Purpose -Innovation has been traditionally considered as a generator of competitiveness, which leads to superior performance. Considering that innovation is a complex phenomenon, it is interesting to understand how innovations are linked with organisations' performance. In this sense, the purpose of this paper is to understand the conditions that make innovation profitable. Design/methodology/approach -The methodology used in the analysis is a multi-case comparative research of low-tech, small and medium-sized furniture firms from Italy, Spain and Finland.Findings -The study shows some evidence that innovation positively influences business performance. In particular, the results suggest that different performance levels are linked to the type of innovation developed. Practical implications -The study presents direct implications for companies aiming at improving their innovation effectiveness. First, it is recommended that firms consider the environment in which they operate; second, they should coordinate future innovation plans by considering the synergistic process among the product, market and process innovations to arrive at a combination that will yield optimal levels of performance. Additionally, the study points out the crucial role that the management style plays in developing innovation capabilities. Originality/value -The paper offers an insight to explain why some companies are more successful at starting and developing innovation than others. The finding that a successful innovation profile is related to the performance of the company represents an interesting contribution to the management of firms.

Purpose: Innovation has been traditionally considered as a generator of competitiveness. Despite the increasing importance of innovation in the literature, there is no agreement about its antecedents. This clearly makes difficult and risky for the managers to choose suitable strategies to promote and develop successful innovations. The present research attempts to contribute to this important area by providing some critical insights on the origins of the innovative behaviour of the firms; namely: market orientation and entrepreneurial proclivity.Design/methodology/approach: To reach our goal we used in-depth case research methodology in furniture firms from Italy, Spain and Finland.Findings: The article contributes to the understanding of why some firms are more innovative than others. The study shows some evidence that market orientation and the entrepreneurship can be considered as antecedents of innovation.Research limitations/implications: We provide evidence that the furniture industry shows a tendency to innovate based on its market orientation along with its entrepreneurial proclivity probably due to the fact that it is a traditional, non-globalized low-tech sector. Future studies might also address other variables related to different competitive settings.Practical implications: This work presents direct implications for companies aiming at improving their innovation capabilities. First, it is recommended that entrepreneurial firms should promote a market orientation philosophy, and second, they also need the top management commitment in terms of people and financial resources to achieve its goals.Originality/value: This article offers an insight to explain why some companies are more successful at starting and developing innovation than others. The finding that a successful innovation profile is related to entrepreneurship and the market orientation of the company represents an interesting contribution to the management of firms.

This case study reports the quality of industrial new product development in five small-to medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in the Finnish metal industry. The findings indicate that SMEs tend to lack a long run perspective; that the role of new products in business strategy calls for clarity and that the whole goal setting as to future new product efforts is limited. The fit between market requirements and firms' own resources is managed due to the flexibility SMEs have and by relying on an in-house knowledge base generated through a close understanding of user conditions. In this respect SMEs are apt to rely on reactive and closed new product strategies only. Even if successful in the past, such strategies risk being unable to identify and take advantage of any business opportunities outside the present product scope. Also, the increasing need of networking may turn out a threat if SMEs cannot establish more open development strategies.

PurposeThe purpose of this study is to examine the new product management practices adopted by low‐tech small and medium‐sized enterprises (SMEs) in the context of design‐intensive products.Design/methodology/approachThe results are based on a multi‐case comparative setting covering SMEs in furniture industry in three countries, Italy, Spain and Finland.FindingsThe study shows considerable differences in performance that occur in terms of the degree of design and innovation, goal orientation and the systematics by which a single furniture business is managed. Proactiveness and freedom in design and innovation together with systematic new product development (NPD) and goal orientation enhances NPD performance. As to the new product uniqueness, innovative design is applicable in furniture industry much as in a similar way as new technological knowledge is in technology industries. The management education and/or interests which are closely related to furniture design and decoration have a clear impact on the level up to which innovative designs are implemented.Practical implicationsThe study has direct implications for furniture companies aiming at improving their competitiveness and NPD effectiveness. The study points out the importance of creating a proper innovative culture and being open to new ideas if export markets are targeted.Originality/valueTechnology intensive products in large‐ and medium‐sized companies have been the main focus of NPD performance research, also facing the risk of over‐generalization due to cross‐industry approaches. Low‐tech industries however play a major role as to national income and employment. In this respect the present study aims to highlight the prevailing NPD practices in small design‐intensive firms in the furniture industry by reporting any management gaps which may occur in terms of new product performance.

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to investigate the firm’s role in the value creation process. In particular, after categorizing the activities that firms carry out to facilitate the creation of value, the “value space,” an actionable framework within which different dimensions of value creation are integrated, is developed and discussed. Design/methodology/approach – The framework is built up on process theory, an in-depth review of the literature and a multiple case study carried out on 65 European firms in the furniture industry. Findings – The value space is both a practical and theoretically based framework which contributes to the development of a more holistic and “actionable” view on the role of firm in the value creation process; also it provides managers with a tool to support the analysis, management and innovation of the value creation process. Originality/value – The systematic categorization of firms’ activities and their subsequent integration into a value creation framework are a missing piece in terms of understanding the value creation process carried out by firms. Also, by facilitating the analysis and innovation of the value creation process, the framework can be used to support both exploitative and explorative business process management.