Firms’ Innovation Objectives and Knowledge Acquisition Strategies

Abstract

External partnerships play an important role in firms’ acquisition of the knowledge inputs to innovation. Such knowledge acquisition may be interactive - involving exploration and mutual learning - or non-interactive - involving exploitative activity and learning by only one party. Here, we consider how firms’ innovation objectives influence their choice of interactive and/or non-interactive knowledge search. We conduct a comparative analysis for Spain and the UK, which have contrasting innovation eco-systems and regulation burdens. Three empirical results emerge. First, we find strong support for complementarity between non-interactive and interactive knowledge search. Second, we find that where firms have innovation objectives relating to product or service improvement, they are more likely to establish non-interactive search strategies. Third, the innovation objective of reducing environmental impact is significantly related to both, interactive and non-interactive knowledge acquisition strategies. This is likely related to the increasing awareness of the need to promote an agenda based on sustainable growth.

Exploratory and exploitative linkages and innovative activity in the offshore renewable energy sector

“…Whilst most of the conceptual and empirical findings highlight the significance of exploratory linkages, especially for firms in nascent high-tech industries, there is also a strong theoretical basis for firms to adopt an exploitation linkage strategy (Roper et al, 2022). For example, the exploitation of existing knowledge through observations and monitoring of suppliers and competitors at conferences, trade fairs and industry association events can be a vital source of information for innovations (Bathelt and Schuldt, 2008;Maskell, 2014).…”

“…In studies that intertwine OI and organisational learning, OI is commonly tied to March's (1991) exploration and exploitation framework. Sources of open external engagement have been described as exploratory (or interactive) linkages or exploitative (non-interactive) linkages (Hewitt-Dundas and Roper, 2011;Roper et al, 2017Roper et al, , 2022Zhang et al, 2023). According to Roper and Love (2018), both interactive and non-interactive knowledge searches can be considered types of inbound OI.…”

“…Fitjar and Huber (2014) highlight the positive impact of trade fairs and conferences on process innovation, which, they say, underlines the importance of more subtle forms of interaction for firm innovation performance. Roper et al (2022) found exploitative linkages such as industry associations to be more common for incremental product innovations and process innovation, as the knowledge exploited from these sources already exists in the market (Katila and Ahuja, 2002). T€ odtling et al (2009) highlight the significance of business connections predominantly in the commercialisation stage of the innovation process, but specifically, they are more important for firms introducing less advanced innovations.…”

“…Firstly, since March's (1991) foundational work, the existing literature has underexamined the importance of exploitative linkages (see, for example, Christensen et al, 2019;Wang et al, 2020). This is despite the literature highlighting that exploitative linkages are a critical source of knowledge for research and innovation (R&I) (Roper et al, 2017), with a limited number of papers discussing both exploratory and exploitative linkages within the same study (Cassiman and Valentini, 2016;Roper et al, 2017Roper et al, , 2022. As a result, there is an acknowledged lack of clarity on which type of links (exploratory versus exploitative) are more important for firm R&I.…”

“…, 2019) implies that certain collaborations may be more fruitful than others for distinct innovation outcomes. Indeed, as highlighted by Roper et al. (2022), a firm faces several choices related to its knowledge acquisition strategy, including whether to use exploratory (interactive) linkages or exploitative (non-interactive) linkages and who to collaborate with.…”