PurposeThis paper aims to undertake a content analysis of extant definitions of “innovation” as a basis for proposing an integrative definition of organizational “innovation”.Design/methodology/approachA literature review was used to generate a representative pool of definitions of organizational innovation, including definitions from the different disciplinary literatures of economics, innovation and entrepreneurship, business and management, and technology, science and engineering. A content analysis of these definitions was conducted in order to surface the key attributes mentioned in the definitions, and to profile the descriptors used in relation to each attribute.FindingsThe key attributes in the paper present in definitions were identified as: nature of innovation; type of innovation; stages of innovation, social context; means of innovation; and aim of innovation. These attributes are defined, descriptors assigned to them, and both a diagrammatic definition and a textual definition of organizational innovation are proposed.Originality/valueAs a concept that is owned and discussed by many business disciplines, “innovation” has many different definitions that align with the dominant paradigm of the respective disciplines. Building on these diverse definitions, this paper proposes a general and integrative definition of organizational “innovation” that encompasses the different perspectives on, and aspects of, innovation, and captures its essence.

It is important for nurse researchers to develop critical awareness of the research methodologies and methods they employ. We argue that the phenomenological focus group is not an oxymoron. Rather, the use of focus groups can provide a greater understanding of the phenomenon under study.

PurposeSeeking to distil and integrate a range of previous definitions, models, frameworks and classifications relating to types of innovation, this paper aims to make a contribution to clarity in innovation research and practice through offering insights into the definitions of the different types of innovation, and, specifically, the relationships between them.Design/methodology/approachThis theoretical paper is based on a review of extant models and frameworks of types of innovation, which includes earlier foundation models, and more recent integrative models.FindingsThis distillation results in a diagrammatic representation of the key frameworks, which is used as a platform to propose a new framework of types of innovation.Originality/valueThis paper draws on all the terminologies used for types of innovation and creates an innovation type‐mapping tool that can be used to clarify the various definitions and terminologies of the innovation type concept.

Purpose -The purpose of this paper is to review and organise the autoethnography literature: to explore the obstacles of and opportunities for autoethnography in organisation research; to support PhD students and supervisors who have chosen this methodological route to more clearly define their autoethnographic positions and choices; and to propose new research directions for organisational autoethnography. Design/methodology/approach -The authors critically summarise autoethnography as a contemporary approach to organisational ethnography by looking back, looking at the present, and looking to the future. The authors briefly consider the historical and disciplinary developmentand vehement critique -of autoethnography, trace its shifting epistemological positions and introduce three emergent "possibilities" of organisation autoethnography. Findings -The authors highlight how autoethnography can tell stories otherwise silenced; exploring the mundane, ignored and distorted in current academic life, past and other work experiences, working with others through collaborative or co-produced autoethnography in exciting new organisational contexts. Originality/value -This paper is one of the first attempts to review autoethnography as a contemporary approach to organisation autoethnography.

No abstract