Relationship between ecosystem innovation and performance measurement models

Abstract

PurposeThis study examines the relationship between the innovation ecosystem and performance measurement models. Although the innovation ecosystem and measurement models are widely recognized, the existing literature lacks a comprehensive understanding of the relationship between the proposed themes. Furthermore, it does not reveal how studies can be grouped to propose a thematic typology of the relationship.Design/methodology/approachThe authors present a systematic literature review conducted in the Web of Science and Scopus databases, from a textual corpus that aided the proposition of the typology that aims to provide answers regarding the addressed themes.FindingsThe results of this review are based on a total of sixty peer-reviewed articles from the innovation ecosystem literature and performance measurement models between 1995 and 2020. The results make several contributions to the literature. First, by integrating evidence from empirical studies, the authors identified a typology formed by three classes: (1) ecosystem agents (2) analytical focus and (3) structured measurement tools. Second, the authors verified the relationship between the themes and discovered the existence of gaps to be filled, with the proposition of three drivers. Third, the authors presented a comprehensive mapping of field studies with a descriptive analysis of the textual corpus.Originality/valueThe results of the research provide important implications for researchers, managers and policy makers. Furthermore, the authors suggest directions for future research, including the need to examine the performance of the entire innovation ecosystem, integrating the different agents that exist for performance measurement.

Assessing shared value in innovation ecosystems: a new perspective of scorecard

“…Finally, we provide guidelines for adopting the proposed approach. As such, this research addresses the recognised literature gap and responds to the need of robust SV measurement (Menghwar and Daood, 2021) in IEs (Cobben et al, 2022;Da Silva et al, 2022;Silva et al, 2022) emphasised by scholars and practitioners. Therefore, this paper offers both academic and practical contributions.…”

“…As such, this research addresses the recognised literature gap and responds to the need of robust SV measurement (Menghwar and Daood, 2021) in IEs (Cobben et al. , 2022; Da Silva et al. , 2022; Silva et al.…”

“…, 2010). Despite the increasing number of indicators and instruments able to measure different performance dimensions (Da Silva et al ., 2022), the adaptability of these approaches to IEs appears limited, due to the peculiar multidimensional and multi-actor nature of IEs. Moreover, this becomes even more complex when an IE is in need of monitoring SV.…”

“…At a more general level, such evolution of the BSC poses challenges for organisations adopting it, such as balancing different objectives and resources to achieve them or aligning behaviours (Sundin et al, 2010). Despite the increasing number of indicators and instruments able to measure different performance dimensions (Da Silva et al, 2022), the adaptability of these approaches to IEs appears limited, due to the peculiar multidimensional and multi-actor nature of IEs. Moreover, this becomes even more complex when an IE is in need of monitoring SV.…”

Resource orchestration capability for innovation: towards an empirically validated measurement framework

“…These drawbacks limit our ability to correctly understand, interpret and apply the research orchestration theory (ROT) for resolving empirical problems concerning innovation-centric resource management within organizational settings. Although ROT posits several insightful concepts about how leaders can manage their resource portfolio for gaining competitive advantage, it explains little about how such resources can be utilized for managing innovation (Carnes et al, 2017;da Silva et al, 2022). It barely elaborates on the theoretical foundations, conceptualizations, and definitions associated with innovation-oriented resource orchestration (Cui et al, 2022).…”