Knowledge transfer and innovation among attractions

Weidenfeld, Adi; Williams, Allan M.; Butler, Richard

doi:10.1016/j.annals.2009.12.001

Cited by 193 publications

(144 citation statements)

References 43 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

134

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Tourism researchers have recognized that the generation and use of new, external knowledge are critical factors in innovation processes (Cooper, 2006;Hjalager, 2002;Shaw & Williams, 2009;Weidenfeld, Williams, & Butler, 2010). This recognition is reflected in the growing number of empirical studies (Bertella, 2011a;Bertella, 2011;Bertella, 2011b;Camisón & Monfort-Mir, 2012;Johannesson, 2012;Racherla et al, 2008;Weidenfeld et al, 2010) that address the role of knowledge in tourism innovation processes in one way or another.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Knowledge Acquisition and Assimilation in Tourism-Innovation Processes

Hoarau

2014

Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and Tourism

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The paper develops a framework and an understanding of the external knowledge absorption in nature-based tourism companies. The concept of potential absorptive capacity is the starting point for exploring how external knowledge (tacit and explicit) is absorbed and assimilated in tourism innovation processes. Although knowledge is the engine that drives innovation, tourism firms can have problems and challenges when trying to absorb external knowledge for innovation. The main challenge is to access and absorb tacit knowledge. This type of knowledge is personal and sticky and therefore difficult to acquire and assimilate into the existing knowledge pool of organizations. Tacit knowledge is also difficult to imitate and is 2 therefore important for developing original and competitive innovations. In this study, knowledge acquisition and assimilation processes and how knowledge challenges are handled are investigated by adopting a multiple, qualitative case-study strategy that focuses on three Icelandic whale-watching firms. This study contributes to the tourism innovation discussion by identifying tourism specific abilities for the acquisition and assimilation of knowledge. The sense-making and strategic interpretation of this knowledge are considered to be important subsequent steps in the innovation process.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…This recognition is reflected in the growing number of empirical studies (Bertella, 2011a;Bertella, 2011;Bertella, 2011b;Camisón & Monfort-Mir, 2012;Johannesson, 2012;Racherla et al, 2008;Weidenfeld et al, 2010) that address the role of knowledge in tourism innovation processes in one way or another.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Knowledge Acquisition and Assimilation in Tourism-Innovation Processes

Hoarau

2014

Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and Tourism

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Their research on small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs) suggests that participation in formal networks is valuable if the knowledge gained from this activity can be shared effectively within the firm. Weidenfeld, Williams and Butler (2009) have also signalled the importance of absorptive capacity to innovation in tourism organisations. Though not the central focus of their work, they point out that the absorptive capacity of organisations is influenced by organisational structure, human capital and management practices (see also Cooper, 2006).…”

Section: The Role Of Absorptive Capacity In Innovationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Innovation in tourism: Re-conceptualising and measuring the absorptive capacity of the hotel sector

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…A priori, no ranking among them can be set as it all depends on the amount of costs and sales expected. So far, abstract affirmations have been stated such as 'process innovations are more influential than product innovations' (Hjalager, 2002;Weidenfeld et al 2010), but, still, it is not straightforward to make general assertions on this issue. At most, one could argue that R&D is more expectation-dependent, as they are future promises of tangible items; and product and process innovations, on the contrary, are real materializations of past R&D investments.…”

Section: Innovation In Biotechnological Companiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Battle royal in biotechnology: R&D vs. product vs. process innovations

Nicolau

Santa-María

2015

Technology Analysis & Strategic Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Companies regard innovation as a central element of their business. However, as not all innovation types are the same, the central question is: should their announcements bring about the same effect on performance? This article analyses potential differences in firm value derived from the innovation-type announcements 'R&D', 'product' and 'process', made by intensive news-generating firms such as biotech companies. The empirical application shows a significantly positive reaction to innovation announcements, with the prospect of future innovation ('R&D' investment announcements) having greater impact on firm value than 'product' and 'process' innovations. Firm experience also acts as a moderator in this innovation-performance relationship, which is particularly relevant for entrepreneurs, who need to develop and send credible signals indicating the value of the firm's intangible assets to the market.

show abstract

Knowledge transfer and innovation among attractions

Cited by 193 publications

References 43 publications

Knowledge Acquisition and Assimilation in Tourism-Innovation Processes

Knowledge Acquisition and Assimilation in Tourism-Innovation Processes

Innovation in tourism: Re-conceptualising and measuring the absorptive capacity of the hotel sector

Battle royal in biotechnology: R&D vs. product vs. process innovations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About