Is the relationship between innovation performance and knowledge management contingent on environmental dynamism and learning capability? Evidence from a turbulent market

Abstract

This study aims to explore the separate and combined effects of knowledge management capabilities, environmental dynamism and learning capability on innovation performance. To achieve this aim, a survey was carried out on a sample of 221 firms and a couple of hypotheses were tested. The findings showed that higher levels of environmental dynamism and learning capability made the positive linkage between knowledge management capabilities and innovation performance stronger. Based on the findings, it was suggested that whilst environmental dynamism may compel firms to assimilate and use new information better, create more new product configurations and move readily to new markets through their knowledge management capabilities, learning capability improves the understanding of organizational knowledge and helps the firm embed this knowledge into organizational processes. In this sense, environmental dynamism and learning capability moderate the relationship between knowledge management capabilities and innovation performance.

Determinants of innovation performance

“…Concerning the findings of the study, regression results in Table 2 show that the positive impact of OLC on IP is consistent across model specifications. This result is in line with prior work Alegre & Chiva, 2013;Jiménez and Sanz, 2006;Kamasak et al, 2016;Tohidi and Mandegari, 2012), and gives support to our first hypothesis (H1) that proposes a positive relationship between OLC and IP.…”

“…Prior research has shown that the presence of OLC positively impact IP (Alegre and Chiva, 2013;Fernández et al, 2012;Jiménez and Sanz, 2006;Kamasak et al, 2016;Tohidi and Mandegari, 2012). The link between OLC and IP comes from the observation and action of the context, efforts in the development of products or services and the results of practices and skills that drive innovation (Calantone et al, 2002;Gomes and Mate, 2017).…”

“…Prior research has identified various drivers of innovation, being underlined the connection between organizational learning capabilities (OLC) and IP (Chiva and Alegre, 2009;Crossan and Apaydin, 2010;Lafuente et al, 2018). In this sense, innovation is conceptualized as the individual and collective learning processes that take place within the business, thus reinforcing the role played by OLC as facilitators of knowledge creation and diffusion (dos Santos and Santos, 2014;Fernández et al, 2012;Kamasak et al, 2016).…”

The interplay of corporate social responsibility and corporate political activity in emerging markets: The role of strategic flexibility in non‐market strategies

“…When firms develop planning and decision‐making flexibility and coordination flexibility (Grewal & Tansuhaj, ), they use organic skills such as social networks and managerial political ties (Fernandez‐Perez, Verdu‐Jover, & Benitez‐Amado, ; Liedong et al, ) and IT‐based skills (Kamasak, Yavuz, & Altuntas, ; Ray, Xue, & Barney, ) in order to exploit all internal and external knowledge sources. Supported by coordination flexibility, planning and decision‐making flexibility enables firms to assimilate better the relevant information and knowledge, to scan, monitor, and anticipate political and social movements thoroughly, and to make higher quality non‐market decisions in a timely manner.…”

“…Furthermore, they may invest in a state‐owned enterprise or another politically embedded company which is on the edge of declaring bankruptcy. Complex and dynamic environments supported with weak institutional frameworks determining the firms’ dependence on certain actors and resources (Jamali & Neville, ; Kamasak et al, ) may compel firms to reconfigure, renew, or alter their resource mix of corporate social responsibility–corporate political activities in response to market conditions (Hadani & Coombes, ). Jamali and Karam () highlight the distinctive elements of non‐market activities in emerging markets and point to “the importance of exploring the context‐dependence” of non‐market research.…”