Innovation as a knowledge‐based outcome

Abstract

Purpose -The purpose of this paper is to provide clarity to the concept of innovation and its various definitions. Design/methodology/approach -The article reviews the innovation literature and proposes that innovation has been conceptualized either from a process or from an outcome perspective. Also, the authors show that there is a substantive difference between innovation seen in the traditional innovation literature and innovation as conceived in the knowledge management literature.Findings -The paper proposes a general framework to categorize the existing views of innovation and show that innovation as an outcome has not been clearly defined from a knowledge perspective. To address this gap, the authors develop a new definition of an innovation outcome based on knowledge elements.Research limitations/implications -The research lays the groundwork for more comprehensive methods of measuring innovation and innovativeness, which is particularly useful for the study of service innovation.Practical implications -The framework and definition expand the ability of managers to measure and understand the key factors of innovation.Originality/value -The research contributes to the literature by developing a comprehensive knowledge-based, outcome-oriented definition of innovation.

Inovação e Conhecimento como Ferramentas Estratégicas nas Organizações: Estudo de Casos Múltiplos

“…De acordo com Quintane et al (2011), o conceito de inovação pode ser obtido em um processo, ou através de um resultado; porém há uma diferença considerável entre os dois tipos de visão sobre o assunto: a visão da literatura sobre a gestão do conhecimento e a da literatura tradicional. Na gestão do conhecimento, este passa a ser a essência do processo de inovação.…”

Knowledge and Discourse Matters

“…Despres and Chauvel (2002) suggest there are too many theories and this, combined with what McFarlane (2011) calls a lack of a 'unifying framework' on the near horizon, presents perhaps one of the greatest challenges for KM. Such panoply of diverse theory can be seen as indicative of definitional difficulties, particularly with the concept of knowledge itself (Quintane, Casselman, Reiche and Nylund, 2011). Bouthillier and Shearer (2002), like many before and since, describe this definitional problem as a significant issue and KM as an ill-defined field which none-the-less makes substantial claims.…”

The Effect of Knowledge Integration, Knowledge Innovation on New Product Performance: An Empirical Study in Saudi Arabia Firms

“…For this reason, (Quintane, Casselman, Reiche, & Nylund, 2011) propose a definition of innovation as an outcome from a knowledge-based viewpoint, and this definition allow for more accuracy in term of assessing the innovativeness of an organization. As a result, innovation appears to depend on the company's competency to study, through which new knowledge are developed, circulated and used (Alegre & Chiva, 2008).…”