Responsible Innovation Toward Sustainable Development in Small and Medium‐Sized Enterprises: a Resource Perspective

Abstract

What resources do small enterprises need to develop responsible innovations that enhance sustainable development? Does lack of resources prevent innovation toward sustainability in small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) or can innovations be created with scarce resources? This study investigates environmentally and socially responsible innovations of SMEs from a resource perspective, based on empirical data from 13 Nordic SMEs. The findings indicate that SMEs can create responsible innovations with very different resource combinations. The most common resource combination comprises equity, research and development cooperation, networks, industry knowledge and reputation. Except for financial capital in the form of equity, which appears a necessary condition for responsible innovation from SMEs, resource needs vary between technological and business model innovations. Creating business model innovations appears to be possible with scarce resources, at the very least with equity and social capital. Environmental technology innovations call for more abundant resource combinations. In particular industry knowledge appears to be a key resource for such innovations.

Do Entrepreneurial SMEs Perform Better Because They are More Responsible?

“…This approach emphasizes businesses' resources and internal strategic capabilities that make generating competitive advantages possible (Anderson and Eshima 2013;Castelo Branco and Lima Rodrigues 2006;Hart and Dowell 2011). Tangible resources are linked to practical aspects, while intangible resources refer to immaterial resources and capacities, such as reputation and human capital (Halme and Korpela 2014). According to the RBV, these intangible assets are difficult to imitate or substitute (Barney 1991;Surroca et al 2010) and play a role in business' survival (Gardberg and Fombrun 2006).…”

“…At the community level, innovations encourage constructive collaboration with various stakeholders, thereby allowing SMEs to gain access to complementary resources (Jenkins 2009;Torugsa et al 2012) and identify potential markets (van Kleef and Roome 2007). These external partnerships thus allow SMEs to compensate for their lack of internal resources (Bos-Brouwers 2010; Halme and Korpela 2014). From an RBV perspective, all these elements are intangible assets that are difficult to imitate (Barney 1991).…”

Emerging Environmental Sustainability Practices In Msme's

“…37.5 percent of the analyzed studies indicate the first area containing practices that use education, and attitudes management (Hardeep, Sanjay , Swati, & Tarun, 2015) (Roxas & Chadee , 2012) (Howarth & Fredericks , 2012)(Hernandez-Pardo, Bhamra, & Bahmra, 2013) (Stewart & Gapp , 2012) (Nagypál, 2013), the second area from 50% of the studies contain management programs including certifications, management models and adoption of technology for management, in pursuit of the careful management of the environment (Massa, Farneti, & Scappini , 2015) (Windolph, Schaltegger, & Herzig, 2014) (Omri , 2015) (Nejati, Amran, Ahmad , & , 2014) (Halme & Korpela , 2013) (Hatak , Floh, & Zauner , 2015) (Uhlaner, LBerent-Braun, Jeurissen, & de Wit , 2011) (Hofmann, Theyel, & Wood, 2012), and finally the specific practices in MSMEs (Bos-Brouwers, 2009) (Chukwuemeka, Nkamnebe , & Amobi , 2013) that they include waste separation systems, energy saving policies, reducing resources in production and packaging, emissions control, reduction of the features offered in products and biodiverse use friendly alternatives.…”

The Relationship Between Ethical Organisational Culture and Organisational Innovativeness: Comparison of Findings from Finland and Lithuania

“…In the Finnish sample, employee behaviour is regulated by the knowledge of sanctions for improper behaviour, which implies that the systems in the organisation are built on fairness and justice. In the 26 Lithuanian sample, organisational capability to engage in creative processes is affected by the role models and examples set by the management. Process innovativeness is affected by discussability and clarity in both samples, yet in addition, congruency of management plays a role in the Finnish sample.…”

“…The latter academic discourse is comparatively new but scholars in this field highlight economic, social and environmental impacts of innovation as a process and an outcome (Blok and Lemmens, 2015;Halme and Korpela, 2014). Thus, ethical organisational culture is a set of collective characteristics that ensures responsible processes for innovative outcomes which promote the common good.…”