CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 40Innovation and Knowledge ManagementFirm Innovation and GrowthBusiness Strategies and Innovation

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Does combining different types of innovation always improve SME performance? An analysis of innovation complementarity

Open access
Zhang, Hailun·2022·Journal of Innovation & Knowledge
DOI 10.1016/j.jik.2022.100192
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) sometimes introduce different types of innovation simultaneously. However, the performance implications of simultaneous innovation practices remain under-researched in the literature. Therefore, this paper explores the combined use of six types of innovation and examines complementarity/substitutability in performance between these types of innovation. Data for the empirical analysis originates from a sample of 1,139 Chinese manufacturing SMEs. We identify two tendencies of simultaneous innovation by means of exploratory factor analysis (EFA), which are as follows: product-oriented and production-oriented. Using a conditional approach to supermodularity, we find no interplay between product-oriented types of innovation, but substitutability between production-oriented types of innovation. Based on organizational literature, we perform a supplementary test for the relationship between production-oriented types of innovation and organizational innovation. The result shows that substitutability between production-oriented types of innovation exists only in the absence of organizational innovation. These findings suggest that SMEs in China derive only additive benefits from a combination of product-oriented innovation, and gain no performance payoff from a combination of production-oriented innovation unless they introduce simultaneous organizational change.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jik.2022.100192

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Show all 2 references

Research works printed but not linked: 64

  1. Adler, 1999, Flexibility versus efficiency? A case study of model changeovers in the Toyota production system, Organization Science, 10, 43, 10.1287/orsc.10.1.43 · DOI
  2. Arranz, 2019, An integrated model of organisational innovation and firm performance: Generation, persistence and complementarity, Journal of Business Research, 105, 270, 10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.08.018 · DOI
  3. Ballot, 2015, The fateful triangle: Complementarities in performance between product, process and organizational innovation in France and the UK, Research Policy, 44, 217, 10.1016/j.respol.2014.07.003 · DOI
  4. Battisti, 2010, How innovative are UK firms? Evidence from the fourth UK community innovation survey on synergies between technological and organizational innovations, British Journal of Management, 21, 187, 10.1111/j.1467-8551.2009.00629.x · DOI
  5. Baumann, 2016, The link between R&D, innovation and productivity: Are micro firms different?, Research Policy, 45, 1263, 10.1016/j.respol.2016.03.008 · DOI
  6. Cao, 2020, Does market competition promote innovation efficiency in China's high-tech industries?, Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 32, 429, 10.1080/09537325.2019.1667971 · DOI
  7. Chen, 2020, Leading for constructive innovation: Preliminary evidence from China, Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 57, 10.1016/j.jengtecman.2020.101588 · DOI
  8. Chen, 2017, A study of factors influencing disruptive innovation in Chinese SMEs, Asian Journal of Technology Innovation, 25, 140, 10.1080/19761597.2017.1302552 · DOI
  9. Chen, 2020, Effects of organizational innovation and technological innovation capabilities on firm performance: Evidence from firms in China's Pearl River Delta, Asia Pacific Business Review, 26, 72, 10.1080/13602381.2019.1592339 · DOI
  10. Christmann, 2000, Effects of “best practices” of environmental management on cost advantage: The role of complementary assets, Academy of Management Journal, 43, 663, 10.2307/1556360 · DOI
  11. Chudnovsky, 2006, Innovation and productivity in developing countries: A study of Argentine manufacturing firms’ behavior (1992–2001), Research Policy, 35, 266, 10.1016/j.respol.2005.10.002 · DOI
  12. Chung, 2017, The unique chinese innovation pathways: Lessons from chinese small and mediuem sized manufacturing firms, International Journal of Production Economics, 190, 80, 10.1016/j.ijpe.2016.09.004 · DOI
  13. Colbert, 2004, The complex resource-based view: Implications for theory and practice in strategic human resource management, Academy of Management Review, 29, 341, 10.2307/20159047 · DOI
  14. Damanpour, 2010, An integration of research findings of effects of firm size and market competition on product and process innovations, British Journal of Management, 21, 996, 10.1111/j.1467-8551.2009.00628.x · DOI
  15. Donbesuur, 2020, Technological innovation, organizational innovation and international performance of SMEs: The moderating role of domestic institutional environment, Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 161, 10.1016/j.techfore.2020.120252 · DOI
  16. Doran, 2012, Are differing forms of innovation complements or substitutes?, European Journal of Innovation Management, 15, 351, 10.1108/14601061211243675 · DOI
  17. Ebben, 2005, Efficiency, flexibility, or both? Evidence linking strategy to performance in small firms, Strategic Management Journal, 26, 1249, 10.1002/smj.503 · DOI
  18. Evangelista, 2010, The economic impact of technological and organizational innovations. A firm-level analysis, Research Policy, 39, 1253, 10.1016/j.respol.2010.08.004 · DOI
  19. Fu, 2018, Innovation and productivity in formal and informal firms in Ghana, Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 131, 315, 10.1016/j.techfore.2017.08.009 · DOI
  20. González-Blanco, 2019, Exploring the complementarity between foreign technology, embedded technology and increase of productive capacity, Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 25, 39, 10.3846/tede.2019.7600 · DOI
  21. Gu, 2016, Effects of external and internal sources on innovation performance in Chinese high-tech SMEs: A resource-based perspective, Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 40, 76, 10.1016/j.jengtecman.2016.04.003 · DOI
  22. Guisado-González, 2018, Assessing the relationship between R&D subsidy, R&D cooperation and absorptive capacity: An investigation on the manufacturing Spanish case, The Journal of Technology Transfer, 43, 1647, 10.1007/s10961-017-9579-7 · DOI
  23. Guisado-González, 2017, Product–process matrix and complementarity approach, The Journal of Technology Transfer, 42, 441, 10.1007/s10961-015-9435-6 · DOI
  24. Gunday, 2011, Effects of innovation types on firm performance, International Journal of Production Economics, 133, 662, 10.1016/j.ijpe.2011.05.014 · DOI
  25. Hall, 2009, Innovation and productivity in SMEs: empirical evidence for Italy, Small Business Economics, 33, 13, 10.1007/s11187-009-9184-8 · DOI
  26. Hervas-Oliver, 2015, Technological innovation without R&D: Unfolding the extra gains of management innovations on technological performance, Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 27, 19, 10.1080/09537325.2014.944147 · DOI
  27. Hou, 2013, Complementarity between in-house R&D and technology purchasing: evidence from Chinese manufacturing firms, Oxford Development Studies, 41, 343, 10.1080/13600818.2013.807910 · DOI
  28. Hsieh, 2014, The life cycle of plants in India and Mexico, The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 129, 1035, 10.1093/qje/qju014 · DOI · Paper page
  29. Hullova, 2019, Critical capabilities for effective management of complementarity between product and process innovation: Cases from the food and drink industry, Research Policy, 48, 339, 10.1016/j.respol.2018.09.001 · DOI
  30. Hullova, 2016, Uncovering the reciprocal complementarity between product and process innovation, Research Policy, 45, 929, 10.1016/j.respol.2016.01.012 · DOI
  31. Jiang, 2013, Does ownership type matter for innovation? Evidence from China, Journal of Business Research, 66, 2473, 10.1016/j.jbusres.2013.05.037 · DOI
  32. Laforet, 2006, Innovative characteristics of small manufacturing firms, Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 13, 363, 10.1108/14626000610680253 · DOI
  33. Lee, 2019, Synergy effects of innovation on firm performance, Journal of Business Research, 99, 507, 10.1016/j.jbusres.2017.08.032 · DOI
  34. Lee, 2016, Inventing while you work: Knowledge, non-R&D learning and innovation, Research Policy, 45, 345, 10.1016/j.respol.2015.09.009 · DOI
  35. Li, 2018, China's manufacturing locus in 2025: With a comparison of “Made-in-China 2025” and “Industry 4.0, Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 135, 66, 10.1016/j.techfore.2017.05.028 · DOI
  36. Liao, 2020, Technology import, secondary innovation, and industrial structure optimization: A potential innovation strategy for China, Pacific Economic Review, 25, 145, 10.1111/1468-0106.12326 · DOI
  37. Lin, 2014, Exploring the role of dynamic capabilities in firm performance under the resource-based view framework, Journal of Business Research, 67, 407, 10.1016/j.jbusres.2012.12.019 · DOI · Paper page
  38. Liu, 2017, Beyond catch-up—can a new innovation policy help China overcome the middle income trap?, Science and Public Policy, 44, 656, 10.1093/scipol/scw092 · DOI
  39. Liu, 2022, Entrepreneurial orientation, new product development and firm performance: The moderating role of legitimacy in Chinese high-tech SMEs, European Journal of Innovation Management, 25, 130, 10.1108/EJIM-05-2020-0204 · DOI
  40. Mei, 2019, Exploring the effects of inter-firm linkages on SMEs' open innovation from an ecosystem perspective: An empirical study of Chinese manufacturing SMEs, Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 144, 118, 10.1016/j.techfore.2019.04.010 · DOI
  41. Mohnen, 2005, Complementarities in innovation policy, European Economic Review, 49, 1431, 10.1016/j.euroecorev.2003.12.003 · DOI
  42. Nahm, 2014, Scale-up nation: China's specialization in innovative manufacturing, World Development, 54, 288, 10.1016/j.worlddev.2013.09.003 · DOI
  43. O'Reilly, 2008, Ambidexterity as a dynamic capability: Resolving the innovator's dilemma, Research in Organizational Behavior, 28, 185, 10.1016/j.riob.2008.06.002 · DOI · Paper page
  44. Peteraf, 1993, The cornerstones of competitive advantage: a resource-based view, Strategic Management Journal, 14, 179, 10.1002/smj.4250140303 · DOI
  45. Petti, 2019, Technological innovation vs technological backwardness patterns in latecomer firms: An absorptive capacity perspective, Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 51, 10, 10.1016/j.jengtecman.2019.02.002 · DOI
  46. Phillips, 2019, When do efficiency and flexibility determine a firm's performance? A simulation study, Journal of Innovation & Knowledge, 4, 88, 10.1016/j.jik.2017.12.003 · DOI
  47. Qiao, 2014, Industry association networks, innovations, and firm performance in Chinese small and medium-sized enterprises, China Economic Review, 29, 213, 10.1016/j.chieco.2014.04.011 · DOI
  48. Rivkin, 2000, Imitation of complex strategies, Management Science, 46, 824, 10.1287/mnsc.46.6.824.11940 · DOI
  49. Sapprasert, 2012, Organizational innovation and its effects, Industrial and Corporate Change, 21, 1283, 10.1093/icc/dts023 · DOI
  50. Serrano-Bedia, 2018, Complementarity between innovation knowledge sources: Does the innovation performance measure matter?, BRQ Business Research Quarterly, 21, 53, 10.1016/j.brq.2017.09.001 · DOI
  51. Simao, 2018, External knowledge sources as antecedents of organizational innovation in firm workplaces: A knowledge-based perspective, Journal of Knowledge Management, 22, 237, 10.1108/JKM-01-2017-0002 · DOI
  52. Sok, 2016, The performance advantages for SMEs of product innovation and marketing resource–capability complementarity in emerging economies, Journal of Small Business Management, 54, 805, 10.1111/jsbm.12172 · DOI
  53. Solís-Molina, 2018, Performance implications of organizational ambidexterity versus specialization in exploitation or exploration: The role of absorptive capacity, Journal of Business Research, 91, 181, 10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.06.001 · DOI
  54. Soto-Acosta, 2018, Information technology, knowledge management and environmental dynamism as drivers of innovation ambidexterity: A study in SMEs, Journal of Knowledge Management, 22, 824, 10.1108/JKM-10-2017-0448 · DOI
  55. Tan, 2010, Flexibility–efficiency tradeoff and performance implications among Chinese SOEs, Journal of Business Research, 63, 356, 10.1016/j.jbusres.2009.04.016 · DOI
  56. Tang, 2012, An investigation of entrepreneurial orientation, perceived environmental hostility, and strategy application among Chinese SMEs, Journal of Small Business Management, 50, 132, 10.1111/j.1540-627X.2011.00347.x · DOI
  57. Tavassoli, 2016, Innovation strategies and firm performance: Simple or complex strategies?, Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 25, 631, 10.1080/10438599.2015.1108109 · DOI
  58. Teece, 1986, Profiting from technological innovation: Implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy, Research Policy, 15, 285, 10.1016/0048-7333(86)90027-2 · DOI · Paper page
  59. Úbeda-García, 2020, Toward a dynamic construction of organizational ambidexterity: Exploring the synergies between structural differentiation, organizational context, and interorganizational relations, Journal of Business Research, 112, 363, 10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.10.051 · DOI
  60. Wu, 2009, Accelerating secondary innovation through organizational learning: A case study and theoretical analysis, Industry and Innovation, 16, 389, 10.1080/13662710903053656 · DOI
  61. Xiang, 2019, Family firms, sustainable innovation and financing cost: Evidence from Chinese hi-tech small and medium-sized enterprises, Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 144, 499, 10.1016/j.techfore.2018.02.021 · DOI
  62. Zhang, 2020, A causal analysis of the role of institutions and organizational proficiencies on the innovation capability of Chinese SMEs, International Business Review, 29, 10.1016/j.ibusrev.2019.101638 · DOI
  63. Zhang, 2018, Open innovation and firm performance: Evidence from the Chinese mechanical manufacturing industry, Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 48, 76, 10.1016/j.jengtecman.2018.04.004 · DOI
  64. Zhang, 2017, Catch-up in nanotechnology industry in China from the aspect of process-based innovation, Asian Journal of Technology Innovation, 25, 5, 10.1080/19761597.2017.1302397 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 40

Metadata

Authors
Zhang, H.
Affiliations
Freie Universität Berlin (DE)
Corresponding author
Zhang, Hailun
ORCID
Zhang, Hailun
Venue
Journal of Innovation & Knowledge
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2022-07
Volume
7
Issue
3
Pages
100192
ISSN
2444-569X (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.jik.2022.100192
OpenAlex
W4283747039
Cited by
40
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 3
FWCI
5.60
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Journal of Innovation & Knowledge (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
  • Econstor (Econstor) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Refubium (Universitätsbibliothek der Freien Universität Berlin) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Universitätsbibliothek der FU Berlin Hochschulschriftenstelle u. Dokumentenserver
Funders
China Scholarship Council (201806330116)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Innovation and Knowledge Management
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Firm Innovation and Growth
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Business Strategies and Innovation
Keywords
small and medium-sized enterprises, innovation complementarity, SME performance, supermodularity, substitutability, organizational innovation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Does combining different types of innovation always improve SME performance? An analysis of innovation complementarity. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.jik.2022.100192
The paper
Zhang, H. (2022). Does combining different types of innovation always improve SME performance? An analysis of innovation complementarity. Journal of Innovation & Knowledge. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jik.2022.100192