Advertisement

The Impact of Organizational Learning on Innovativeness in Spanish Companies

  • Jesús David Sánchez de Pablo González del Campo
  • Miha Škerlavaj
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 49)

Abstract

Innovativeness is a key factor regarding the survival and progress of a company in modern business environments. The question is how to facilitate innovativeness in organizations. This article studies the impact of the organizational learning process on innovativeness. We understand innovativeness as a combination of (1) innovative culture and (2) technological and process innovation. Organizational learning is a consecutive process of (1) information acquisition, (2) information distribution, (3) information interpretation, and (4) behavioral and cognitive changes. New knowledge obtained through organizational learning improves innovativeness. As a methodological framework, we use the partial least square (PLS) approach to structural equation modeling on data from 107 Spanish companies. The results show that organizational learning has a strong positive direct impact on process, product, and service innovations. In addition, the impact of organizational learning on innovation is also indirect, via innovative culture.

Keywords

Organizational learning Innovativeness Behavioral and Cognitive Changes Spanish Companies 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    De Geus, A.P.: Planning as learning. Harvard Business Review 88, 70–74 (1988)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Škerlavaj, M., Indihar Štemberger, M., Škrinjar, R., Dimovski, V.: Organizational learning culture—the missing link between business process change and organizational performance. International Journal of Production Economics 106, 346–367 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Caballé, S., Juan, A., Xhafa, F.: Supporting effective monitoring and knowledge building in online collaborative learning systems. In: Lytras, M.D., Carroll, J.M., Damiani, E., Tennyson, R.D. (eds.) WSKS 2008. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 5288, pp. 205–214. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Damanpour, F.: Organizational innovation: a meta-analysis of the effects of determinants and moderators. Academy of Management Journal 34(3), 555–590 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Liao, S., Fei, W.C., Liu, C.T.: The relationship between knowledge inertia, organizational learning and organizational innovation. Technovation 28, 183–195 (2008)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Santos, M.L., Álvarez, L.I.: Innovativeness and organizational innovation in total quality oriented firms: the moderating role of market turbulence. Technovation 27, 514–532 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Stata, R.: Organizational learning: The key to management innovation. Sloan Management Review 30, 63–74 (1989)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Argyris, C., Schön, D.A.: Organizational learning: a theory of action perspective. Addison-Wesley, Reading (1978)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Akgün, A.E., Keskin, H., Byme, J.C., Aren, S.: Emotional and learning capability and their impact on product innovativeness and firm performance. Technovation 27, 501–513 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Fosfuri, A., Tribó, J.A.: Exploring the antecedents of potential absorptive capacity and its impact on innovation performance. Omega. The International Journal of Management Science 36, 173–187 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Crossan, M.M., Lane, H., White, R.E., Djurfeldt, L.: Organizational learning: dimensions for a theory. The International Journal of Organizational Analysis 3, 337–360 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Fiol, C.M., Lyles, M.A.: Organizational learning. Academy of Management Review 10, 803–813 (1985)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Huber, G.P.: Organizational learning: The contributing processes and the literature. Organization Science 2, 88–115 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Dimovski, V.: Organizational learning and competitive advantage. Ph.D. Thesis, Cleveland State University (1994)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Dimovski, V., Škerlavaj, M., Kimman, M., Hernaus, T.: Comparative analysis of the organizational learning process in Slovenia, Croatia, and Malaysia. Expert Systems with Applications 34, 3063–3070 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hurley, R., Hult, G.T.M.: Innovation, market orientation, and organizational learning: an integration and empirical examination. Journal of Marketing 62, 42–54 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Tidd, J., Bessant, J., Pavitt, K.: Managing innovation. Wiley, Chichester (1997)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Schumpeter, J.A.: Theory of economic development: an enquiry into profits, capital, interest and the business cycle. Harvard University Press, Cambridge (1934)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Dewar, R.D., Dutton, J.E.: The adoption of radical and incremental innovations: an empirical analysis. Management Science 32, 1422–1433 (1986)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Guadamillas, F., Donate, M.J., Sánchez de Pablo, J.D.: Knowledge management for corporate entrepreneurship and growth: a case study. Knowledge and Process Management 15, 32–44 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Daft, R.L.: A dual-core model of organizational innovation. Academy of Management Journal 21(2), 193–210 (1978)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Simpson, P.M., Siguaw, J.A., Enz, C.A.: Innovation orientation outcomes: The good and the bad. Journal of Business Research 59, 1133–1141 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Snyder, W.M., Cummings, T.C.: Organization learning disorders: a conceptual model and intervention hypotheses. Human Relations 51, 873–895 (1998)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Park, Y., Kim, S.: Knowledge management system for fourth generation R&D: knowvation. Technovation 26, 595–602 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Rodan, S., Galunic, C.: More than networks structure: how knowledge heterogeneity influences managerial performance and innovativeness. Strategic Management Journal 25, 541–562 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Drucker, P.E.: Innovation and entrepreneurship: practice and principles. Heinemann, London (1985)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Senge, P.M., Roberts, C., Ross, R.B., Smith, B.J., Kleiner, A.: The fifth discipline fieldbook. Doubleday, New York (1994)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Dimovski, V., Škerlavaj, M.: Performance effects of organizational learning in a transitional economy. Problems and Perspectives in Management 3, 56–67 (2005)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Spector, J.M., Davidsen, P.I.: How can organizational learning be modeled and measured? Evaluation and Program Planning 29, 63–69 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Bagozzi, R.P., Yi, Y.: On the evaluation of structural equation models. Academy of Marketing Science 16(1), 74–94 (1988)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Hair, J.F., Anderson, R.E., Tatham, R.L., Black, W.C.: Multivariate data analysis, 5th edn. Prentice-Hall, London (1998)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Fornell, C., Larcker, D.F.: Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research 25, 186–192 (1981)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jesús David Sánchez de Pablo González del Campo
    • 1
  • Miha Škerlavaj
    • 2
  1. 1.University of Castilla-La ManchaCiudad Real(Spain)
  2. 2.University of LjubljanaSlovenia)

Personalised recommendations