Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Interaction Between Knowledge Management Activities, Innovation Barriers and Innovation Performance: Spanish High and Medium Technology Firms

  • Published:
Journal of the Knowledge Economy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to explain differing innovative behaviours in Spanish high and medium technology firms according to the investment made in knowledge management practices within their innovation processes and their investment in their workers’ capacities. Using a methodology of clusters, four separate types of behaviour were identified for their innovation performance. The cause and effect relationships between the defined constructs were studied by applying SEM methodology in each cluster identified, as well as the direct impact of the knowledge management constructs on the innovation performance construct. In all cases, knowledge workers have the greatest impact on innovation performance. There is also a strong correlation between knowledge workers and investment in internal knowledge management. Finally, the factors that hinder innovation activities are determined by the size of the companies. Further theoretical and empirical development will be required to provide comparison and feedback on the findings found over time and with a more inter-sectoral and intra-business focus. Organisations interested in improving both their innovative activity and their knowledge management, must be aware of the importance of knowledge workers, (key for internal R&D knowledge) and of the need for continuous training as the main tool for stimulating the continuous transmission and generation of knowledge. This is a new contribution to the patterns of behaviour with regard to innovation performance, complementing other sector studies carried out in Spain and elsewhere, and gives further proof of the positive effect of innovation knowledge management.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alavi, M., & Leidner, D. E. (2001). Review: knowledge management and knowledge management systems: conceptual foundations and research issues. MIS Q, 25(1), 107–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aldenderfer, M., & Blashfield, R. (1984). Cluster analysis (Vol. 44). (S. U. Sciences, Ed.) Londres: Sage.

  • Alegre, J., & Chiva, R. (2008). Assessing the impact of organizational learning capability on product innovation: an empirical test. Technovation, 28(6), 315–326.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alegre, J., Sengupta, K., & Lapiedra, R. (2013). Knowledge management and innovation performance in a high-tech SMEs industry. International Small Business Journal, 31(4), 454–470.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Argote, L. (1999). Organizational learning: creating, retaining, and transferring knowledge. Boston, M.A: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bagozzi, R. P. (1988). On the evaluation of structural equation models. J Acad Mark Sci, 1(16), 74–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beijerse, R. (1999). Questions in knowledge management: defining and conceptualizing a phenomenon. J Knowl Manag, 3(2), 94–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychol Bull, 107, 238–246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bizquerra, R. (1989). Métodos de Investigación Educativa. México: CEAC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cantner, U., Joel, K., & Schmidt, T. (2009). The use of knowledge management by German innovators. J Knowl Manag, 12(6), 187–203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carneiro, A. (2002). How does knowledge management influence innovation and competitiveness? J Knowl Manag, 4(2), 87–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, W., & Levinthal, D. (1990). Absorptive capacity: a new learning perspective on learning and innovation. Adm Sci Q, 35, 128–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Commission European. (2010). Europe 2020: A strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth. Brussels: COM/2010/2020 final.

  • COTEC. (2014). Informe COTEC 2013: Tecnología e Innovación en España. Madrid: Fundación COTEC para la Innovación Tecnológica.

    Google Scholar 

  • Council European. (2000). Presidency conclusions of the Extraordinary Lisbon European Council of 23–24 March. Brussels: SN 100/1/00.

  • Daft, R. (1982). Bureaucratic versus non bureaucratic structure and the process of innovation and change. En S. Bacharach, Research in the Sociology of Organisations. Greenwich: JAI press.

  • Damanpour, F. (1991). Organizational innovation: a meta-analysis of effects of determinants and moderators. Academy of Management Journa, I, 555–590.

  • Darroch, J., & McNaughton, R. (2005). Examining the link between knowledge and management practices and types of innovation. J Intellect Cap, 3(3), 210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davenport, T., & Prusak, L. (1998). Working knowledge: how organizations manage what they know. Boston, M.A: Harvard Business Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dendorf, J., & Chan, Y. (2011). Knowledge strategy typologies: defining dimensions and relationships. Knowl Manag Res Pract, 9(2), 102–119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dougherty, D. (1992). A practice-centered model of organizational renewal through product innovation. Strategic Management Journa, I, 13(51), 77–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Drucker, P. (1995). Managing in a time of great change. New York, N.Y: Truman, Talley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Earl, L. (2003). Knowledge management practices survey in Canada 2002. N° 7.

  • Faggian, A., & McCann, P. (2009). Human capital, graduate migration and innovation in British regions. Camb J Econ, 33(2), 317–333.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flick, U. (2009). An introduction to qualitative research (4th ed.). Londres: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gill, J., & Johnson, P. (2010). Research methods for managers (4th ed.). Londres: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Githii, S. K. (2014). Knowledge management practices and innovation performance: a literature review. J Bus Manag, 16(2), 89–94.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gloet, M., & Terziovski, M. (2004). Exploring the relationship between knowledge management practices and innovation performance. J Manuf Technol Manag, 15(5), 402–409.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goffin, K., & Mitchell, R. (2005). Innovation management: strategy and implementation using the pentathlon framework (2nd ed.). New York, N.Y: Palgrave MacMillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grant, R. (1996). Toward a knowledge-based theory of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, I, 17, 109–122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grant, R., & Baden-Fuller, C. (2004). A knowledge accessing theory of strategic alliances. J Manag Stud, 41(1), 61–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hair, J. F. (1995). Multivariate data analysis. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall, R. (2006). A framework linking intangible resources and capabilities to sustainable competitive advantage. Strateg Manag J, 14(8), 607–618.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hall, R., & Andriani, P. (2002). Managing knowledge innovation. Long Range Plan, 35, 29–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henderson, R., & Cockburn, I. (1994). Measuring competence? Exploring firm effects in pharmaceutical research. Strateg Manag J, 15, 63–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hu, L., & Bentler, P. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct Equ Model, 6(1), 1–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huang, J., & Li, Y. (2009). The mediating effect of knowledge management on social interaction and innovation performance. Int J Manpow, 30(3), 285–301.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • INE (Instituto Nacional de Estadística). (2012). Encuesta sobre Innovación en las Empresas 2010. Madrid: España.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jöreskog, K. (1979). A general approach to confirmatory maximum likelhood factor analysis with addendum. In K. J. Sörbom (Ed.), Advances in factor analysis and structural equation model. Cambridge: Abt Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knight, K. (1967). A descriptive model of the intra-firm innovation process. J Bus, 40(4), 478–496.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leydesdorff, L. (2000). The triple helix: an evolutionary model of innovations. Res Policy, 29(2), 243–255.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lin, R., Che, R., & Ting, C. (2012). Turning knowledge management into innovation in the high-tech industry. Ind Manag Data Syst, 112(1), 42–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luengo-Valderrey, M. (2014). Repercusión de la triple hélix en resultados de innovación: mipymes de información y comunicación españolas. En R. Quijano, L. Argüelles, Sahuí, & J. (Comp.), Mipymes innovadoras: Evolucionando ante los nuevos retos (págs. 129–154). San Francisco de Campeches, México: Universidad Autónoma de Campeche.

  • Lundvall, B., & Borras, S. (1997). The globalising learning economy: Implications for innovation policy. Commission of the European Union: Report based on contributions from seven projects under the TSER programme DG XII.

  • Martin-de Castro, G. (2015). Knowledge management and innovation in knowledge-based and high-tech industrial markets: the role of openness and absorptive capacity. Ind Mark Manag, 47, 143–146.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McEvily, S., & Chakravarthy, B. (2002). The persistence of knowledge-based advantage: an empirical test for product performance and technological knowledge. Strategic Management Journa, I, 23(4), 285–305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Navarro, M. (2002). La Cooperación para la Innovación de las Empresas Española desde una Perspectiva Internacional Comparada. Economía Industrial, I, 346, 47–66.

    Google Scholar 

  • Navas, J., & Nieto, M. (2003). Estrategias de Innovación y Creación de Conocimiento Tecnológica en las empresas Industriales españolas. (J. Navas, & M. (. Nieto, Edits.) Madrid: Civitas.

  • Nonaka, I. (1994). A dynamic theory of organizational knowledge creation. Organ Sci, 5(1), 14–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H. (1995). The knowledge creating company: how Japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nonaka, I., & Teece, D. (2001). Managing industrial knowledge: creation, transfer and utilization. London: Sage Publication.

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD and Eurostat. (1997). Oslo manual—proposed guidelines for collecting and interpreting technological innovation data (2nd ed.). Paris: OECD.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • OECD. (1996). The knowledge based economy. Paris: OECD.

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD. (2005). The measurement of scientific and technological activities proposed guidelines for collecting and interpreting technological data. Oslo manual. Paris: OECD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Page, A. (1990). Hacia un modelo causal del rendimiento académico. Madrid: CIDE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Piatier, A. (1984). Barriers to innovation. London: Frances Pinter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Plessis, M. (2007). The role of knowledge management in innovation. J Knowl Manag, 11(4), 20–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Romesburg, H. (1984). Factor analysis for researchers. Belmont, CA: Lifetime Learning Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ruiz, M., Pardo, A., & San Martin, R. (2010). Modelos de ecuaciones estructurales. Papeles del Psicólogo, 31(1), 34–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, K., Collins, C., & Clark, K. (2005). Existing knowledge, knowledge creation capability, and the rate of new product introduction in high-technology firms. Acad Manag J, 48(2), 346–357.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swan, J., Newell, S., Scarbrough, H., & Hislop, D. (1999). Knowledge management and innovation: networks and networking. J Knowl Manag, 3(4), 262–275.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tidd, J., Bessant, J., & Pavitt, K. (1997). Managing innovation – integrating technological, market and organizational change (2nd ed.). New York, N.Y: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tin, L. (2005). Measuring innovation performance. Recuperado el 10 de 11 de 2015, de https://www.nlb.gov.sg/Portals/0/Docs/Research/InnovationPerformance.pdf

  • Weelwright, S., & Clarck, K. (1992). Revolutionizing product development—quantum leaps in speed, efficiency, and quality. New York; N.Y: The Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, L., Cote, J., & Buckley, M. R. (1989). Lack of method variance in self-reported affect and perceptions at work: reality or artefact? J Appl Psychol, 74(3), 462–468.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zack, M. (1999). Managing codified knowledge. Sloan Management Review, Summer, 45–48.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Management Evaluation and Business Innovation, Universidad del País Vasco/Euskal Herriko Unibertsitatea (University of the Basque Country), C/Elcano, 21, 48008, Bilbao, Bizkaia, Spain

    María Jesús Luengo-Valderrey

  2. Marbella International University Centre (MIUC), 29601, Marbella, CO, Spain

    Mónica Moso-Díez

Authors
  1. María Jesús Luengo-Valderrey
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mónica Moso-Díez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to María Jesús Luengo-Valderrey.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Luengo-Valderrey, M.J., Moso-Díez, M. Interaction Between Knowledge Management Activities, Innovation Barriers and Innovation Performance: Spanish High and Medium Technology Firms. J Knowl Econ 10, 298–317 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-017-0458-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-017-0458-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation