JOINT IMPACTS OF INTER-UNIT TASK INTERDEPENDENCE AND MANAGERIAL PERCEPTION ON THE ADOPTION OF RADICAL INNOVATION: A CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK
Vol. 130 No. 5B (2021), Original Article
Vol. 130 No. 5B (2021)

JOINT IMPACTS OF INTER-UNIT TASK INTERDEPENDENCE AND MANAGERIAL PERCEPTION ON THE ADOPTION OF RADICAL INNOVATION: A CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK

Original Article
https://doi.org/10.26459/hueunijed.v130i5B.6388
Published 2021-12-24
Tran Thanh Dat
National Economics Uniersity
PDF

Keywords

Task interdependence
adoption of innovation
innovation
managerial perception of innovation radicalness

Abstract

This conceptual paper attempts to integrate the fundamental concept of task interdependence into research on adopting radical innovation. The paper discusses some conceptual issues in innovation, innovation radicalness, task interdependence, and the role of managerial perception in adopting radical innovation. The paper argues for considering task interdependence, a concept in organization design literature, as an organizational variable that impacts the adoption of radical innovation. The paper emphasizes the role of managerial perception of innovation radicalness in moderating the impacts. The conceptual framework, the accompanied hypothesis, and possible ways of operationalizing the concepts involved are then presented in section 4. The paper contributes to the literature on the relationships between organizational context and innovation adoption.

https://doi.org/10.26459/hueunijed.v130i5B.6388
PDF

References

  1. Damanpour, F., & Gopalakrishnan, S. (1998), Theories of Organizational Structure and Innovation Adoption: the role of environmental change, Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 15, 1–24.
  2. Kimberly, J. R., & Evanisko, M. J. (1981), Organizational Innovation: The Influence of Individual, Organizational, and Contextual Factors on Hospital Adoption of Technological and Administrative Innovations, Academy of Management Journal, 24(4), 689–713.
  3. Scott, W. R. (1990), Innovation in Medical Care Organizations: A Synthetic Review, Medical Care Review, 47(2), 165–192.
  4. Zaltman, G., Duncan, R., & Holbeck, J. (1973), Innovations and Organizations, New York: Wiley.
  5. Damanpour, F. (1991), Organizational Innovation: A Meta-analysis of Effects of Determinants and Moderators, Academy of Management Journal, 34(3), 555–590.
  6. Van de Ven, A. (1986), Central Problems in the Management of Innovation, Management Science, 32(5), 590–607.
  7. Knight, K. E. (1967), A Descriptive Model of the Intra-Firm Innovation Process, The Journal of Business, 40(4), 478–496.
  8. Nelson, R. R. (1991), Why do Firms Differ, and How Does it Matter? Strategic Management Journal, 12 (Special Issue: Fundamental Research Issues in Strategy and Economics), 61–74.
  9. March, J. D., & Simon, H. A. (1958), Organizations, New York: Wiley.
  10. Dewar, R. D., & Dutton, J. E. (1986), The Adoption of Radical and Incremental Innovations: An Empirical Analysis, Management Science, 32(11), 1422–1433.
  11. Damanpour, F. (1987), The Adoption of Technological, Administrative, and Ancillary Innovations: Impact of Organizational Factors, Journal of Management, 13(4), 675–688.
  12. Downs, G., & Mohr, L. (1976), Conceptual Issues in the Study of Innovation, Administrative Science Quarterly, 21(4), 700–714.
  13. Schumpeter, J. (1942), Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy, New York: Harper.
  14. Damanpour, F., & Gopalakrishnan, S. (1999), Organizational Adaptation and Innovation: The Dynamics of Adopting Innovation Types, In K. Brockhoff, A. K. Chakrabarti, J. Hauschildt (Eds.), The Dynamics of Innovation, Berlin: Springer.
  15. Daft, R. L. (1978), A Dual-core Model of Organizational Innovation, Academy of Management Journal, 21(2), 193–210.
  16. Damanpour, F., & Evan, W. M. (1984), Organizational Innovation and Performance: The Problem of Organizational Lag, Administrative Science Quarterly, 29(3), 392–409.
  17. Ettlie, J. W., Bridge, W. P., & O'Keefe, R. D. (1984), Organizational Strategy and Structural Differences for Radical versus Incremental Innovation, Management Science, 30(6), 682–695.
  18. Greenhalgh, C., & Rogers, M. (2010), Innovation, Intellectual Property, and Economic Growth, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
  19. Damanpour, F., & Aravind, D. (2011), Managerial Innovation: Conceptions, Processes, and Antecedents, Management and Organization Review, 8(2), 423–454.
  20. Nord, W. R., & Tucker, S. (1987), Implementing Routine and Radical Innovation, Lexington, Mass: Lexington Books.
  21. Normann, R. (1971), Organizational Innovativeness: Product Variation and Reorientation, Administrative Science Quarterly, 16, 203–215.
  22. Wageman, R. (2001), The Meaning of Interdependence. In M. E. Turner (Ed.), Groups at Work: Theory and Research, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers (197–217).
  23. McCann, J. E., & Ferry, D. L. (1979), An Approach for Assessing and Managing Inter-Unit Interdependence, The Academy of Management Review, 4(1), 113–119. https://doi.org/10.2307/257411.
  24. Aldrich, H. (1979), Organizations and Environments, Englewood Cliffs, N.J: Prentice-Hall.
  25. Thompson, J. D. (1967), Organizations in Action: Social Science Bases of Administrative Theory, New York: McGraw-Hill.
  26. Mintzberg, H. (1979), The Structuring of Organizations: A Synthesis of the Research, Englewood Cliffs, N.J: Prentice-Hall.
  27. Lawrence, P. R., & Lorsch, J. W. (1967), Differentiation and Integration in Complex Organizations, Administrative Science Quarterly, 12(1), 1–47.
  28. Simon, H. A. (1976), Administrative Behavior: A Study of Decision-making Processes in Administrative Organization (3rd ed.), Free Press.
  29. Starr, P. (1982), The Social Transformation of American Medicine, New York: Basic Books.
  30. Barnard, C. I. (1938), The Functions of the Executive, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  31. Clark, P. B., & Wilson, J. Q. (1961), Incentive Systems: A Theory of Organizations, Administrative Science Quarterly, 6(2), 129–166.
  32. Raveendran, M., Silvestri, L., & Gulati, R. (2020), The Role of Interdependence in the Micro-Foundations of Organization Design: Task, Goal, and Knowledge Interdependence, The Academy of Management Annals, 14, 828–868.
Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Copyright (c) 2021 Array