We are grateful to Linda Argote for her support throughout the process of writing this paper. We also want to thank Bas Warmerhoven for his assistance, Ed Noyons for his support in the bibliometric analysis, and to Kirsten Foss for comments on an earlier version of this paper.

Over the last 15 years, business model innovation (BMI) has gained an increasing amount of attention in management research and among practitioners. The emerging BMI literature addresses an important phenomenon but lacks theoretical underpinning, and empirical inquiry is not cumulative. Thus, a concerted research effort seems warranted. Accordingly, we take stock of the extant literature on BMI. We identify and analyze 150 peer-reviewed scholarly articles on BMI published between 2000 and 2015. We provide the first comprehensive systematic review of the BMI literature, include a critical assessment of these research efforts, and offer suggestions for future research. We argue that the literature faces problems with respect to construct clarity and has gaps with respect to the identification of antecedent conditions, contingencies, and outcomes. We identify important avenues for future research and show how the complexity theory, innovation, and other streams of literature can help overcome many of the gaps in the BMI literature.

 This article introduces the Special Issue and discusses the microfoundations of routines and capabilities, including why a microfoundations view is needed and how it may inform work on organizational and competitive heterogeneity. Building on extant research, we identify three primary categories of micro-level components underlying routines and capabilities: individuals, social processes, and structure. We discuss how these components, and their interactions, may affect routines and capabilities. In doing so, we outline a research agenda for advancing the field's understanding of the microfoundations of routines and capabilities.

No abstract

We discuss and examine recent claims that research on knowledge processes has paid insufficient attention to micro (individual) level constructs and mechanisms and to the role of formal organization in governing knowledge processes. We review knowledge sharing research published in 13 (top academic plus top practitioner-oriented) journals in the period 1996-2006 in relation to these two propositions. The review confirms the claim that the knowledge sharing literature is preoccupied with constructs, processes, and phenomena defined at a macro (collective, organizational) level and pay comparatively little attention to micro level constructs. The review provides less support for the proposition that formal governance mechanisms have been under-researched in comparison to formal organization. Still, the multiple ways in which formal governance mechanisms may interact in influencing knowledge sharing outcomes have been under-researched, as has the interaction between more informal aspects of the firm and formal governance mechanisms. We argue that future research on knowledge sharing needs to fill these gaps. Copyright (c) 2009 Blackwell Publishing Ltd and Society for the Advancement of Management Studies.

This is the published version of the paper.This version of the publication may differ from the final published version. Permanent repository link Full terms and conditions of use: http://pubsonline.informs.org/page/terms-and-conditionsThis article may be used only for the purposes of research, teaching, and/or private study. Commercial use or systematic downloading (by robots or other automatic processes) is prohibited without explicit Publisher approval, unless otherwise noted. For more information, contact permissions@informs.org.The Publisher does not warrant or guarantee the article's accuracy, completeness, merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, or non-infringement. Descriptions of, or references to, products or publications, or inclusion of an advertisement in this article, neither constitutes nor implies a guarantee, endorsement, or support of claims made of that product, publication, or service. Copyright © 2011, INFORMS Please scroll down for article-it is on subsequent pagesINFORMS is the largest professional society in the world for professionals in the fields of operations research, management science, and analytics. For more information on INFORMS, its publications, membership, or meetings visit http://www.informs.org Organization Science Vol. 22, No. 4, July-August 2011, pp. T he notion that firms can improve their innovativeness by tapping users and customers for knowledge has become prominent in innovation studies. Similar arguments have been made in the marketing literature. We argue that neither literatures take sufficient account of firm organization. Specifically, firms that attempt to leverage user and customer knowledge in the context of innovation must design an internal organization appropriate to support it. This can be achieved in particular through the use of new organizational practices, notably, intensive vertical and lateral communication, rewarding employees for sharing and acquiring knowledge, and high levels of delegation of decision rights. In this paper, six hypotheses were developed and tested on a data set of 169 Danish firms drawn from a 2001 survey of the 1,000 largest firms in Denmark. A key result is that the link from customer knowledge to innovation is completely mediated by organizational practices.

Job design is one of the most frequently researched practices in the HumanResource Management (HRM) literature, and knowledge sharing has become an important and heavily researched managerial practice. The links between these practices, however, have received little attention in the literature. We argue that job design matters to knowledge sharing for motivational reasons. Specifi cally, jobs contain characteristics that stimulate different kinds of motivation toward knowledge sharing, which have different effects on individual knowledge sharing behavior. We develop six hypotheses that unfold these ideas and test them on the basis of individual-level data collected within a single fi rm. The hypotheses are tested in a LISREL model that confi rms that job characteristics, such as autonomy, task identity, and feedback, determine different motivations to share knowledge, which in turn predict employees' knowledge sharing behaviors.

The past decade has witnessed a surge of research interest in social entrepreneurship (SE). This has resulted in important insights concerning the role of SE in fostering inclusive growth and institutional change. However, the rapid growth of SE research, the emerging nature of the literature, and the fact that SE builds on different disciplines and fields (e.g., entrepreneurship, sociology, economics, ethics) have led to a rather fragmented literature without dominant frameworks. This situation risks leading to a duplication of efforts and hampers cumulative knowledge growth. Drawing on 395 peer-reviewed articles on SE, we (1) identify gaps in SE research on three levels of analysis (i.e., individual, organizational, institutional), (2) proffer an integrative multistage, multilevel framework, and (3) discuss promising avenues for further research on SE.