Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

IT capabilities for product innovation in SMEs: a configurational approach

  • Published:
Information Technology and Management Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

With the advent of globalization and the knowledge-based economy, industrial SMEs must constantly innovate to remain competitive. Now, an important research issue in this regard concerns the role played by IT capabilities in enabling innovation processes such as new product development, and in determining the product innovation performance of these organizations. Using a configurational approach grounded in the resource-based view, contingency theory, and the notions of “fit” and equifinality, we argue that IT capabilities can be leveraged for innovation purposes to the extent that they are coaligned and thus constitute IT capability configurations. This paper presents the results of a survey of 588 Canadian industrial SMEs designed to further analyze this issue. Three IT capability configurations were thus empirically identified, that is, IT Defenders (n = 234), IT Analyzers (n = 91) and IT Prospectors (n = 263), the last two being associated to greater product innovation performance.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. The five IT capability variables are operationalized with “index” instead of “scale” measures [4]. An index variable tends to follow a Poisson-type rather than a normal distribution, i.e. to be right-skewed if the mean is small. Moreover, an index combines elements not expected to be strongly intercorrelated, thus the inappropriateness of Cronbach’s alpha coefficient to test its reliability [14].

References

  1. Aragón-Sánchez A, Sánchez-Marín G (2005) Strategic orientation, management characteristics, and performance: a study of Spanish SMEs. J Small Bus Manag 43(3):287–308

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Atuahene-Gima K, Li H (2004) Strategic decision comprehensiveness and new product development outcomes in new technology ventures. Acad Manag J 47(4):583–597

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Audretsch DB (1995) Innovation and industry evolution. The MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  4. Babbie ER (2009) The basics of social research, 5th edn. Wadsworth, Belmont

    Google Scholar 

  5. Banker RD, Bardhan IR, Chang H, Lin S (2006) Plant information systems, manufacturing capabilities, and plant performance. MIS Q 30(2):315–337

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Banker RD, Bardhan I, Asdemir O (2006) Understanding the impact of collaboration software on product design and development. Inf Syst Res 17(4):352–373

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Barczak G, Hultink EJ, Sultan F (2008) Antecedents and consequences of information technology usage in NPD: a comparison of Dutch and U.S. companies. J Prod Innov Manag 25:620–631

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Barney JB (1991) Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. J Manag 17(1):99–120

    Google Scholar 

  9. Berends H, Jelinek M, Reymen I, Stultiëns R (2014) Product innovation processes in small firms: combining entrepreneurial effectuation and managerial causation. J Prod Innov Manag 31(3):616–635

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Bergeron F, Raymond L, Rivard S (2004) Ideal patterns of strategic alignment and business performance. Inf Manag 41(8):1003–1020

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Bharadwaj AS (2000) A resource-based perspective on information technology capability and firm performance: an empirical investigation. MIS Q 24(1):169–196

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Bhatt GD, Grover V (2005) Types of information technology capabilities and their role in competitive advantage: an empirical study. J Manag Inf Syst 22(2):253–277

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Bhatt G, Emdad A, Roberts N, Grover V (2010) Building and leveraging information in dynamic environments: the role of IT infrastructure flexibility as enabler of organizational responsiveness and competitive advantage. Inf Manag 47:341–349

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Bollen K, Lennox R (1991) Conventional wisdom on measurement: a structural equation perspective. Psychol Bull 110:305–314

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Cassivi L, Lefebvre E, Lefebvre LA, Léger P-M (2004) The impact of e-collaboration tools on firms’ performance. Int J Logist Manag 15(1):91–110

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Chan YE, Horner Reich B (2007) IT alignment: what have we learned? J Inf Technol 22:297–315

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Chen C-J (2007) Information technology, organizational structure, and new product development—the mediating effect of cross-functional team interaction. IEEE Trans Eng Manag 54(4):687–698

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Chiasson MW, Davidson E (2005) Taking industry seriously in information systems research. MIS Q 29(4):591–605

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Crossan MM, Apaydin M (2010) A multi-dimensional framework of organizational innovations: a systematic review of the literature. J Manag Stud 47(6):1154–1191

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Cunha MP, Rego A, Oliveira P, Rosado P, Habib N (2014) Product innovation in resource-poor environments: three research streams. J Prod Innov Manag 31(2):202–210

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Di Benedetto CA, DeSarbo WS, Song M (2008) Strategic capabilities and radical innovation: an empirical study in three countries. IEEE Trans Eng Manag 55(3):420–433

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Doty DH, Glick WH, Huber GP (1993) Fit, equifinality, and organizational effectiveness: a test of two configurational theories. Acad Manag J 36(6):1196–1250

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Durmoşoğlu SS, Barczak G (2011) The use of information technology tools in new product development phases: analysis of effects on new product innovativeness, quality, and market performance. Ind Mark Manag 40:321–330

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Fiss PC (2007) A set-theoretic approach to organizational configurations. Acad Manag Rev 32(4):1180–1198

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Garcia R, Calantone R (2002) A critical look at technological innovation typology and innovativeness terminology: a literature review. J Prod Innov Manag 19:110–132

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Garud R, Tuertscher P, Van de Ven AH (2013) Perspectives on innovation processes. Acad Manag Ann 7(1):775–819

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Gresov C (1989) Exploring fit and misfit with multiple contingencies. Adm Sci Q 34:431–453

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Gresov C, Drazin R (1997) Equifinality: functional equivalence in organization design. Acad Manag Rev 22(2):403–428

    Google Scholar 

  29. Harms R, Krauz S, Schwarz E (2009) The suitability of the configuration approach in entrepreneurship research. Entrep Reg Dev 21(1):25–49

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Hatzichronoglou T (1997) Revision of the high-technology sector and product classification. In: OECD science, technology and industry working papers, 1997/02. OECD Publishing

  31. Hill J, Scott T (2004) A consideration of the roles of business intelligence and e-business in management and marketing decision making in knowledge-based and high-tech start-ups. Qual Market Res Int J 7(1):48–57

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Hobday M (2005) Firm-level innovation models: perspectives on research in developed and developing countries. Technol Anal Strateg Manag 17(2):121–146

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Joshi KD, Chi L, Datta A, Han S (2010) Changing the competitive landscape: continuous innovation through IT-enabled knowledge capability. Inf Syst Res 21(3):472–495

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Karlsson C, Olsson O (1998) Product innovation in small and large enterprises. Small Bus Econ 10:31–46

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Kawakami T, Durmoşoğlu SS, Barczak G (2011) Factors influencing information technology usage for new product development: the case of Japanese companies. J Prod Innov Manag 28:833–847

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Ketchen DJ Jr, Shook CL (1996) The application of cluster analysis in strategic management research: an analysis and critique. Strateg Manag J 17:441–458

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. King WR (2007) IT strategy and innovation: recent innovations in knowledge management. Inf Syst Manag 24(1):91–93

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Klein J, Gee D, Jones H (1998) Analysing clusters of skills in R&D—core competencies, metaphors, visualization, and the role of IT. R&D Manag 28(1):37–42

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Kok RAW, Biemans WG (2009) Creating a market-oriented product innovation process: a contingency approach. Technovation 29:517–526

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Kotha S, Swamidass PM (2000) Strategy, advanced manufacturing technology and performance: empirical evidence from U.S. manufacturing firms. J Oper Manag 18(3):257–277

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Kraaijenbrink J, Spender J-C, Groen AJ (2010) The resource-based view: a review and assessment of its critiques. J Manag 36(1):349–372

    Google Scholar 

  42. Levy M, Powell P (2003) Exploring SME Internet adoption: towards a contingent model. Electronic Markets 13(2):173–181

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Marion TJ, Meyer MH, Barczak G (2015) The influence of digital design and IT on modular product architecture. J Prod Innov Manag 32(1):98–110

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Martínez-Senra AI, Quintás MA, Sartal A, Vázquez XH (2015) How can firms’ basic research turn into product innovation? The role of absorptive capacity and industry appropriability. IEEE Trans Eng Manag 62(2):205–216

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Mata FJ, Fuerst WL, Barney M (1995) Information technology and sustained competitive advantage: a resource-based analysis. MIS Q 19(4):487–505

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Merminod V, Rowe F (2012) How does PLM technology support knowledge transfer and translation in new product development? Transparency and boundary spanners in an international context. Inf Organ 22:295–322

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Meyer AD, Tsui AS, Hinings CR (1993) Configurational approaches to organizational analysis. Acad Manag J 36(6):1175–1195

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Miles RE, Snow CC (2003) Organizational strategy, structure, and process. Stanford University Press, Stanford

    Google Scholar 

  49. Miller D (1996) Configurations revisited. Strateg Manag J 17(7):505–512

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Miller D (1999) Notes on the study of configurations. Manag Int Rev 39(2):27–39

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Miller D, Dröge C (1986) Psychological and traditional determinants of structure. Adm Sci Q 31:539–560

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Miller D, Eisenstat R, Foote N (2002) Strategy from the inside out: building capability-creating organizations. Calif Manag Rev 44(3):37–54

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. OECD (2005) Oslo manual: guidelines for collecting and interpreting innovation data, 3rd edn. OECD Publishing, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  54. OECD (2005) OECD science, technology and industry scoreboard 2005. OCDE Publishing, Paris. http://puck.sourceoecd.org/vl=380292/cl=28/nw=1/rpsv/scoreboard/index.htm

  55. OECD (2010) SMEs, entrepreneurship and innovation, OECD studies on SMEs and entrepreneurship. OECD Publishing, Paris

    Book  Google Scholar 

  56. Overby E, Bharadwaj A, Sambamurthy V (2006) Enterprise agility and the enabling role of information technology. Eur J Inf Syst 15(2):120–131

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Pavlou PA, El Sawy OA (2006) From IT leveraging competence to competitive advantage in turbulent environments: the case of new product development. Inf Syst Res 17(3):198–227

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Pavlou PA, El Sawy OA (2011) Understanding the elusive black box of dynamic capabilities. Decis Sci 42(1):239–273

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Payne GT (2006) Examining configurations and firm performance in a suboptimal equifinality context. Organ Sci 17(6):756–770

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Pennings JM (1975) The relevance of structural-contingency model for organizational effectiveness. Adm Sci Q 20:393–410

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Podsakoff PM, MacKenzie SB, Lee J-Y, Podsakoff NP (2003) Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. J Appl Psychol 88(5):879–903

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Poole MS, Van de Ven AH, Dooley K, Holmes ME (2000) Organizational change and innovation processes: theories and methods for research. Oxford University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  63. Prajogo D, Olhager J (2012) Supply chain integration and performance: the effects of long-term relationships, information technology and sharing, and logistics integration. Int J Prod Econ 135:514–522

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Rai A, Tang X, Brown P, Keil M (2006) Assimilation patterns in the use of electronic procurement innovations: a cluster analysis. Inf Manag 43:336–349

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Raymond L, Croteau A-M (2009) Manufacturing strategy and business strategy in medium-sized enterprises: performance effects of strategic alignment. IEEE Trans Eng Manag 56(2):192–202

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Raymond L, St-Pierre J (2010) R&D as a determinant of innovation in manufacturing SMEs: an attempt at empirical clarification. Technovation 30(1):48–56

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Reitzig M, Puranam P (2009) Value appropriation as an organizational capability: the case of IP protection through patents. Strateg Manag J 30:765–789

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. Rivard S, Raymond L, Verreault D (2006) Resource-based view and competitive strategy: an integrated model of the contribution of information technology to firm performance. J Strateg Inf Syst 15(1):29–50

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. Sambamurthy V, Bharadwaj A, Grover V (2003) Shaping agility through digital options: reconceptualizing the role of information technology in contemporary firms. MIS Q 27(2):237–263

    Article  Google Scholar 

  70. Santhanam R, Hartono E (2003) Issues in linking information technology capability to firm performance. MIS Q 27(1):125–153

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. Song M, Berends H, van der Bij H, Weggeman M (2007) The effect of IT and co-location on knowledge dissemination. J Prod Innov Manag 24:52–68

    Article  Google Scholar 

  72. Song LZ, Song M (2010) The role of information technologies in enhancing R&D-marketing integration: an empirical investigation. J Prod Innov Manag 27:382–401

    Article  Google Scholar 

  73. Tatikonda MV, Montoya-Weiss MM (2001) Integrating operations and marketing perspectives of product innovation: the influence of organizational process factors and capabilities on development performance. Manag Sci 47(1):151–172

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. Terziovski M (2007) Building innovation capability in organizations: an international cross-case perspective. World Scientific, Singapore

    Book  Google Scholar 

  75. Thornhill S (2006) Knowledge, innovation and firm performance in high- and low-technology regimes. J Bus Ventur 21:687–703

    Article  Google Scholar 

  76. Tushman M, Nadler DA (1978) Information processing as an integrating concept in organization design. Acad Manag Rev 3(3):613–624

    Google Scholar 

  77. Uwizeyemungu S, Raymond L (2012) Impact of an ERP system’s capabilities upon the realisation of its business value: a resource-based perspective. Inf Technol Manag 13(2):69–90

    Article  Google Scholar 

  78. Van de Ven AH, Drazin R (1985) The concept of fit in contingency theory. Res Organ Behav 7:333–365

    Google Scholar 

  79. Venkatraman N (1989) The concept of fit in strategy research: toward verbal and statistical correspondence. Acad Manag Rev 14(3):423–444

    Google Scholar 

  80. Wade M, Hulland J (2004) The resource-based view and information systems research: review, extension and suggestions for future research. MIS Q 28(1):107–142

    Article  Google Scholar 

  81. Watson J (2007) Modeling the relationship between networking and firm performance. J Bus Ventur 22:852–874

    Article  Google Scholar 

  82. Westerman G, Curley M (2008) Building IT-enabled innovation capabilities at Intel. MIS Q Executive 7(1):33–48

    Google Scholar 

  83. Whelan E, Teigland R, Donnellan B, Golden W (2010) How internet technologies impact information flows in R&D: reconsidering the technological gatekeeper. R&D Manag 40(4):400–413

    Article  Google Scholar 

  84. Yoo Y, Henfridsson O, Lyytinen K (2010) Research commentary—the new organizing logic of digital innovation: an agenda for information systems research. Inf Syst Res 21(4):724–735

    Article  Google Scholar 

  85. Zahra SA, George G (2002) The net-enabled business innovation cycle and the evolution of dynamic capabilities. Inf Syst Res 13(2):147–150

    Article  Google Scholar 

  86. Zhang T, Ramakrishnon R, Livny M (1996) BIRCH: an efficient data clustering method for very large databases. In: Proceedings of the ACM SIGMOD conference on management of data, Montreal, pp 103–114

  87. Zhu K (2004) The complementarity of information technology infrastructure and e-commerce capability: a resource-based assessment of their business value. J Manag Inf Syst 21(1):167–202

    Article  Google Scholar 

  88. Zhu K, Kreamer K (2000) e-Commerce metrics for net-enhanced organizations: assessing the value of e-commerce to firm performance in the manufacturing sector. Inf Syst Res 18(5):463–475

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Funding was provided by SSHRC (Grant No. 890-2011-0153).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institut de recherche sur les PME, Université du Québec à Trois-Rivières, P.O. Box 500, Trois-Rivières, QC, G9A 5H7, Canada

    Louis Raymond, Sylvestre Uwizeyemungu, Bruno Fabi & Josée St-Pierre

Authors
  1. Louis Raymond
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sylvestre Uwizeyemungu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Bruno Fabi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Josée St-Pierre
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Louis Raymond.

Appendix: Questions posed to measure the SME’s e-business and AMT capabilities

Appendix: Questions posed to measure the SME’s e-business and AMT capabilities

Please indicate the business activities presently realized through the firm’s use of the Internet and the Web:

Selling products to customers:

□

Interacting with customers to improve services:

□

Interacting with business partners to develop new products and services:

□

Prospecting for new customers:

□

Developing business intelligence:

□

Placing orders to suppliers:

□

Recruiting human resources:

□

Please indicate the manufacturing technologies and systems presently used by the firm:

Computer-aided drafting:

□

Computer-aided design (CAD):

□

Computer-aided manufacturing (CAM):

□

Computer-based bar-coding:

□

Computer-based production scheduling:

□

Enterprise resource planning (ERP):

□

Computer-based production inspection and control:

□

Computer-based quality assurance:

□

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Raymond, L., Uwizeyemungu, S., Fabi, B. et al. IT capabilities for product innovation in SMEs: a configurational approach. Inf Technol Manag 19, 75–87 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10799-017-0276-x

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10799-017-0276-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation