scholarly journals Value Creation in Innovation Ecosystems: How the Structure of Technological Interdependence Affects Firm Performance in New Technology Generations

Author(s):  
Ron Adner ◽  
Rahul Kapoor
2018 ◽  
Vol 19 (5) ◽  
pp. 935-964 ◽  
Author(s):  
Neha Smriti ◽  
Niladri Das

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to examine the effect of intellectual capital (IC) on financial performance (FP) for Indian companies listed on the Centre for Monitoring Indian Economy Overall Share Price Index (COSPI). Design/methodology/approach Hypotheses were developed according to theories and literature review. Secondary data were collected from Indian companies listed on the COSPI between 2001 and 2016, and the value-added intellectual coefficient (VAIC) of Pulic (2000) was used to measure IC and its components. A dynamic system generalized method of moments (SGMM) estimator was employed to identify the variables that significantly contribute to firm performance. Findings Indian listed firms appear to be performing well and efficiently utilizing their IC. Overall, human capital had a major impact on firm productivity during the study period. Furthermore, the empirical analysis showed that structural capital efficiency and capital employed efficiency were equally important contributors to firm’s sales growth and market value. The growing importance of the contribution of IC to value creation was consistently reflected in the FP of these Indian companies. Practical implications This study has robust theoretical grounds and employs a validated methodology. The present study extends knowledge of IC among academicians and managers and highlights its contribution to value creation. The findings may help stakeholders and policymakers in developing countries properly reallocate intellectual resources. Originality/value This study is the first study to evaluate IC and its relationship with traditional measures of firm performance among Indian listed firms using dynamic SGMM and VAIC models.


Author(s):  
Richard T. Herschel

A chief knowledge officer (CKO) is a senior executive who is responsible for ensuring that an organization maximizes the value it achieves through one of its most important assets-knowledge. Knowledge is often defined as information exercised for problem solving, understanding, and benefit. By adopting a CKO, firms formally recognize that knowledge is an asset that needs to be captured, disseminated, and shared to enhance firm performance and value creation. And most of all, they realize it is an asset that must be managed. Knowledge management is seen as essential, because firms today are valued in part on market perceptions of expertise as expressed through their processes, products and services (Choo, 1998).


2013 ◽  
Vol 63 (3/4) ◽  
pp. 244 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paavo Ritala ◽  
Vassilis Agouridas ◽  
Dimitris Assimakopoulos ◽  
Otto Gies

2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Marika Arena ◽  
Giovanni Azzone ◽  
Giulia Piantoni

PurposeAlthough innovation ecosystems (IEs) are generally considered capable of creating shared value (SV), this potentiality has often been taken for granted and not deeply analysed, yet. As a result, in the literature, there is not a framework that defines the process of SV creation in IEs or which aspects should be considered for understanding it. Moving from these considerations, this paper aims to propose a conceptual model of how IEs can create SV, identifying the main building blocks of the process and the aspects that characterize these building blocks.Design/methodology/approachThe authors reviewed the literature on IEs and value creation over the last 15 years, by structurally analysing 120 articles. On the basis of such review, the authors identified main dimensions of analysis focusing on the conceptualization of SV in IEs.FindingsFirst, the authors developed a conceptual model relying on a process-based logic and framing the SV creation in terms of inputs, here intended as four key characteristics (actors, structure, governance and relations), internal processes (strategies and internal mechanisms) and outputs (the value created). Second, each element of value creation is explored, highlighting the main evidence emerging from prior studies in connection to each block.Originality/valueThis paper drives the identification of some relevant relationships that connect the characteristics of the IEs, the strategies and the internal mechanisms to the output of the process, i.e. the SV created.


2021 ◽  
pp. 014920632110216
Author(s):  
Jay B. Barney ◽  
David J. Ketchen ◽  
Mike Wright

This article explains how viewing resource-based theory within Brandenburger and Stuart’s value creation framework adds clarity to the theory as a whole and to its essential elements including the definition of its dependent variables, its approach to value creation, and its approach to the appropriation of economic value. Building on this foundation, the article addresses several questions about resource-based theory: Is it a theory or a view? Is resource-based theory tautological? Is resource-based theory static? How important are stakeholders within resource-based theory? Does resource-based theory constitute a theory of the firm? Does resource-based theory acknowledge industry structure’s role in explaining firm performance? Does resource-based theory incorporate uncertainty? Does resource-based theory have strong managerial implications? In accomplishing these tasks, the article sets the stage for the further evolution and application of resource-based theory.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document