Investigating the effects of innovation strategies on export business performance with the moderating role of competition intensity

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Professor, Department Economics and Administrative Sciences, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran.

2 Associate Professor, Department Economics and Administrative Sciences, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran.

3 Master Student of Executive Management, Department Economics and Administrative Sciences, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION
Nowadays, organizations must always be creative and innovative to successfully deliver their activities and survive in international markets. Therefore, if organizations do not have creativity and innovation in their products, they will be downgraded and eliminated from the competition cycle. In global competitive markets, putting innovation strategies in the organization's programs is key to improving performance (Durand et al, 2017). Product Innovation Strategy (PIS) isthe invention of innovative and innovative methods of products and services has always been important for the lives of groups in competitive environments (Croitoru, 2012) .In this case, process innovation strategy is process innovations may include such things as input materials, job characteristics, workflow and information (Abernathy & Utterback, 1978). The main feature of the process innovation is that this type of innovation is within the organization and occurs in the production line and is not discoverable by individuals outside the organization, and this is a unique feature because it is not imitated by rivals because it is within the organization and cannot be outspoken (Maine et al, 2012). Competition means an attempt to employ a range of rivals in an industry to undermine each other, and in this way, each competitor will maximize his ability and ability to survive in the field and to achieve future growth and development (Knight, 2011). In this research, sales, profitability and market share were used to measure the export performance of the organizations. The statistical population of this study consisted of 230 companies that exported in the past 5 years in Tabriz city, with 148 companies selected as the sample. Structural equation modeling was used to analyze the data and test the hypotheses. The hypotheses were analyzed using SPSS18 and AMOS software. The results from such research will draw the attention of managers and organizational researchers to dimensions that are more important.
 
METHODS
Since this research analyzes the relationship between innovation and business strategies of exporters in Tabriz city considering the moderating role of competition intensity. This research in terms of its purpose is an applied research. The data has been collected using the questionnaire. Therefore, this research is a survey based on the field work. For measuring variables, standard measurements of previous studies were used. The face and content validity of the final questionnaire were confirmed by reviewing the views of management experts. The validity of the questionnaire constructs was also evaluated using the confirmatory factor analysis technique using AMOS software and the significance of the related items to the proposed structures was confirmed.
 
FINDINGS AND ARGUMENT
The research findings are presented in two tables. Table 1 shows the results of the research hypotheses test.
 
Table 1. Test results of research hypotheses





                                            Relationship results


Standard coefficient


t- value


p- value


Test result




Product Innovation← Business Performance


0.25


2.471


0.013


Confirm




prosess Innovation← Business Performanc


0.75


3.074


0.002


Confirm





 
And Table 2 shows the effect of product innovation and process innovation on business performance in two groups with high and low competition.
 
Table 2. Effect of product innovation and process innovation on business performance in two groups with high and low competition.





Model


Independent variables


Dependent variables


β


sig


R2


View count




low competitive intensity


prosess Innovation


Business Performanc


0.255


0.000


0.065


72




High competitive intensity


prosess Innovation


Business Performanc


0.530


0.000


0.806


76










low competitive intensity


Product Innovation


Business Performanc


0.471


0.000


0.222


72




High competitive intensity


Product Innovation


Business Performanc


0.029


0.000


0.806


76





 
As can be seen in the above discussion, the effect of process innovation on business performance in two groups of companies with high competition is higher than that of low competition. The more the competition intensifies, the greater the impact of process innovation on business performance
 
CONCLUSIONS
In this research all hypotheses were approved. According to these hypotheses, product and process innovation strategies have a positive impact on the performance of export organizations. It is important to note that in a high competitive environment, the use of process innovation strategy on export performance has a better impact on the product innovation strategy. One of the reasons for using the process innovation strategy in a competitive state of affairs is that the process innovation process is hidden from the eyes of competitors. In this case, the business will be able to maintain its financial resources for producing products and avoid the imitation of competitors.  It is safe to say that this is important to maintain business life in a competitive environment. The results are consistent with the results of previous studies. Paying attention to the external environment of the organization and understanding the intensity of competition in the environment will make it more effective for decision makers to get a better strategy. In short, attention outside and within the organization to adopt an innovation strategy must be consistent with the organization's success. A strategy, as it can be a business success, can equally create barriers to this path and eliminate the market. Therefore, taking innovation strategy in line with the market situation and international competitors not only helps to improve performance but also plays an important role in business development. Export companies provide successful businesses and executives by adopting a market-oriented strategy to innovate and utilize existing creativity while increasing sales by increasing market share and profits.

Keywords

References

منابع
کاتلر، فلیپ.، کازلیون، جان.، مهرانی، هرمز. (1390). مدیریت و بازاریابی در عصر آشوب و تلاطم بازارها. رسا.
نیک‌رفتار، طیبه.، طالبی، کامبیز.، سعیدی آرانی، فاطمه. (1394). بررسی رابطه نوآوری سازمانی و عملکرد با متغیـر میـانجی نوآوری بازاریابی (مطالعه موردی: کسب‌وکارهای کوچک و متوسط در صـنعت نسـاجی کاشـان) ،مدیریت بازرگانی،7 (2)، 500-485.
کلاه‌کج، رسول. درزیان، کاظم، (1392). تجزیه‌وتحلیل بازارهای صادراتی (هدف) صادرات مزیت دار کشور، بررسی‌های بازرگانی، تهران: موسسه مطالعات و پژوهش‌های بازرگانی، 4 (11)،ص 42-61.
برقی اسکویی، محمدمهدی.، ولی زاده، سمیه. (1369). تأثیر بهبود فضای کسب‌وکار بر تجارت خارجی: مطالعه موردی شرکای عمده تجاری ایران. مدیریت کسب‌وکار بین‌المللی. 1 (2). ص 25-44.
مرتضوی، مهدی؛ رسولی قهرودی، مهدی. و رستمی، آرزو. (1395). بررسی تأثیر نوآوری سازمانی و استراتژی عمومی رهبری هزینه بر عملکرد سازمان از طریق مزیت رقابتی. مدیریت توسعه و تحول، (27), 25-17.
نیک‌رفتار، طیبه؛ طالبی، کامبیز. و سعیدی آرانی، فاطمه. (2015). بررسی رابطۀ نوآوری سازمانی و عملکرد با متغیر میانجی نوآوری بازاریابی (مطالعۀ موردی: کسب‌وکارهای کوچک و متوسط در صنعت نساجی کاشان). مدیریت بازرگانی، 7(2)، 500-485.
رحمان سرشت، حسین (1387). فرایند و استراتژی‌های نوآوری در شرکت‌های عمرانی ایران، چشم‌انداز مدیریت بازرگانی، (29): 278-297.
Abernathy, W., and Utterback J. (1978). Patterns of Industrial Innovation, Technology Review, (80): 41 – 47.
Allen S, R.Helms M.M. (2006). Linking strategic practices and organizational performance to porter’s generic strategies, Business process Management Journal, 12(4): 433-454.
Armanios, D.E., Eesley, C.E., Li, J., Eisenhardt, K.M., 2017. How entrepreneurs leverage institutional intermediaries in emerging economies to acquire public resources. Strategyic Management. (38): 1373–1390.
Arora, R. (2015). Making Innovations Happen. Fostering Innovations by Inducing Foresight. Retrieved at makinginnovationshappen.com/blog/1.
Brenes, E.R., Camacho, A.R., Ciravegna, L., Pichardo, C.A., (2016). Strategy and innovation in emerging economies after the end of the commodity boom—Insights from Latin America. J. Bus. Res. 69, 4363–4367.
Buzzell, R. D., & Gale, B. T. (1987). The PIMS principles: Linking strategy to performance. Simon and Schuster.‏
Cadogan, J.W., Sundqvist, S., Puumalainen, K, & Salminen, R. T. (2012). Strategic flexibilities and export performance: The moderating roles of export market-oriented behavior and the export environment. European Journal of Marketing, 46(10): 1418–1452.
Congden, S. W., & Schroeder, D. M. (1996). Competitive strategy and the adoption and usage of process innovation. International Journal of Commerce and Management, 6(3/4): 5-21.
Covin, J. G., & Slevin, D. P. (1991). A conceptual model of entrepreneurship as firm behavior. Entrepreneurship: Critical perspectives on business and management, (3): 5-28.
Covin, J. G., Slevin, D. P., & Heeley, M. B. (2000). Pioneers and followers: Competitive tactics, environment, and firm growth. Journal of business venturing, 15(2): 175-210.
Croitoru, A. (2012). Schumpeter, JA, 1934 (2008), The Theory of Economic Development: An Inquiry into Profits, Capital, Credit, Interest and the Business Cycle, translated from the German by Redvers Opie, New Brunswick (USA) and London (UK): Transaction Publishers. Journal of comparative research in anthropology and sociology, 3(2): 1-13.
Damanpour, F. (2010). An integration of research findings of effects of firm size and market competition on product and process innovations. British Journal of Management, 21(4): 996-1010.
Damanpour, F., & Wischnevsky, J. D. (2006). Research on innovation in organizations: Distinguishing innovation-generating from innovation-adopting organizations. Journal of engineering and technology management, 23(4), 269-291.
Durand, R., Grant, R.M., Madsen, T.L., 2017. The expanding domain of strategic management research and the quest for integration. Strategic Manage. J. 38, 4–16.
Gallouj, Fa, & Windrum, Paul. (2009). Services and services innovation. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 19(2): 141-148.
Gopalakrishnan, S., & Bierly, P. (2001). Analyzing innovation adoption using a knowledge-based approach. Journal of Engineering and Technology management, 18(2): 107-130.
Grant, R. M. (2016). Contemporary strategy analysis: Text and cases edition. John Wiley & Sons.
Hambrick, D. C. (1983). High profit strategies in mature capital goods industries: A contingency approach. Academy of Management journal, 26(4), 687-707.
Hambrick, Donald C., and David Lei. (1985). toward an empirical prioritization of contingency variables for business strategy." Academy of Management Journal 28(4): 763-788.
Harris, S. G., & Mossholder, K. W. (1996). The affective implications of perceived congruence with culture dimensions during organizational transformation. Journal of management, 22(4): 527-547.
Hurley, R. F., & Hult, G. T. M. (1998). Innovation, market orientation, and organizational learning: an integration and empirical examination. The Journal of marketing, 42-54.
Iansiti, M. (1998). Technology integration. Harvard Business School Press, Boston.‏
Ittner, C. D., & Larcker, D. F. (1997). The performance effects of process management techniques. Management Science, 43(4): 522-534.
Jansen, J. J., Van Den Bosch, F. A., & Volberda, H. W. (2006). Exploratory innovation, exploitative innovation, and performance: Effects of organizational antecedents and environmental moderators. Management science, 52(11): 1661-1674.
Jaworski, B., Kohli, A., (1993). Market orientation: antecedents and consequences. Journal of Marketing 57 (3): 53–70.
Klingenberg, B., Timberlake, R., Geurts, T. G., & Brown, R. J. (2013). The relationship of operational innovation and financial performance—A critical perspective. International journal of production economics, 142(2): 317-323.
Knight, G. A., 11-Kumar, V., Jones, E., Venkatesan, R., Leone, R.P. (2011). Is Market Orientation a Source of Sustainable Competitive Advantage or Simply the Cost of Competing? Journal of Marketing, 75 (1): 16 –30.
Kohler, T.: Crowdsourcing-based business models: how to create and capture value, Calif. Manage. Rev. 57(4) (2015).
Kohli, A. K., & Jaworski, B. J. (1990). Market orientation: the construct, research propositions, and managerial implications. The Journal of Marketing, 1-18.
Lumpkin, G. T., & Dess, G. G. (2001). Linking two dimensions of entrepreneurial orientation to firm performance: The moderating role of environment and industry life cycle. Journal of business venturing, 16(5), 429-451.
Maine, E., Lubik, S., & Garnsey, E. (2012). Process-based vs. product-based innovation: Value creation by nanotech ventures. Technovation, 32(3): 179-192.
Miller, D. (1988). Relating Porter's business strategies to environment and structure: Analysis and performance implications. Academy of management Journal, 31(2): 280-308.
Miller, D., & Friesen, P. H. (1983). Strategy‐making and environment: the third link. Strategic Management Journal, 4(3): 221-235.
OECD, & Commission, European. (1997). Proposed Guidelines for Collecting and Interpreting Technological Innovation Data: The Oslo Manual. Productivity Growth and the New Economy. Paris orientation–performance relationship? Journal of Marketing, 58 (1): 46–55.
Porter, M. E. (1985). Technology and competitive advantage. Journal of business strategy, 5(3): 60-78.
Porter, M. E. (2008). Competitive strategy: Techniques for analyzing industries and competitors. Simon and Schuster.‏
Prajogo, Daniel I. "The strategic fit between innovation strategies and business environment in delivering business performance." International Journal of Production Economics 171 (2016): 241-249.
Schroeder, D. M. (1990). A dynamic perspective on the impact of process innovation upon competitive strategies. Strategic Management Journal, 11(1): 25-41.
Tidd, J. (2006). A review of innovation models. Imperial College London, 16.
Tsai, K.-H., & Yang, S.-Y. (2013). Firm innovativeness and business performance: The joint moderating effects of market turbulence and competition. Industrial Marketing Management, 42(8): 1279-1294.
Weiblen, T., & Chesbrough, H. W. (2015). Engaging with startups to enhance corporate innovation. California Management Review, 57(2), 66-90.
Xin, J. Y., Yeung, A. C., & Cheng, T. C. E. (2010). First to market: Is technological innovation in new product development profitable in health care industries? International Journal of Production Economics, 127(1): 129-135.
Zahra, S. A. (1996). Technology strategy and financial performance: Examining the moderating role of the firm's competitive environment. Journal of business venturing, 11(3): 189-219.
Zahra, S. A., & Bogner, W. C. (2000). Technology strategy and software new ventures' performance: Exploring the moderating effect of the competitive environment. Journal of business venturing, 15(2): 135-173.‏
Zahra, S. A., & Covin, J. G. (1993). Business strategy, technology policy and firm performance. Strategic Management Journal, 14(6): 451-478.

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 26 December 2018
  • Revise Date: 29 January 2019
  • Accept Date: 18 February 2019

Share

How to cite

Statistics