Refine
Has Fulltext
- no (13)
Document Type
- Article (13) (remove)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (13)
Keywords
- Business models (1)
- Design Thinking (1)
- Framing (1)
- German Mittelstand (1)
- Managerial cognition (1)
- SMEs (1)
- Tools (1)
- Visualisations (1)
- anniversary (1)
- bibliometrics (1)
Innovation response behaviour is defined as individuals novelty-supporting or novelty-impeding action when navigating innovation initiatives through the organization. A typology of innovation response behaviour is developed, distinguishing between active and passive modes of conduct for novelty-supporting and novelty-impeding behaviour, respectively. The antecedents of innovation response behaviour are delineated based on West and Farr's five-factor model of individual innovation. Moreover, we argue that within organizational contexts, individuals often fail to implement their ideas due to innovation barriers, perceived as factors that are beyond their control. Based on the theory of planned behaviour, we reveal how these barriers influence individuals intentional and exhibited innovation response behaviour. Propositions about proximal and distal antecedents of individuals innovation response behaviour are derived. Proposing a research framework to study the organizational process of innovation from an actor-based perspective, this paper intends to link existing research on individual innovation with the process of innovation at the organizational level, explicitly accounting for the socio-political dynamics and arising managerial problems associated with successful innovation implementation within organizational realities. Implications for research in innovation management are discussed and avenues for future research outlined.
Effecting, but effective?
(2020)
Business model (BM) visualisations have become popular instruments with which to explain and manage today's complex business interactions. Using verbal and graphic elements, they provide simplified representations of reality and can support BM tasks that go beyond working memory's capacities. Visualisations thus reduce cognitive load and represent how practitioners and researchers think about BMs. However, they can also affect their thinking. This constitutes a thus far insufficiently explained tension between effectively reducing reality's complexity and the resulting cognitive biases. Building on cognitive load and framing theory, we qualitatively analysed 103 BM visualisations to explain how visual elements affect visualisations' cognitive effectiveness (helpfulness and ease of applicability) and unfold visual framing effects. By identifying five visual framing effects, we contribute to the cognitive BM perspective and explain how this set of cognitive factors affects BM management and research. We also found that most BM visualisations are not cognitively effective because they consist of unclear and non-parsimonious elements, limiting their cross-contextual application. Furthermore, the analysis revealed certain visualisations with strictly operationalised BM dimensions. These findings provide essential contributions to the literature on BM methods. We conclude by discussing how practitioners and researchers can use BM visualisations and their cognitive impacts accordingly.
Organizations have discovered Design Thinking as a promising framework or language for innovation-focused project teamwork. The goal is to develop new products and services by being customer-centric and working iteratively and in an interdisciplinary way, using specific working principles and methods to create a common language among all stakeholders. The empirical results in this article show that Design Thinking teamwork is different from other forms of teamwork. The difference in Design Thinking team-based project work is that the teams go through a specific learning process that poses individual challenges but also provides the individual with experience-based learning. We show that teams going through this learning process repeatedly find themselves in seemingly insolvable conflicts-so called structural dilemmas-within the framework of project deadlines and under the influence of strategic guidelines of the organization. We explore these structural dilemmas and develop ways to overcome them.
One of the most challenging difficulties for incumbent organisations, especially small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), is to manage digital transformation driven by technological change. Incumbent organisations' responses to digital transformation have been extensively studied in the current literature.
However, most research neglects digital transformation in SMEs. There are hardly any valid developed measures for the maturity of digital transformation. We present a holistic digital transformation maturity model based on an extensive literature review, qualitative computer-assisted data analysis, and empirical findings.
The digital transformation maturity model focuses on small- and medium-sized enterprises' unique features and characteristics.
We proved the practical applicability and relevance of the digital transformation maturity model in an extensive study involving various organisations, particularly German SMEs (n = 310).
Organisations can use this model to assess themselves initially and, through this process, gain a comprehensive understanding of the multiple forms of digital transformation.