SummaryThe business environment faced by contemporary organizations is highly uncertain and constantly changing. Thus, organizations have adopted and implemented a continuous stream of innovations to achieve sustainable growth and survival. Considering the demand for additional resources to implement innovations, the present study explores organizational conditions that may lead to innovation‐targeted burnout and fatigue among employees, which impede their active participation in a subsequent innovation. To this end, we propose a theoretical framework that elucidates the effects of previous innovations on the subsequent implementation behavior of employees. We identify two dimensions of the cognitive appraisal of previous innovations (i.e., intensity and failure) that shape employees' beliefs regarding innovations, such as innovation‐targeted helplessness, which ultimately results in innovation fatigue. Data collected from 84 managers and 397 employees of Chinese and Korean organizations prove the significant role of employee perceptions of previous innovations in shaping the innovation‐targeted helplessness and fatigue of employees, which ultimately affect employee behavior toward a subsequent innovation. The present conceptual and empirical analyses suggest that given continuous streams of innovation implementation, managers should carefully consider employee's perceptions of previous innovations (i.e., intensity and failure) for successful implementation of a subsequent innovation. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

No abstract

No abstract

Innovation literature typically postulates a linear and institution-driven implementation process that leads to bifurcated outcomes (i.e., acceptance or rejection) of innovation. Adopting a grounded theory approach and a social constructionist perspective, we explore dynamic, interactive implementation processes unfolding over time; these processes generate divergent and often unexpected outcomes. The present qualitative analysis of 40 cases of innovation reveals that two competing forces shape the implementation process. As initiators of innovation implementation, top managers form a driving force and introduce various tactics to facilitate implementation. Resistors or individuals against innovation form a resisting force and organize various schemes to inhibit implementation. The relative strengths of driving and resisting forces lead to four different patterns of implementation, namely, implementation without change, modified implementation, minimal implementation, and implementation failure. Dynamic interactions between initiators and resistors shift implementation outcomes by changing the perceptions of followers with regard to innovation characteristics. The resulting theoretical framework highlights the political nature of innovation

No abstract