Innovation ambidexterity and public innovation Intermediaries: The mediating role of capabilities

Muthu De Silva; Jeremy  Howells; Zaheer Khan; Martin Meyer

doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.05.013

Innovation ambidexterity and public innovation Intermediaries: The mediating role of capabilities

Muthu De Silva^* (Corresponding Author), Jeremy Howells, Zaheer Khan, Martin Meyer

^*Corresponding author for this work

Business Management

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

19 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

We lack an in-depth understanding of how the different roles played by public innovation intermediaries during their engagement in collaborative projects enable them to generate ambidexterity. By adopting a sequential mixed methods research design to gather data from 122 Research and Technology Organizations (RTOs) operating in Europe, the findings suggest that public innovation intermediaries performed two different roles in collaborative projects
namely, knowledge integration and network building, and these have a differential impact on the generation of distinct types of in-house innovation. The knowledge integration role is conducive to exploratory innovation, whereas the network building role contributes to exploitative innovation. Importantly, relational, and internal capabilities mediate between these roles and innovation. Yet, this mediation effect varies depending on the nature of the public innovation intermediary’s role and innovation profile. How public innovation
intermediaries should utilise their key roles to generate in-house ambidexterity is crucial in leveraging the impact of public funding in this area

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	14-29
Number of pages	16
Journal	Journal of Business Research
Volume	149
Early online date	15 May 2022
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.05.013
Publication status	Published - 1 Oct 2022

Bibliographical note

Acknowledgement: Authors would like to acknowledge the financial assistance provided by the Innovate UK for this study. We would like to thank the editor, Prof Morgan Miles, and two anonymous reviewers for immensely valuable feedback and advice in the preparation of this article. Our gratitude also goes to the Big Innovation Centre for supporting data collection. We also acknowledge financial assistance received from Birkbeck, University of London to get the paper proofread. Authors also kindly acknowledged the feedback received during the “Academy of Management”, “Marketing, Strategy & Policy” [best paper award], and “Innovation Intermediaries and Emerging Digital Technologies: Policy and Practice”, conferences.

Keywords

Innovation ambidexterity
public innovation intermediaries
exploitative innovation
exploratory innovation
knowledge integration
network building

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

Access to Document

10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.05.013Licence: Unspecified

Silva_etal_JBR_Innovation_Ambidexterity_And_AAM
©2022. This manuscript version is made available under the CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 license https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
Accepted author manuscript, 573 KBLicence: CC BY-NC-ND

Cite this

@article{2ff212d2b9b549e4a34f60d58b394340,

title = "Innovation ambidexterity and public innovation Intermediaries: The mediating role of capabilities",

abstract = "We lack an in-depth understanding of how the different roles played by public innovation intermediaries during their engagement in collaborative projects enable them to generate ambidexterity. By adopting a sequential mixed methods research design to gather data from 122 Research and Technology Organizations (RTOs) operating in Europe, the findings suggest that public innovation intermediaries performed two different roles in collaborative projectsnamely, knowledge integration and network building, and these have a differential impact on the generation of distinct types of in-house innovation. The knowledge integration role is conducive to exploratory innovation, whereas the network building role contributes to exploitative innovation. Importantly, relational, and internal capabilities mediate between these roles and innovation. Yet, this mediation effect varies depending on the nature of the public innovation intermediary{\textquoteright}s role and innovation profile. How public innovationintermediaries should utilise their key roles to generate in-house ambidexterity is crucial in leveraging the impact of public funding in this area",

keywords = "Innovation ambidexterity, public innovation intermediaries, exploitative innovation, exploratory innovation, knowledge integration, network building",

author = "Silva, {Muthu De} and Jeremy Howells and Zaheer Khan and Martin Meyer",

note = "Acknowledgement: Authors would like to acknowledge the financial assistance provided by the Innovate UK for this study. We would like to thank the editor, Prof Morgan Miles, and two anonymous reviewers for immensely valuable feedback and advice in the preparation of this article. Our gratitude also goes to the Big Innovation Centre for supporting data collection. We also acknowledge financial assistance received from Birkbeck, University of London to get the paper proofread. Authors also kindly acknowledged the feedback received during the “Academy of Management”, “Marketing, Strategy & Policy” [best paper award], and “Innovation Intermediaries and Emerging Digital Technologies: Policy and Practice”, conferences.",

year = "2022",

month = oct,

day = "1",

doi = "10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.05.013",

language = "English",

volume = "149",

pages = "14--29",

journal = "Journal of Business Research",

issn = "0148-2963",

publisher = "Elsevier",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Innovation ambidexterity and public innovation Intermediaries

T2 - The mediating role of capabilities

AU - Silva, Muthu De

AU - Howells, Jeremy

AU - Khan, Zaheer

AU - Meyer, Martin

N1 - Acknowledgement: Authors would like to acknowledge the financial assistance provided by the Innovate UK for this study. We would like to thank the editor, Prof Morgan Miles, and two anonymous reviewers for immensely valuable feedback and advice in the preparation of this article. Our gratitude also goes to the Big Innovation Centre for supporting data collection. We also acknowledge financial assistance received from Birkbeck, University of London to get the paper proofread. Authors also kindly acknowledged the feedback received during the “Academy of Management”, “Marketing, Strategy & Policy” [best paper award], and “Innovation Intermediaries and Emerging Digital Technologies: Policy and Practice”, conferences.

PY - 2022/10/1

Y1 - 2022/10/1

N2 - We lack an in-depth understanding of how the different roles played by public innovation intermediaries during their engagement in collaborative projects enable them to generate ambidexterity. By adopting a sequential mixed methods research design to gather data from 122 Research and Technology Organizations (RTOs) operating in Europe, the findings suggest that public innovation intermediaries performed two different roles in collaborative projectsnamely, knowledge integration and network building, and these have a differential impact on the generation of distinct types of in-house innovation. The knowledge integration role is conducive to exploratory innovation, whereas the network building role contributes to exploitative innovation. Importantly, relational, and internal capabilities mediate between these roles and innovation. Yet, this mediation effect varies depending on the nature of the public innovation intermediary’s role and innovation profile. How public innovationintermediaries should utilise their key roles to generate in-house ambidexterity is crucial in leveraging the impact of public funding in this area

AB - We lack an in-depth understanding of how the different roles played by public innovation intermediaries during their engagement in collaborative projects enable them to generate ambidexterity. By adopting a sequential mixed methods research design to gather data from 122 Research and Technology Organizations (RTOs) operating in Europe, the findings suggest that public innovation intermediaries performed two different roles in collaborative projectsnamely, knowledge integration and network building, and these have a differential impact on the generation of distinct types of in-house innovation. The knowledge integration role is conducive to exploratory innovation, whereas the network building role contributes to exploitative innovation. Importantly, relational, and internal capabilities mediate between these roles and innovation. Yet, this mediation effect varies depending on the nature of the public innovation intermediary’s role and innovation profile. How public innovationintermediaries should utilise their key roles to generate in-house ambidexterity is crucial in leveraging the impact of public funding in this area

KW - Innovation ambidexterity

KW - public innovation intermediaries

KW - exploitative innovation

KW - exploratory innovation

KW - knowledge integration

KW - network building

U2 - 10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.05.013

DO - 10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.05.013

M3 - Article

SN - 0148-2963

VL - 149

SP - 14

EP - 29

JO - Journal of Business Research

JF - Journal of Business Research

ER -

Innovation ambidexterity and public innovation Intermediaries: The mediating role of capabilities

Abstract

Bibliographical note

Keywords

UN SDGs

Access to Document

Fingerprint

Cite this