Purpose -The purpose of this paper is to provide clarity to the concept of innovation and its various definitions. Design/methodology/approach -The article reviews the innovation literature and proposes that innovation has been conceptualized either from a process or from an outcome perspective. Also, the authors show that there is a substantive difference between innovation seen in the traditional innovation literature and innovation as conceived in the knowledge management literature.Findings -The paper proposes a general framework to categorize the existing views of innovation and show that innovation as an outcome has not been clearly defined from a knowledge perspective. To address this gap, the authors develop a new definition of an innovation outcome based on knowledge elements.Research limitations/implications -The research lays the groundwork for more comprehensive methods of measuring innovation and innovativeness, which is particularly useful for the study of service innovation.Practical implications -The framework and definition expand the ability of managers to measure and understand the key factors of innovation.Originality/value -The research contributes to the literature by developing a comprehensive knowledge-based, outcome-oriented definition of innovation.

As the debate over the value of microfinance institutions (MFIs) intensifies, it remains apparent that microfinance may, at the very least, be considered as one tool in the arsenal of the war against poverty in base of pyramid (BoP) markets. Given the variety of actors in the microfinance arena, stakeholders have placed a relatively new emphasis on performance reporting for MFIs, allowing comparisons and identifications of performance gaps. One result of this scrutiny is an increased importance placed on MFIs' social performance, with an eye to understanding measures of MFIs' intent, process, and results in the social realm-in addition to their financial sustainability. While a number of factors may explain differences in social performance, in this paper we take a close look at a particular factor that may have a positive relationship with social performance-that of an MFI's religious affiliation or religiosity. Using archival data, we derived three sets of randomly paired samples, pairing religious MFIs with non-religious ones, and compared social performance indicators derived from the literature across the samples. We sought to understand whether religiously-affiliated MFIs would, in fact, demonstrate stronger social performance intent, wider social performance reach via service delivery processes, and better social performance outcomes in BoP markets. Statistical analysis provided preliminary evidence that religiouslyaffiliated MFIs display stronger social performance, suggesting new avenues for future research.

The article draws on product life cycle (PLC) and new product development (NPD) literature to demonstrate the strategic significance of the intersection of the two streams. This paper makes a unique contribution by illustrating when to employ NPD strategies and demonstrates the resulting interaction with the product life cycle. NPD strategies often fail when assumptions about the nature of the PLC curve are incorrectly perceived. NPD strategies also impact the PLC in a reflexive manner, opening up opportunities to alter the competitive landscape.

No abstract

PurposeThis paper seeks to examine the ethical dilemmas that emerge when offering microfinance services in BOP markets.Design/methodology/approachUtilizing the ethical lenses of deontology, teleology, virtue ethics and moral relativism, the paper builds on prior research on ethical issues in BOP markets and the ethics of microfinance to highlight the specific stakeholder impacts facing MFIs. Relevant literature and examples from practice are utilized to illustrate the different ethical perspectives.FindingsIn general, many of the key dilemmas represent themselves in the extreme poverty segment of the BOP where commercial business models have the least traction.Research limitations/implicationsPropositions are developed for the corrective actions in the paper which might allow future research to uncover differences in intervention success in different BOP markets.Practical implicationsThe discussion of potential interventions for the various stakeholders may ameliorate criticisms of MFIs, suggest opportunities for cross‐sectoral partnerships and improve outreach to the poorest of the poor.Social implicationsFor each issue addressed, this paper looks at the types of corrections that are made or called for through markets, government actions and civil society to respond to the negative impacts uncovered through our analysis.Originality/valueThe analysis in this paper contributes to the theoretical ethical literature with a very specific application to an emerging concern in the field of microfinance. It also offers prescriptive scenarios for industry and public policy makers. It challenges the ethics underlying businesses that wish to target the full spectrum of Base of Pyramid participants.