Purpose: In innovation networks, SMEs' capability to innovate is both enhanced and restricted by more powerful or better positioned partners. The purpose of this article is to ask how managers of processing SME suppliers in Italian and Swiss food innovation networks experience their relationships with innovation network partners and how they configure modes of interaction with them. Design/methodology/approach: A series of problem centered interviews with managers of six Swiss and five Italian food sector SMEs was conducted. Findings: Findings describe how SME managers in the two regions perceive the nature of interaction as well as benefits and disadvantages resulting from asymmetric relationships within networked innovation process. Differences in the perception frame and their impact on behavior in innovation networks are analyzed. Research limitations/implications: The data are only valid for the food sector in the two regional markets. Furthermore, this paper only displays the perspective of managers of first and second processing food SME suppliers. Additional data should be gathered on the perspective of other network partners as well as on real-time communication between them. Practical implications: The findings suggest that active cooperation with especially customers in innovation networks supports innovation opportunities of processing food SME suppliers. Originality/value: Scholars so far have comprehensively deduced potential advantages and problems resulting from asymmetries in power and positioning of partners for knowledge sharing in innovation networks but have not yet investigated its specifics. Particularly, empirical work on the perspective of managers from processing SME suppliers on innovation related cooperation with their partners in the value chain on networked innovation is yet almost scant

This paper presents detailed insights into the nature of innovation dynamics of an SME operating in the food industry. Furthermore, the paper highlights how Action Research has changed and enhanced SME's capability to innovate. Within the exploratory action research based case study described in this article, the researchers interacted closely with one company with regards to a newly launched innovation process over a time period of more than 18 months. The analysis contributes to the fields of action research and innovation research in three respects: First, it exemplifies how systemic action research as a method can be applied on the organisational level in the private sector. Second, it demonstrates how useful action research can be for fostering the innovativeness and creativity of a company. Lastly, the analysis illustrates the extensive time horizon of an action research project.

PurposeThe interrelationship between organizational learning (OL) and organizational culture (OC) is often assumed at an abstract theoretical level, but there is yet no systematization of scholarly knowledge allowing to conceptualize and understand its precise nature. In this article, we therefore ask “How can we, based on the insights from the dispersed research studying OC and OL, conceptualize the interrelationship between the two concepts?” Our purpose is to create an overview on the past development path and the current status of research interrelating OL and OC, to use it as basis for the conceptualization of this interrelationship and to identify avenues for future research.Design/methodology/approachThis article utilized a systematic literature review methodology by combining bibliometric and content analysis using relevant articles identified from the Scopus database. A two-stage literature review research approach was employed: (1) Bibliometric analysis was used to identify 416 relevant contributions and to present a comprehensive contextual picture of the interrelations between OL and OC research by analyzing the 162 most relevant articles. (2) A subsequent qualitative content analysis of the 45 most relevant academic contributions detailed and solidified the insights.FindingsWe identify four weakly linked thematic clusters on the interrelationship of OC and OL. Based on that, our analysis confirms the theorized bidirectional relationship between OC and OL: OC acts as antecedent, driver and result of OL processes, and OL processes are constrained by and alter OC. We moreover develop three propositions that put knowledge at the center of scholarly attention for understanding this interrelationship in more depth and develop avenues for future research.Practical implicationsOur research has important implications for managers as it shows that mastering leadership challenges is central for the success of OL processes and OC change. We moreover specify the leadership challenges that relate to particular types of OL processes. Managers need to take this interrelationship into account when setting out for OL or OC change processes, and carefully reflect on whether or not the decided OL measures fit the given OC, and the other way round.Originality/valueOur contribution to existing research is threefold: It first lies in analytically mapping out the research field, second in conceptualizing the interrelationship between OC and OL and third in identifying open research questions and topics.

No abstract

No abstract