4.7 Article

Path dependent constraints on innovation programmes in production and operations management

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PRODUCTION RESEARCH
卷 49, 期 11, 页码 3069-3085

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/00207543.2010.482569

关键词

innovation levels; force field analysis; path dependency

资金

  1. Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council [EP/C534239/1]
  2. Economic and Social Research Council [RES331270005]
  3. EPSRC [EP/C534239/1] Funding Source: UKRI
  4. Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council [EP/C534239/1] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Innovation has been categorised into levels, ranging from incremental to radical, each of which has the potential to impact on the workforce and the organisation of a company, influenced by contextual factors. This paper investigates the barriers to innovation diffusion in companies working at these two ends of the innovation scale, in order to identify similarities and differences in how levels of innovation affect an organisation and how culture affects success. It also considers these factors in light of the path dependency concept. Investigations were conducted on a case study basis, using semi-structured interviews. This led to the creation of force field analysis diagrams to portray the findings, which show the radical innovation implementation has experienced greater resistance than the incremental programme. Conclusions show that there were many similarities between the radical and incremental innovation projects. Differences were primarily based on project specific forces and those that occur as a result of path dependant forces that have shaped the current working environment. Organisational culture was found to be a significant influence, as all innovation programmes require the involvement of people. Findings of this study will contribute to theory on the differential and similar forces which shape incremental and radical innovations.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据