Flexibility and innovation: moderator effects of cooperation and dynamism

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to analyze simultaneously two moderator effects on a model of relationships between external human resource (HR) flexibility and innovation in a large sample of manufacturing firms. Design/methodology/approach The study sample consisted of 1,864 Spanish industrial firms in 2012 compiled from a large set of statements from the Survey of Business Strategies questionnaire. Logit and linear regressions tested the moderator effects of inter-organizational technology cooperation and environmental (market) dynamism in the relationship between external HR flexibility and innovation performance. To control for multicollinearity the Lance’s residual centering technique was used. Findings Process innovations seemed to be dependent on industry while innovative firms have developed a greater flexibility than non-innovative firms. Some moderator effects were found regarding inter-organizational cooperation while the market dynamism was negatively related to the measures of innovation with absence of moderator effects. Research limitations/implications Future studies should integrate more moderator effects that may influence the relationship between external HR flexibility and the firm’s innovation performance. The results regarding the influences of external flexibility on innovation have to be differentiated as inter-organizational technological cooperation compensated the influence of external workplace flexibility on innovation. Practical implications Managers should use a right mix of external flexibility measures according to the inter-organizational cooperation but regardless the level of environmental dynamism. Originality/value This paper is original in the sense that it studies the relationship between external HR flexibility and innovation with the simultaneous moderator effect of inter-organizational technology cooperation and market dynamism. The value of the paper lies in the discussion of interrelated moderator effects in order to propose adequate strategies to develop external HR flexibility.

What's driving innovation in small businesses in Australia? The case of the food industry

“…Chung () observed that temporal flexibility had an effect on innovation, whereas Martinez‐Sanchez et al . () revealed that innovation performance was positively associated with internal functional flexibility and negatively associated with numerical flexibility and outsourcing, but the relationships between them were moderated by interorganisational cooperation.…”

Outsourcing and firm performance: a meta-analysis

“…For instance, it has been suggested that outsourcing restricts the scope for future organizational innovation (Bettis et al, 1992;Windrum et al, 2009) because its cost gains might be misleading (Gilley and Rasheed, 2000). Martínez-Sánchez et al (2008) found that outsourcing intensity does not lead to firm performance and outsourcing might involve larger inventories due to longer lead times. The inconclusiveness of the literature on outsourcing on performance calls for more research.…”

The effect of ICT and higher-order capabilities on the performance of Ibero-American SMEs

“…In the management field, flexibility refers to the capability to change structural/strategic/operational schemes to facilitate creative responses that promote information processing, innovation, and the ability to respond to market demands or uncertainty, among other situations (Damanpour 1992 ; Dobrzykowski et al 2015 ; Perry-Smith and Mannucci 2017 ; Kumar and Singh 2019 ; Shukla and Sushil 2020 ). In organizations, flexibility is therefore considered an important strategic capability (Malhotra and MacKelprang 2012 ), which has motivated researchers to conceptualize various flexibility measures, including strategic flexibility (Bamel and Bamel 2018 ; Brozovic 2018 ), human resource flexibility (Way et al 2015 ; Martínez-Sánchez et al 2019 ), supply chain flexibility (Beamon 1999 ; Das 2011 ), information systems flexibility (Kumar and Stylianou 2014 ), and manufacturing flexibility (Oke 2013 ), among others. In this study, we used a manufacturing flexibility sub-measure, also known as mix flexibility (Oke 2013 ) or product innovation flexibility (PIF) (Liao and Barnes 2015 ), which we adapted in a generic way to the production of both goods and services.…”