for open innovation and knowledge management capacity. Technological Forecasting and Social Change.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saunila, M. (2017). Understanding innovation performance measurement in SMEs. Measuring Business Excellence, 21(1), 1–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saunila, M., Ukko, J., & Rantanen, H. (2014). Does innovation capability really matter for the profitability of SMEs? Knowledge and Process Management, 21(2), 134–142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schumpeter, J. A. (1934). The theory of economic development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simons, R. (2000). Performance measurement and control systems for implementing strategy. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tannenbaum, A. S. (1968). Control in organizations. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thrassou, A., Vrontis, D., & Bresciani, S. (2018a). The Agile Innovation Pendulum: Family business innovation and the human, social, and marketing capitals. International Studies of Management and Organization, 48(1), 88–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thrassou, A., Vrontis, D., & Bresciani, S. (2018b). The Agile Innovation Pendulum: A strategic marketing multicultural model for family businesses. International Studies of Management and Organization, 48(1), 105–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tidd, J., Bessant, J., & Pavitt, K. (2005). Managing innovation: Integrating technological, market and organizational change. Chichester: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van der Panne, G., Van Beers, C., & Kleinknecht, A. (2003). Success and failure of innovation: A literature review. International Journal of Innovation Management, 7(03), 309–338.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Voss, C., Tsikriktsis, N., & Frohlich, M. (2002). Case research in operations management. International Journal of Operations and Production Management, 22(2), 195–219.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vrontis, D., Thrassou, A., Chebbi, H., & Yahiaoui, D. (2012). Transcending innovativeness towards strategic reflexivity. Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal, 15(4), 420–437.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yin, R. K. (1994). Case study research. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ylinen, M., & Gullkvist, B. (2014). The effects of organic and mechanistic control in exploratory and exploitative innovations. Management Accounting Research, 25(1), 93–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Lappeenranta University of Technology, Lahti, Finland

    Minna Saunila

  2. Lahti University of Applied Sciences, Lahti, Finland

    Martti Mäkimattila

Authors
  1. Minna Saunila
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Martti Mäkimattila
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Minna Saunila .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. School of Business, University of Nicosia, Nicosia, Cyprus

    Demetris Vrontis

  2. School of Business Administration, College of Management, Rishon Lezion, Israel

    Yaakov Weber

  3. School of Business, University of Nicosia, Nicosia, Cyprus

    Alkis Thrassou

  4. Ural Federal University, Yekaterinburg, Russia

    S. M. Riad Shams

  5. Department of Accounting and Finance, University of Applied Sciences Crete (T.E.I. of Crete), Heraklion, Crete, Greece

    Evangelos Tsoukatos

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Saunila, M., Mäkimattila, M. (2018). A Dynamic Learning Perspective on Innovation Control: Balancing Freedom and Constraint. In: Vrontis, D., Weber, Y., Thrassou, A., Shams, S., Tsoukatos, E. (eds) Innovation and Capacity Building. Palgrave Studies in Cross-disciplinary Business Research, In Association with EuroMed Academy of Business. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-90945-5_14

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation