Professional Documents
Culture Documents
(2005),"A leader's guide to creating an innovation culture", Strategy & Leadership, Vol. 33 Iss 4 pp. 38-45 http://
dx.doi.org/10.1108/10878570510608031
(2010),"Organizational culture as determinant of product innovation", European Journal of Innovation Management, Vol. 13
Iss 4 pp. 466-480 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/14601061011086294
Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-srm:406254 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service
information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please
visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of
more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online
products and additional customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication
Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation.
probably best described as a pervasive attitude is indicative of the way the business runs itself
that allows business to see beyond the present on a daily and routine basis. In one sense it is
and create the future. In short, innovation is the encapsulation of the organisations true
the engine of change and in todays fiercely priorities.
competitive environment resisting change is Humans are active observers of the envi-
dangerous. Companies cannot protect them- ronment in which they live. They shape the
selves from change regardless of their excel- environment and are shaped by the environ-
lence or the vastness of their current resource ment in which they exist and from which they
basin. Change, while it brings uncertainty and infer organisational priorities. From this
risk, also creates opportunity. The key driver understanding they align themselves to
of the organisations ability to change is inno- achieve their own particular ends. At times
vation. However, simply deciding that the these personal ends may coincide with those
organisation has to be innovative is not suffi- of the organisation or they may conflict.
cient. That decision must be backed by Understanding and perceptions of the envi-
actions that create an environment in which ronment act as guiding mechanisms. The
people are so comfortable with innovation practices and procedures that come to define
that they create it. these perceptions are labelled climate.
Culture is a primary determinant of inno- Scheider et al. (1996) define four dimensions
Downloaded by Multimedia University At 19:14 13 September 2016 (PT)
The parameters listed above help to define Furthermore, culture can be thought of as
climate. It is primarily from these sources that having two components: explicit or implicit.
employees draw inferences about the organi- The distinction between explicit and implicit
sational environment in which they reside and components of culture is important in that it
understand the priorities accorded to certain allows a better understanding of how to
goals that the organisation espouses. analyse and manage it. Explicit culture repre-
Closely allied to the concept of climate is sents the typical patterns of behaviour by the
culture. Organisational culture refers to people and the distinctive artefacts that they
deeply held beliefs and values. Culture is produce and live within. Implicit component
therefore, in a sense, a reflection of climate, of culture refers to a values, beliefs, norms
but operates at a deeper level. Whereas cli- and premises which underline and determine,
mate is observable in the practices and poli- the observed patterns of behaviour (i.e. those
cies of the organisation, the beliefs and values expressed within explicit culture). The dis-
of culture are not visible at that level but exist tinction is necessary because it serves to
as cognitive schema which govern behaviour highlight that it is easier to manipulate explicit
and actions to given environmental stimuli. aspects when trying to fashion organisational
To illustrate the inter-linkage, 3M has the change. For example, in trying to make the
practice of setting aside a certain amount of company customer oriented it may be possi-
Downloaded by Multimedia University At 19:14 13 September 2016 (PT)
time for employees to do creative work on ble to elicit certain actions and behaviours
their own initiatives. To support this, specific from employees through relatively simple
seed funding is provided, and the individuals training in customer satisfaction techniques
are encouraged to share and involve and but not necessarily effect any change in
become involved in each others projects. implicit culture. A change in implicit culture
These practices and support (climate) make would necessitate altering the value set of the
individuals believe that senior management individual members to the extent that it
values innovation (culture). Culture thus became an unconscious norm of action,
appears to stem from the interpretations that rather than guided by procedural or other
employees give to their experience of organi- organisational control routines. The degree
sational reality (why things are the way they and extent to which this happens is dependent
are and the how and why of organisational on the strength of the culture.
priorities.) The strength of culture depends primarily
If the notion of innovation culture is to be on two things:
useful, it is important to be clear about what (1) Pervasiveness of the norms beliefs and
we mean by the term. Failure to specify it behaviours in the explicit culture (the
clearly leads to confusion and misunderstand- proportion of members holding strongly
ing. The question, what is innovation culture, to specific beliefs and standards of behav-
is pertinent yet complex. The reason for this is iours).
partly to do with the way the concept of cul- (2) Match between the implicit and explicit
ture has evolved and partly to do with the aspects of culture.
inherent complexity within the concept itself.
Another way of looking at culture is in terms
It is perhaps important to remember that the
of cultural norms. Creating culture through
concept of corporate culture has developed
use of words is however seldom enough.
from anthropological attempts to understand
Essentially norms vary along two dimensions
whole societies. The term, over time, came to
(O Reilly, 1989):
be used to other social groupings, ranging
(1) The intensity: amount of approval/disap-
from whole nations, corporations, depart-
proval attached to an expectation.
ments and even teams within businesses.
(2) Crystallisation: prevalence with which the
There are a multitude of definitions of
norm is shared.
culture but most suggest culture is the pattern
of arrangement or behaviour adopted by a For instance when analysing an organisations
group (society, corporation, or team) as the culture it may be that certain values are held
accepted way of solving problems. As such, widely but with no intensity, e.g. everyone
culture includes all the institutionalised ways understands what top management wants,
and the implicit beliefs, norms, values and but there is no strong approval/disapproval.
premises which underline and govern By way of contrast, it may be that a given
behaviour. norm such as innovation, is positively valued
32
Culture and climate for innovation European Journal of Innovation Management
Pervaiz K. Ahmed Volume 1 Number 1 1998 3043
in one group (marketing and R&D) and or authority cannot. Moreover, given the
negatively valued by another (say manufactur- nature of culture and climate, it is clear that
ing). There is intensity but no crystallisation. senior managers play a critical role in shaping
It is only when there exist both intensity and culture, since they are able to give priority to
consensus that strong cultures exist. This is innovation, as well as make efforts, in terms of
why it is difficult to develop or change culture. rewards for instance, to guard against compla-
Strong cultures score highly on each of the cency. Employees take the priorities set by
above attributes. Moreover, really strong what management values, and use these to
cultures work at the implicit level and exert a guide their actions. The challenge for man-
greater degree of control over peoples behav- agement then is to make sure that the employ-
iour and beliefs. Strong cultures can be bene- ees make the right type of attributions, since
ficial as well as harmful, depending on the any mismatches or miscommunication quite
circumstances in which the organisation finds easily leads to confusion and chaos.
itself. The value of strong cultures is that by
virtue of deeply-held assumptions and beliefs
Organisational culture and effectiveness
the organisation is able to facilitate behaviours
in accordance to organisational principles. A Having examined the issue of defining cul-
company that can create strong culture has ture, it is necessary to check the attributes that
Downloaded by Multimedia University At 19:14 13 September 2016 (PT)
employees who believe in its products, its make for its effectiveness. The topic of culture
customers, and its processes. and effectiveness is of central importance, yet
However, organisations need also to be the area is beset by a formidable set of
wary of a strong culture. As well as being a research problems. According to Denison and
strength, it can in circumstances be a hin- Mishra (1995), any theory of cultural effec-
drance. To effectively use culture over the tiveness must encompass a broad range of
long term, organisations need to also possess phenomena extending from core assumptions
certain values and assumptions about accept- to visible artefacts, and from social structures
ing change. These values must be driven by to individual meaning. In addition, the theory
the strategic direction in which the company must also address culture as symbolic repre-
is moving. Without these a strong culture can sentations of past attempts at adaptation and
be a barrier to recognising the need for survival, as well as a set of limiting or enabling
change, and being able to reconstitute itself conditions for future adaptation. Even though
even if the need is recognised. Supporting this attempts at integration have been made there
apparently contradictory facet of culture, is still very limited consensus regarding a
Denison (1990), in a longitudinal study found universal theory, and a great deal of scepti-
evidence that suggests incoherent and weak cism exists about whether culture can ever be
cultures at one point in time were associated measured in a way that allows one organisa-
with greater organisational effectiveness in the tion to be compared with another.
future, and that some strong cultures eventu-
ally led to decline in corporate performance. Empirical evidence: culture effectiveness
Clearly, balance and understanding of context The empirical work on organisational culture
is important. Cultures with strong drive for can be traced back early to the work of classi-
innovation and change can lead to problems cal organisation theorists such as Burns and
when market circumstances and customer Stalker (1961), Lawrence and Lorsh (1967),
requirements demand predictability and Likert (1961). In more recent times a vast
conforming to specifications. John Scullys base of popular literature on the subject was
rescue of Apple Computers from the innova- started by writers such as Peters and Water-
tive but less predictable culture created by man (1982) in espousing a theory of excel-
Steve Jobs is a good example of the weakness lence, which purports to identify cultural
of a strong culture. characteristics of successful companies.
Generally we can say that because culture Numerous studies have produced evidence
can directly affect behaviour it can help a which highlights the importance of culture to
company to prosper. An innovative culture organisational performance and effectiveness.
can make it easy for senior management to To cite a handful of exemplary studies, Wilkins
implement innovation strategies and plans.. and Ouchi (1983) discuss the concept of
The key benefit is that often it can do things clan organisation and explore the hypotheti-
that simple use of formal systems, procedures cal conditions under which clans would be
33
Culture and climate for innovation European Journal of Innovation Management
Pervaiz K. Ahmed Volume 1 Number 1 1998 3043
more efficient organisational forms. Gordon high conformity and little or no dissent.
(1985) highlighted that high and low per- Nonetheless in each case the degree of
forming companies in the banking and utili- consistency of the system is a salient trait
ties industries had different culture profiles. of the organisations culture.
Kotter and Heskett (1992) present an analysis (3) Adaptability, or the capacity for internal
of the relationship between strong cultures, change in response to external conditions, is a
adaptive cultures and effectiveness. Most cultural trait that is positively related to
recently Deshpande et al. (1993) link culture effectiveness. Effective organisations must
types to innovativeness. Deshpande et al., develop norms and beliefs that support
using a synthesis of over 100 previous studies their capacity to receive and interpret
in organisational behaviour, sociology and signals from their environment and trans-
anthropology, define four generic culture late them into cognitive, behavioural and
types: market culture, adhocracy culture, clan structural changes. When consistency
culture and hierarchical culture. Their study becomes detached from the external
appears to suggest that a certain variety of environment, firms will often develop into
cultures are more able to enhance innovative- insular bureaucracies, and are unlikely to
ness than other types. Market and adhocracy be adaptable.
cultures score highly for high performance (4) Sense of mission or long term vision is a
Downloaded by Multimedia University At 19:14 13 September 2016 (PT)
other things, this culture-cognitive style communication via the written word;
match suggests that organisational conditions much information flow upwards; directives
flow downwards.
(including training programs) supportive of
creativity will be effective only to the extent
that the potential and current organisational Cultural norms for innovation
members know of and prefer these conditions.
Bearing in mind that the external context
impacts heavily upon innovation and recipro-
Structure and innovation cally, the intrinsic creativity inherent in the
organisation defines its ability to adapt to, and
Although most research appears to agree that
even shape the environment, we can ask how
innovation is influenced by social processes,
can culture promote innovation? Indeed does
research in this area thus far has taken a back
culture hinder or enhance the process of
seat to research on individual differences and
creativity and innovation? The answer is that
antecedents. Generally it can be said that
it simply depends on the norms that are wide-
innovation is enhanced by organic structures
ly held by the organisation. If the right types
rather than mechanistic structures. Innova-
of norms are held and are widely shared then
tion is increased by the use of highly participa- culture can activate creativity. Just as easily, if
tive structures and cultures (e.g. high perfor- the wrong culture exists, no matter the effort
mance-high commitment work systems and good intention of individuals trying to
(Burnside, 1990). For instance, an idea promote innovation, few ideas are likely to be
champion must be made to feel part of the forthcoming .
total innovation; at the very least he/she must A variety of research (Andrew, 1996;
be allowed to follow the progress of the inno- Filipczak, 1997; Judge et al., 1997; OReilly,
vation. This builds involvement via ownership 1989; Picken and Dess, 1997; Pinchot and
and enhances attachment and commitment at Pinchot, 1996; Schneider et al., 1996; Warner
the organisational level. There is also a strong et al., 1997), appear to point to the same set of
case here to let the individual lead the project critical norms involved in promoting and
in a total sense from beginning to end. implementing innovation and creativity.
Norms that promote innovation are pre-
Organic structures promote innovation sented below.
freedom from rules;
participative and informal; Challenge and belief in action
many views aired and considered; The degree of which employees are involved
face to face communication; little red tape; in daily operations and the degree of stretch
inter-disciplinary teams; breaking down required.
departmental barriers; Key attributes:
emphasis on creative interaction and aims; dont be obsessed with precision;
36
Culture and climate for innovation European Journal of Innovation Management
Pervaiz K. Ahmed Volume 1 Number 1 1998 3043
eliminate mixed messages; innovation, exert just a little bit more effort
shared vision and common direction; towards creativity goals, care a just a little bit
build consensus; more about their work, then the statement
may produce a positive return on the invest-
mutual respect and trust;
ment needed to create it.
concern for the whole organisation.
So what makes a statement effective?
According to Ledford et al. (1994), an effec-
Organisational structure: autonomy and
tive statement consists of four basic guiding
flexibility
principles to bring a statement to life:
The degree to which the structure facilitates
(1) Make it a compelling statement. Avoid
innovation activities.
boring details and routine descriptions.
Key attributes:
(2) Install an effective communication and
decision making responsibility at lower
implementation process.
levels;
(3) Creates strong linkage between the
decentralised procedures;
philosophy and the systems governing
freedom to act;
behaviour.
expectation of action; (4) Have an ongoing process of affirmation
belief the individual can have an impact; and renewal.
delegation;
quick, flexible decision making, minimise
bureaucracy. Leadership and innovation culture
Leading edge organisations consistently
Corporate missions, philosophy innovate, and do so with courage. It is the task
statements and innovation culture of organisational leaders to provide the cul-
ture and climate that nurtures and acknowl-
Having a clear corporate philosophy enables edges innovation at every level. Notwithstand-
individuals to co-ordinate their activities to ing the fact that leadership is critically impor-
achieve common purposes, even in the tant, it is nevertheless insufficient on its own
absence of direction from their managers to build a culture of continuous improvement
(Ouchi, 1983). One effect of corporate state- and innovation. To build a culture of innova-
ments is their influence in creating a strong tion, many innovation champions must be
culture capable of appropriately guiding identified, recruited, developed, trained,
behaviours and actions. However there is also encouraged and acknowledged throughout
a degree of doubt as to whether statements of the organisation.
credo have any value in driving the organisa- In order to build a successful and sustain-
tion forward. Most statements encountered able culture of innovation, leadership needs to
often are of little value because they fail to accomplish two broad tasks. First leaders
grab peoples attention or motivate them to need to be acutely sensitive to their
38
Culture and climate for innovation European Journal of Innovation Management
Pervaiz K. Ahmed Volume 1 Number 1 1998 3043
environment and acutely aware of the impact effectively seed a climate conducive to innova-
that they themselves have on those around tion. It is important to note that it is not suffi-
them. This sensitivity enables them to provide cient to only emphasise one or few practices.
an important human perspective to the task at Climates are created by numerous elements
hand and is critical because it is only within coming together to reinforce employee per-
this awareness that the leader can begin to ceptions. Weaknesses or contradictions, even
bridge the gap between leaderspeak and the along single dimensions, can quite easily
real world of organisational culture. The debilitate efforts. For example, if rewards are
second factor is the ability of leaders to accept not structured for innovation but are given for
and deal with ambiguity. Innovation cannot efficient performance of routine operations,
occur without ambiguity, and organisations then no matter how seductive the other cues
and individuals that are not able to tolerate and perceptions are, employees are likely to
ambiguity in the work place environment and respond with caution and uncertainty. This is
relationships reproduce only routine actions. particularly the case because perceptions of
Innovative structures for example cannot have the climate are made on aggregates of experi-
all attendant problems worked out in advance. ence.
Leaders need to build a deep appreciation of Additionally, management create climate
this fact, otherwise there will be a tendency to not by what they say but by their actions. It is
Downloaded by Multimedia University At 19:14 13 September 2016 (PT)
create cultures of blame. Tolerance of ambi- through visible actions over time rather than
guity allows space for risk taking, and explo- through simple statements that employees
ration of alternative solution spaces which do begin to cement perceptions. It is only when
not always produce business results. This employees see things happening around them,
hedges against constant deployment of tried and to things that push them towards innova-
and tested routines for all occasions. Tom tion, that they begin to internalise the values
Peters comes close to the mark in highlighting of innovation. At innovative companies, the
that most successful managers have an unusu- whole system of organisational function is
al ability to resolve paradox, to translate con- geared-up to emphasise innovation (who gets
flicts and tensions into excitement, high hired, how they are rewarded, how the organi-
commitment and superior performance. sation is designed and laid out, what processes
Characteristics that distinguish highly are given priority and resource back-up, and
innovative firms against less innovative com- so on).
panies are as follows:
Top management commits both financial Leadership, innovation and
and emotional support to innovation, and empowerment
they promote innovation through champi-
ons and advocates for innovation. Empowering people to innovate is one of the
Top management has to ensure that realis- most effective ways for leaders to mobilise the
tic and accurate assessments of the markets energies of people to be creative. Combined
are made for the planned innovation. with leadership support and commitment,
Highly innovative firms are close to the end empowerment gives people freedom to take
users, and are accurately able to assess responsibility for innovation. Empowerment
potential demand. in the presence of strong cultures that guide
actions and behaviour produces both energy
Top management ensures that innovation
and enthusiasm for consistent work towards
projects get the necessary support from all
an innovative goal. Employees themselves are
levels of the organisation.
able to devise ways that allow them to inno-
Top management ensures that structured
vate and accomplish their tasks. The only
methodology/systems are set in place so
serious problem with empowerment occurs
that each innovation goes through a careful
when it is provided in an organisation without
screening process prior to actual imple-
a strong value system capable of driving activ-
mentation.
ities in a unified and aligned manner to the
The above suggests that senior management super-ordinate goals of the organisation. In
play a pivotal role in enhancing or hindering these conditions, empowerment is little less
organisational innovation. If senior manage- than abdication of responsibility, and when
ment are able to install all of the above types responsibility and power is pushed down-
of procedures and practices then they wards, chaos typically ensues.
39
Culture and climate for innovation European Journal of Innovation Management
Pervaiz K. Ahmed Volume 1 Number 1 1998 3043
Even with empowerment, innovative They need also to understand the penalties if
actions can be incapacitated. Often people inefficiencies creep into aspects of their task.
encounter organisational barriers which In this way, understanding of risk provides
inhibit innovation. Some typical organisation- clear definition of the priority and space for
al barriers encountered are listed below: innovative actions. Without knowing that risk
self-imposed barriers; tolerance exists within the organisation,
unwarranted assumptions; employees tend not to be willing to try and
one correct answer thinking; innovate, or engage in activities that are a
failing to challenge the obvious; departure from tradition.
pressure to conform; The best way for leaders to define the action
fear of looking foolish. space, is not to be so precise as to discourage
innovation, but to stipulate a broad direction
Killer phrases also abound, a few of which are
which is consistent and clear. This means that
listed below:
as leaders they must be capable of accepting
it will cost too much;
ambiguity, and able to place trust in employ-
we have never done things that way;
ees ability to stretch out to goals rather than
if its that good, why hasnt someone
prescribe details of specific actions which stifle
thought of it before?;
and smother creative actions.
has it been done somewhere else?;
Downloaded by Multimedia University At 19:14 13 September 2016 (PT)
yes, but
Structure involvement
it cant be done that way;
Involvement is not something that just occurs
its impossible;
on its own. Senior management need to design
etc.
into their organisations ways of buying involve-
Actions that need to be addressed in order for ment. Involvement requires emotional encour-
the empowerment to contribute to innovation agement, as well as an infrastructure to create
are listed below: possibilities of involvement. Organisational
design and layout can be used to create a physi-
Establish meaningful actions cal environment to enhance interaction.
boundary Awards and special recognition schemes are
For employees to be creative and innovative other mechanisms to encourage buy-in into
they need to understand the primacy of the innovation as a philosophy and way of organi-
innovation agenda, and need to understand sational life. Establishing specific mechanisms
how far they are being empowered to achieve for structured involvement such as quality
these ends. Successful companies need to circles is yet another device to encourage active
draw actions boundary through a process of participation into the programme. Without
explicitly defining the domain of action and direct structures to induce innovation, leader-
the priority, and the level of responsibility and ship commitment to innovation remains an
empowerment provided to reach these ends. empty exhortation and produces empty results.
Most often such transmission occurs through
mission and vision statements. Devised cor- Accountability
rectly, these statements can act as powerful A very common problem in empowered
enablers. Incorrectly, they can be just as innovation is that everyone is encouraged to
powerful disablers breeding cynicism and participate in cross-functional process
discontent. involvement, to an extent that almost every-
body loses track of who is accountable for
Define risk tolerance what. The result of unrestricted and uncon-
Employees need to know the level of risks that trolled empowerment is chaos. As new
they can take safely. This helps them to define processes are put in place then new forms of
the space within which they are allowed to act behavioural guidance must be provided and
in an empowered manner, and the occasions must be accompanied by redefinitions of
when they need to approach organisational responsibility. While empowerment, on the
ratification for engaging in actions. For exam- surface, looks like an unstructured process, in
ple, employees need to understand how much reality it is anything but that. It is in fact a
time they can spend on their pet projects, and clear definition of domains in which the indi-
how much effort they need to ensure that their viduals are allowed to exert creative discre-
routine operations are not made sub-optimal. tion, and the responsibility that they must
40
Culture and climate for innovation European Journal of Innovation Management
Pervaiz K. Ahmed Volume 1 Number 1 1998 3043
execute while engaging in their total task as innovative companies behave as focused
employees of the organisation. communities whereas less innovative compa-
nies units behave more like traditional
Action orientation rather than bureaucratic departments. They suggest four
bureaucracy orientation managerial practices that influence the mak-
To ensure that innovation occurs, leaders ing of such goal-directed communities.
must ensure that there are no bureaucratic
bottlenecks which suffocate attempts at inno- Balanced autonomy
vation. One primary culprit of this is overly Autonomy is defined as having control over
bureaucratic procedures for rubber-stamping means as well as the ends of ones work. This
approval or reporting requirements. Faced concept appears to be one of central impor-
with such obstacles, a lot of employee tance. There are two types of autonomy:
initiatives fail. In fact a large proportion of strategic autonomy: the freedom to set
suggestion schemes appear to fail not because ones own agenda;
there is a lack of ideas but because of the operational autonomy: the freedom to
protocols, and the failure of the protocols to
attack a problem, once it has been set by
process with sufficient speed either a
the organisation, in ways that are deter-
favourable or unfavourable response.
mined by the individual self.
Downloaded by Multimedia University At 19:14 13 September 2016 (PT)
building a culture that cannot be copied? Are Ekvall Goran (1993), Creativity in project work: a longitu-
you busy inventing a narrow base of products, dinal study of a product development project,
or are you experimenting with creating innova- Creativity and Innovation Management, March,
tiveness? Without doubt the most innovative pp. 17-26.
companies of the future will be dominated by Gordon, (1985), The relationship between corporate
those that do not simply focus energies upon culture to industry sector and corporate perfor-
mance, in Kilman, R.H., Saxton, M.J., Serpa, R. and
product and technical innovation, but those
asscoc. (Eds), Gaining Control of Corporate Culture,
who have managed to build enduring environ-
Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA.
ments of human communities striving towards
Guildford, J.P. (1983), Transformation abilities or func-
innovation through the creation of appropriate
tions, Journal of Creative Behaviour, Vol. 17,
cultures and climate. This will be the energy of pp. 75-83.
renewal and the drive to a successful future.
Judge, W.Q., Fryxell, G.E. and Dooley, R.S. (1997), The
new task of R&D, management: creating goal
References directed communities for innovation, California
Management Review, Vol. 39 No. 3, Spring,
Amabile, T.M. (1988), A model of creativity and innovation pp. 72-84.
in organisations, in Straw, B.M. and Kotter, J.P. and Heskett, J.L. (1992), Corporate Culture and
Cummings, L.L. (Eds), Research in Organisational
Performance, Free Press, New York, NY.
Behaviour, Vol. 10, pp. 123-67, JAI Press, Greenwich,
Downloaded by Multimedia University At 19:14 13 September 2016 (PT)
Burnside, R.M. (1990), Improving corporate climates for Pinchot, E. and Pinchot, G. (1996), Seeding a climate for
creativity, in West, M.A. and Farr, J.L. (Eds), Innova- innovation, Executive Excellence, June, pp. 17-18.
tion and Creativity at Work, Wiley, Chichester, Shalley, C.E. and Oldham, G.R. (1985), Effects of goal
pp. 265-84. difficulty and expected evaluation on intrinsic
Bruner, M. (1996), Adopting an organisational culture of motivation: a laboratory study, Academy of
continual change, CMA Magazine, September Management Journal, Vol. 28, pp. 628-40.
1996. Schein, E.H. (1985) Organisational Culture and Leadership,
Carroll, J.B. (1985), Domains of cognitive ability, paper Jossey Bass, San Francisco, CA.
presented at the meeting of American Association
Schneider, B., Gunnarson, S.K. and Niles-Jolly, K. (1996),
for the Advancement of Science, Los Angeles.
Creating the climate and culture of success,
Collins, J.C. and Porras, J.I. (1991), Organisational vision Organisational Dynamics, pp. 17-29.
and visionary organisations, California Manage-
ment Review, Vol. 34, pp. 30-52. Schneider, B., Brief, A.P. and Guzzo, R.A. (1996), Creating
a climate and culture for sustainable change,
Denison, D.R. (1990), Corporate Culture and Organisation-
Organisational Dynamics, Spring, pp. 7-19.
al Effectiveness, Wiley & Sons, New York, NY.
Wilkins, A. and Ouchi, W. (1983), Efficient cultures:
Denison, D.R. and Mishra, A.K. (1995), Toward a theory of
organisational culture and effectiveness, Organisa- exploring the relationship between culture and
tion Science, Vol. 6 No. 2, pp. 204-23. organisational performance, Administrative
Science Quarterly, Vol. 28 No. 60, pp. 468-98.
Deshpande, R., Farley, J.U. and Webster, F.E. (1993),
Corporate culture, customer orientation and Woodman, R.W. and Schoenfeldt, L.F. (1990), An interac-
innovativeness in Japanese firms: a quadrad analy- tionist model of creative behavior, Journal of
sis, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 57, pp. 23-7. Creative Behaviour, Vol. 24, pp. 279-90.
43
This article has been cited by:
1. John M. Keesler. 2016. Trauma-informed Day Services for Individuals with Intellectual/Developmental Disabilities: Exploring
Staff Understanding and Perception within an Innovative Programme. Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities
29:5, 481-492. [CrossRef]
2. Eric Christian Brun. 2016. Ambidexterity and Ambiguity: The Link Between Ambiguity Management and Contextual
Ambidexterity in Innovation. International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management 13:04, 1650013. [CrossRef]
3. XieXuemei Xuemei Xie WuYonghui Yonghui Wu ZengSaixing Saixing Zeng School of Management, Shanghai University,
Shanghai, China Shanghai University, Shanghai, China Shanghai Jiaotong University, Shanghai, China . 2016. A theory
of multi-dimensional organizational innovation cultures and innovation performance in transitional economies. Chinese
Management Studies 10:3, 458-479. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
4. Irene Y.H. Fan IKI-SEA, Bangkok University, Bangkok, Thailand Rongbin W.B. Lee Department of Industrial and Systems
Engineering, Knowledge Management and Innovation Research Center, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hung Hom,
Hong Kong . 2016. Intellectual capital-based innovation planning: empirical studies using wiNK model. Journal of Intellectual
Capital 17:3, 553-569. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
5. Kong Seng Lai, Nor'Aini Yusof, Ernawati Mustafa Kamal. 2016. Organizational culture of the architectural firm: a case in a
developing country. International Journal of Construction Management 16:3, 197-208. [CrossRef]
6. Xiangzheng Deng, Zhan Wang, Chunhong Zhao. 2016. ECONOMIC EVOLUTION IN CHINA ECOLOGICALLY
FRAGILE REGIONS. Journal of Economic Surveys 30:3, 552-576. [CrossRef]
Downloaded by Multimedia University At 19:14 13 September 2016 (PT)
7. Minglong Li, Cathy H.C. Hsu. 2016. Linking customer-employee exchange and employee innovative behavior. International
Journal of Hospitality Management 56, 87-97. [CrossRef]
8. Anna Arcari, Anna Pistoni, Enrico Moretto, Paolo Ossola, Daniele Tonini. 2016. How Italian companies are monitoring
innovation. MANAGEMENT CONTROL :2, 143-165. [CrossRef]
9. DayanMumin Mumin Dayan Mumin Dayan is an Associate Professor at the United Arab Emirates University, UAE. He
received his MBA degree in Marketing from the Bennett S. Le Bow College of Business at Drexel University and PhD
degree in Marketing from the Fox School of Business in Temple University, Philadelphia, PA, USA. His current research
areas are new product/technology development, cognitive/social psychology in innovation and small business management
and decision-making in teams. His work has been published in journals such as Industrial Marketing Management, Journal
of Product Innovation Management, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, R&D Management, Long Range
Planning and Research Policy. ZaccaRobert Robert Zacca Robert Zacca is an Assistant Professor of Management and
Entrepreneurship at the United Arab Emirates University, UAE. He earned his MBA degree from Plymouth State University,
New Hampshire, UK, and PhD in Entrepreneurship from Cracow University of Economics, Poland. His current research
areas are drivers and enablers of innovative enterprises and entrepreneurial creativity. He has recently won a National Research
Foundation grant from the UAE to investigate the Drivers and Enablers of Innovative Start-ups within the UAE, and
his work has been published in journals such as Management Decision Journal, International Journal of Entrepreneurship
& Innovation, Creativity and Innovation Management and IEEE International Technology Management Conferences.
HusainZafar Zafar Husain Zafar Husain is an Assistant Professor of Management of Technology and Innovation in the
College of Business Administration at Al Ain University of Science and Technology, UAE. He completed his PhD at
Indian Institute of Technology, New Delhi, India. His research interests focus on strategic management of technology
and innovation, technology-based innovation and entrepreneurship, business intelligence and performance management. Di
BenedettoAnthony Anthony Di Benedetto Anthony Di Benedetto is a Professor of Marketing and Supply Chain Management
and Senior Washburn Research Fellow, Temple University, Philadelphia, PA, USA. He was Editor-in-Chief of Journal of
Product Innovation Management for nine years and is the co-author of New Products Management. He earned his PhD,
MBA and BSc at McGill University, Montreal, Canada. His research is in the areas of product development, product
launch strategy and industrial marketing management. He has published in journals such as Journal of Product Innovation
Management, Management Science, Strategic Management Journal, Journal of International Business Studies, Journal of
Operations Management and IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management. RyanJames C. James C. Ryan James C.
Ryan is currently employed as an Assistant Professor of Human Resource Management and Organizational Behavior in the
College of Business and Economics at the United Arab Emirates University, UAE. He completed his PhD at Dublin City
University and MA and BSc in psychology at University College Dublin, Ireland. He has worked in universities in Ireland,
New Zealand and the UAE. His research interests focus on workplace motivation, leadership and culture in organizational
contexts with additional interests in work values and entrepreneurship. College of Business and Economics, United Arab
Emirates University, Al Ain, UAE Department of Business Administration, College of Business, AlFaisal University, Riyadh,
Saudi Arabia College of Business Administration, Al Ain University of Science and Technology, Al Ain, UAE Department
of Marketing and Supply Chain Management, Fox School of Business, Temple University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
Department of Business Administration, College of Business and Economics, United Arab Emirates University, Al Ain,
UAE . 2016. The effect of entrepreneurial orientation, willingness to change, and development culture on new product
exploration in small enterprises. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing 31:5, 668-683. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
10. LasradoFlevy Flevy Lasrado Flevy Lasrado is presently associated with the Sharjah Institute of Technology and heads the
quality assurance department. She completed her PhD at the University of Salford UK, during which she undertook the study
of suggestion schemes. She carries 15+ years of diverse experience in Higher Education (HE) and is actively pursuing research
for quality enhancement in HE sector. ArifMohammed Mohammed Arif Mohammed Arif is a Professor at the School of
Built Environment at the University of Salford UK. RizviAftab Aftab Rizvi Aftab Rizvi is an Associate Professor of Decision
sciences at Manipal University, Dubai. UrdzikChris Chris Urdzik Chris Urdzik is currently an Adjunct Assistant Professor at
Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University-Worldwide, Daytona Beach, Florida, USA. He has over 35 years of industry experience
in aerospace management. He holds masters degrees in Aeronautical Science and Management and regularly lectures in those
disciplines. Quality Assurance Department, Sharjah Institute of Technology, Sharjah, UAE School of Built Environment,
University of Salford, Manchester, UK Department of Business, Manipal University, Dubai, UAE Department of Business
Administration, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University-Worldwide, Daytona Beach, Florida, USA . 2016. Critical success
factors for employee suggestion schemes: a literature review. International Journal of Organizational Analysis 24:2, 315-339.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
11. Siti Hajar Mohd Roffeei, Yusniza Kamarulzaman, Farrah Dina Yusop. 2016. Innovation Culture in Higher Learning
Institutions: A Proposed Framework. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 219, 401-408. [CrossRef]
12. Zeeshan Ali. 2016. Sustainable New Product Development and Social Sustainability: The Impact of Stakeholder Support.
Sustainability: The Journal of Record 9:2, 88-98. [CrossRef]
13. Jane Sutton, Hannah E. Family, Jennifer A. Scott, Heather Gage, Denise A. Taylor. 2016. The influence of organisational
climate on care of patients with schizophrenia: a qualitative analysis of health care professionals views. International Journal
of Clinical Pharmacy 38:2, 344-352. [CrossRef]
Downloaded by Multimedia University At 19:14 13 September 2016 (PT)
14. JOCHEN SCHWEITZER. 2016. HOW CONTRACTS AND CULTURE MEDIATE JOINT TRANSACTIONS OF
INNOVATION PARTNERSHIPS. International Journal of Innovation Management 20:01, 1650005. [CrossRef]
15. Alexandra Durcikova, Kelly J. Fadel. 2016. Knowledge sourcing from repositories: The role of system characteristics and
psychological climate. Information & Management 53:1, 64-78. [CrossRef]
16. Julia C. Naranjo-Valencia, Daniel Jimnez-Jimnez, Raquel Sanz-Valle. 2016. Studying the links between organizational
culture, innovation, and performance in Spanish companies. Revista Latinoamericana de Psicologa 48:1, 30-41. [CrossRef]
17. Anwar Amin, Michael BellEnabling Innovation in Acehnese Schools 137-144. [CrossRef]
18. Marie Heidingsfelder, Kora Kimpel, Kathinka Best, Martina Schraudner. 2015. Shaping Future Adapting design know-
how to reorient innovation towards public preferences. Technological Forecasting and Social Change 101, 291-298. [CrossRef]
19. Annika Steiber, Sverker Alnge. 2015. Organizational innovation: verifying a comprehensive model for catalyzing
organizational development and change. Triple Helix 2:1. . [CrossRef]
20. Jurgita Giniuniene, Lolita Jurksiene. 2015. Dynamic Capabilities, Innovation and Organizational Learning: Interrelations and
Impact on Firm Performance. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 213, 985-991. [CrossRef]
21. Mooweon Rhee, Jin Suk Park, Taeyoung Yoo. 2015. The contradictory roles of ambiguity for innovation in an industry: how
beneficial are standardisation and classification?. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management 27:9, 1114-1128. [CrossRef]
22. Patthera Suwannathat Technopreneurship and Innovation Management Program, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok,
Thailand Pasu Decharin Department of Commerce, Chulalongkorn Business School, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok,
Thailand Anupap Somboonsavatdee Department of Statistics, Chulalongkorn Business School, Chulalongkorn University,
Bangkok, Thailand . 2015. Fostering innovation in public organizations in Thailand. International Journal of Organizational
Analysis 23:4, 528-544. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
23. ERIC CHRISTIAN BRUN. 2015. ON AMBIGUITY TOLERANCE (AT) AND ROLES IN NPD TEAMS: TOWARDS
A NUANCED UNDERSTANDING OF AT. International Journal of Innovation Management 19:05, 1550046. [CrossRef]
24. Anna Karlsson, Katarina Lund Stetler. 2015. Frequency Versus Effect Obstacles to Innovation and Their Relationship to
Innovation Self-Efficacy. International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management 12:05, 1550025. [CrossRef]
25. Katarina Lund Stetler. 2015. Creativity Just in Time? The Role of Delivery Precision in Product Development. International
Journal of Innovation and Technology Management 12:05, 1550026. [CrossRef]
26. Ana Cristina G. Castro Silva, Cristiano Hora de O. Fontes, Ava Santana Barbosa. 2015. Multicriteria evaluation model
for organizational performance management applied to the Polo Fruit Exporter of the So Francisco Valley. Computers and
Electronics in Agriculture 117, 168-176. [CrossRef]
27. M. Muzamil Naqshbandi, Sharan Kaur, Pin Ma. 2015. What organizational culture types enable and retard open innovation?.
Quality & Quantity 49:5, 2123-2144. [CrossRef]
28. N. Chutivongse, N. GerdsriProposed steps to analyze organizational characteristics and develop a roadmap for being an
innovative organization 728-735. [CrossRef]
29. Edison Jair Duque Oliva. 2015. CLIMA DE INNOVACIN PARA LA INNOVACIN. Suma de Negocios 6:14, 125-129.
[CrossRef]
30. Altmann Peter 1 , Engberg Robert 2 1,2Halmstad University, School of Business and Engineering, Halmstad, Sweden
peter.altmann@hh.se, robert.engberg@hh.se . 2015. Managing Human Resources and Technology Innovation: The Impact
of Process and Outcome Uncertainties. International Journal of Innovation Science 7:2, 91-106. [Abstract] [Enhanced Abstract]
[PDF]
31. Najmedin Meshkati, Yalda Khashe. 2015. Operators' Improvisation in Complex Technological Systems: Successfully Tackling
Ambiguity, Enhancing Resiliency and the Last Resort to Averting Disaster. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management
23:2, 90-96. [CrossRef]
32. Tomi J. Kallio Turku School of Economics, University of Turku, Pori, Finland. Kirsi-Mari Kallio Turku School of Economics,
University of Turku, Pori, Finland. Annika Johanna Blomberg Turku School of Economics, University of Turku, Pori,
Finland. . 2015. Physical space, culture and organisational creativity a longitudinal study. Facilities 33:5/6, 389-411.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
33. Abdul Rahim Abu Bakar, Zafar U. Ahmed. 2015. Technology Motivation in E-Marketing Adoption Among Malaysian
Manufacturers. Journal of Transnational Management 20:2, 126-152. [CrossRef]
34. Nader Seyyedamiri, Nezameddin Faghih. 2015. Studying entrepreneurial marketing for information technology SMEs based
on the classic grounded theory. QScience Connect 2015:1, 9. [CrossRef]
35. Julia C. Naranjo-Valencia, Gregorio Caldern-Hernndez. 2015. Construyendo una cultura de innovacin. Una propuesta de
transformacin cultural. Estudios Gerenciales 31:135, 223-236. [CrossRef]
36. Morgan Miles, Audrey Gilmore, Paul Harrigan, Gemma Lewis, Zubin Sethna. 2015. Exploring entrepreneurial marketing.
Journal of Strategic Marketing 23:2, 94-111. [CrossRef]
Downloaded by Multimedia University At 19:14 13 September 2016 (PT)
37. Katarzyna Szczepaska-Woszczyna. 2015. Leadership and Organizational Culture as the Normative Influence of Top
Management on Employee's Behaviour in the Innovation Process. Procedia Economics and Finance 34, 396-402. [CrossRef]
38. Sharn OrchardEntrepreneurship and the Human Capital of Organizational Innovation: The Intrapreneur 111-138. [CrossRef]
39. Amal Ghalib Rashid Al-Mamoori, Zainal Ariffin Ahmad. 2015. Linking Organizational Structure, Technological Support
and Process Innovation: the Mediating Role of Knowledge Sharing in the Iraqi Textile Industry. SHS Web of Conferences
18, 01007. [CrossRef]
40. Peter W. Arbuckle, Michael D. Lepech, Gregory A. Keoleian. 2014. The Role of Concrete Industry Standards as Institutional
Barriers to More Sustainable Concrete Bridge Infrastructure. Advances in Civil Engineering Materials 3:1, 20130109.
[CrossRef]
41. S. Sai Manohar, Shiv R. Pandit. 2014. Core Values and Beliefs: A Study of Leading Innovative Organizations. Journal of
Business Ethics 125:4, 667-680. [CrossRef]
42. Muhammad Shakeel Sadiq Jajja Suleman Dawood School of Business, Lahore University of Management Sciences, Lahore,
Pakistan Shaukat Ali Brah Karachi School of Business and Leadership, Karachi, Pakistan Syed Zahoor Hassan Suleman
Dawood School of Business, Lahore University of Management Sciences, Lahore, Pakistan Vijay R. Kannan Jon M. Huntsman
School of Business, Utah State University, Logan, Utah, USA . 2014. An examination of product innovation and buyer-
supplier relationship in Pakistani firms. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management 63:8, 1031-1045.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
43. Elina Riivari, Anna-Maija Lms. 2014. Does it Pay to Be Ethical? Examining the Relationship Between Organisations
Ethical Culture and Innovativeness. Journal of Business Ethics 124:1, 1-17. [CrossRef]
44. CASPER CLAUDI RASMUSSEN. 2014. INTANGIBLE RESOURCES AS DRIVERS OF HIGH GROWTH.
International Journal of Innovation Management 18:04, 1450021. [CrossRef]
45. David A. Patterson Silver Wolf (Adelv unegv Waya), Catherine Dulmus, Eugene Maguin, John Keesler, Byron Powell. 2014.
Organizational Leaders and Staff Members Appraisals of Their Work Environment Within a Childrens Social Service
System. Human Service Organizations Management, Leadership & Governance 38:3, 215-227. [CrossRef]
46. Ching-Sung Lee, Yen-Cheng Chen, Pei-Ling Tsui, Tung-Han Yu. 2014. Examining the relations between open innovation
climate and job satisfaction with a PLS path model. Quality & Quantity 48:3, 1705-1722. [CrossRef]
47. Senay Sabah, Alan L. Carsrud, Akin Kocak. 2014. The Impact of Cultural Openness, Religion, and Nationalism on
Entrepreneurial Intensity: Six Prototypical Cases of Turkish Family Firms. Journal of Small Business Management 52:2,
306-324. [CrossRef]
48. Rita Zybartait, Ignas Dzemyda. 2014. Creativity Enhancement in Lithuanian Furniture Manufacturing Business According
to International Business Development. Mokslas - Lietuvos ateitis 6:1, 93-102. [CrossRef]
49. Kalanit Efrat. 2014. The direct and indirect impact of culture on innovation. Technovation 34:1, 12-20. [CrossRef]
50. Mita Mehta, Arti Chandani, B. Neeraja. 2014. Creativity and Innovation: Assurance for Growth. Procedia Economics and
Finance 11, 804-811. [CrossRef]
51. Eva Velasco, Ibon Zamanillo, Teresa Garcia Del Valle. 2013. Mobilizing Company Members' Full Innovative Potential. Human
Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing & Service Industries 23:6, 541-559. [CrossRef]
52. KURT MATZLER, DAGMAR E. ABFALTER, TODD A. MOORADIAN, FRANZ BAILOM. 2013. CORPORATE
CULTURE AS AN ANTECEDENT OF SUCCESSFUL EXPLORATION AND EXPLOITATION. International
Journal of Innovation Management 17:05, 1350025. [CrossRef]
53. Kayhan Tajeddini, Ulf Elg, Myfanwy Trueman. 2013. Efficiency and effectiveness of small retailers: The role of customer
and entrepreneurial orientation. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 20:5, 453-462. [CrossRef]
54. Arnifa Asmawi, Sabarudin Zakaria, Chong Chin Wei. 2013. Understanding transformational leadership and R&D culture in
Malaysian universities. Innovation: Management, Policy & Practice 15:3, 287-304. [CrossRef]
55. FLORIAN PALLAS, FLORIAN BCKERMANN, OLIVER GOETZ, KIRSTIN TECKLENBURG. 2013.
INVESTIGATING ORGANISATIONAL INNOVATIVENESS: DEVELOPING A MULTIDIMENSIONAL
FORMATIVE MEASURE. International Journal of Innovation Management 17:04, 1350009. [CrossRef]
56. CEVAHIR UZKURT, RACHNA KUMAR, NURCAN ENSARI. 2013. ASSESSING ORGANIZATIONAL READINESS
FOR INNOVATION: AN EXPLORATORY STUDY ON ORGANIZATIONAL CHARACTERISTICS OF
INNOVATIVENESS. International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management 10:04, 1350018. [CrossRef]
57. Ray Uzwyshyn, Aida Marissa Smith, Priscilla Coulter, Christy Stevens, Susan Hyland. 2013. A Virtual, Globally Dispersed
Twenty-First Century Academic Library System. The Reference Librarian 54:3, 226-235. [CrossRef]
58. Adegoke Oke. 2013. Linking manufacturing flexibility to innovation performance in manufacturing plants. International
Journal of Production Economics 143:2, 242-247. [CrossRef]
59. Jerome Gard, Guido Baltes, Daniel Wehle, Bernhard KatzyAn integrating model of autonomy in corporate entrepreneurship
1-14. [CrossRef]
Downloaded by Multimedia University At 19:14 13 September 2016 (PT)
60. Salih Yesil, Ahmet Kaya. 2013. The Effect of Organizational Culture on Firm Financial Performance: Evidence from a
Developing Country. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 81, 428-437. [CrossRef]
61. Salih Yesil, Fikret Sozbilir. 2013. An Empirical Investigation into the Impact of Personality on Individual Innovation Behaviour
in the Workplace. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 81, 540-551. [CrossRef]
62. Annika SteiberDepartment of Technology Management and Economics, Chalmers University of Technology, Gothenburg,
Sweden Sverker AlngeDepartment of Technology Management and Economics, Chalmers University of Technology,
Gothenburg, Sweden. 2013. A corporate system for continuous innovation: the case of Google Inc. European Journal of
Innovation Management 16:2, 243-264. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
63. Arnifa Asmawi, Sabarudin Zakaria, Chong Chin Wei. 2013. Understanding transformational leadership and R&D culture in
Malaysian universities. Innovation: Management, Policy & Practice 2612-2649. [CrossRef]
64. Adela J. McMurray, Md. Mazharul Islam, James C. Sarros, Andrew Pirola-Merlo. 2013. Workplace Innovation in a Nonprofit
Organization. Nonprofit Management and Leadership 23:3, 367-388. [CrossRef]
65. K. B. Tharan, Somayehsdat BahmanniaTransformational leadership and homogeneous innovative behavior: Moderate roles
of collectivist orientation and subjective norm toward knowledge sharing 55-58. [CrossRef]
66. Norbert Burger, Thorsten Staake, Elgar Fleisch, Christofer Hierold. 2013. Managing technology development teams -
exploring the case of microsytems and nanosystems. R&D Management 43:2, 162-186. [CrossRef]
67. Victor Wilfredo Bohorquez LopezBased at CENTRUM Catolica, PUCP, Lima, Peru. Jose EstevesBased at IE Business
School, Madrid, Spain. 2013. Acquiring external knowledge to avoid wheel reinvention. Journal of Knowledge Management
17:1, 87-105. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
68. Haris M. Noor, Bariah Dzulkifli. 2013. Assessing Leadership Practices, Organizational Climate and Its Effect towards
Innovative Work Behaviour in R&D. International Journal of Social Science and Humanity 129-133. [CrossRef]
69. Karun Pratoom, Gomon Savatsomboon. 2012. Explaining factors affecting individual innovation: The case of producer group
members in Thailand. Asia Pacific Journal of Management 29:4, 1063-1087. [CrossRef]
70. Monique Goepel, Katharina Hlzle, Dodo zu Knyphausen-Aufse. 2012. Individuals Innovation Response Behaviour: A
Framework of Antecedents and Opportunities for Future Research. Creativity and Innovation Management 21:4, 412-426.
[CrossRef]
71. Antonio LerroSusanne NilssonBased in the Division of Integrated Product Development, School of Industrial Engineering
and Management, Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden. 2012. Exploring problem finding in a medical device
company. Measuring Business Excellence 16:4, 66-78. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
72. Elisabeth Clark, Brian Webster. 2012. Innovation and its contribution to the scholarship of learning and teaching. Nurse
Education Today 32:7, 729-731. [CrossRef]
73. Ian CombeAston University, Birmingham, UKIan CombeMarketing Group, Aston Business School, Aston University,
Birmingham, UK. 2012. Marketing and flexibility: debates past, present and future. European Journal of Marketing 46:10,
1257-1267. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
74. Elina RiivariOpen University, University of Jyvskyl, Jyvskyl, Finland AnnaMaija LmsSchool of Business and
Economics, University of Jyvskyl, Jyvskyl, Finland Johanna KujalaSchool of Economics and Business Administration,
University of Tampere, Tampere, Finland Erika HeiskanenJuuriharja Consulting Group Oy, Helsinki, Finland. 2012. The
ethical culture of organisations and organisational innovativeness. European Journal of Innovation Management 15:3, 310-331.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
75. Aneika L. SimmonsDepartment of Management and Marketing, Sam Houston State University, Huntsville, Texas, USA
Victor E. SowerDepartment of Management and Marketing, Sam Houston State University, Huntsville, Texas, USA. 2012.
Leadership sagacity and its relationship with individual creative performance and innovation. European Journal of Innovation
Management 15:3, 298-309. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
76. E PawlowskiOrganizational innovations and knowledge based enterprises 3-12. [CrossRef]
77. Syed Awais Ahmad Tipu, James C Ryan, Kamel A Fantazy. 2012. Transformational leadership in Pakistan: An examination
of the relationship of transformational leadership to organizational culture and innovation propensity. Journal of Management
& Organization 18:4, 461-480. [CrossRef]
78. Syed Awais Ahmad Tipu, James C Ryan, Kamel A Fantazy. 2012. Transformational leadership in Pakistan: An examination
of the relationship of transformational leadership to organizational culture and innovation propensity. Journal of Management
& Organization 18:04, 461-480. [CrossRef]
79. Mazlum Celik, Omer Turunc, Necdet Bilgin. 2012. Moderating Role of the Ethic. Journal of Applied Sciences 12:6, 544-552.
[CrossRef]
80. Syed Awais Ahmad Tipu, James C. Ryan, Kamel A. Fantazy. 2012. Transformational Leadership in Pakistan: An Examination
of the Relationship of Transformational Leadership to Organizational Culture and Innovation Propensity. Journal of
Management & Organization 997-1046. [CrossRef]
Downloaded by Multimedia University At 19:14 13 September 2016 (PT)
81. Roman KmieciakFaculty of Organisation and Management, Silesian University of Technology, Zabrze, Poland Anna
MichnaFaculty of Organisation and Management, Silesian University of Technology, Zabrze, Poland Anna MeczynskaFaculty
of Organisation and Management, Silesian University of Technology, Zabrze, Poland. 2012. Innovativeness, empowerment
and IT capability: evidence from SMEs. Industrial Management & Data Systems 112:5, 707-728. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
82. Keng-Boon Ooi, Binshan Lin, Pei-Lee Teh, Alain Yee-Loong Chong. 2012. Does TQM support innovation performance
in Malaysia's manufacturing industry?. Journal of Business Economics and Management 13:2, 366-393. [CrossRef]
83. Julia C. Naranjo-Valencia, Daniel Jimnez Jimnez, Raquel Sanz-Valle. 2012. Es la cultura organizativa un determinante de
la innovacin en la empresa?. Cuadernos de Economa y Direccin de la Empresa 15:2, 63-72. [CrossRef]
84. Elizabeth Daniel, Andrew Myers, Keith Dixon. 2012. Adoption rationales of new management practices. Journal of Business
Research 65:3, 371-380. [CrossRef]
85. JASNA PRESTER, MARLI GONAN BOZAC. 2012. ARE INNOVATIVE ORGANIZATIONAL CONCEPTS
ENOUGH FOR FOSTERING INNOVATION?. International Journal of Innovation Management 16:01, 1250005. [CrossRef]
86. TE FU CHEN. 2012. TRANSFORMING KNOWLEDGE INTO ACTION TO REACH INNOVATION CAPACITY
IN HIGH-TECH SMES. International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management 09:01, 1250005. [CrossRef]
87. Ulrik Brandi, Cathrine HasseEmployee-Driven Innovation and Practice-Based Learning in Organizational Cultures 127-148.
[CrossRef]
88. Bari'ah Dzulkifli, Haris Md.NoorFramework of the mediating effect of organizational climate on the relationship between
leadership practices and innovative work behavior 614-619. [CrossRef]
89. Bjrn Remneland-Wikhamn, Wajda Wikhamn. 2011. Open Innovation Climate Measure: The Introduction of a Validated
Scale. Creativity and Innovation Management 20:4, 284-295. [CrossRef]
90. PETER PRUD'HOMME VAN REINE, BEN DANKBAAR. 2011. THE DYNAMIC INTERACTION BETWEEN
CORPORATE AND REGIONAL CULTURES: THE CASE OF SOUTHEAST NETHERLANDS. Tijdschrift voor
economische en sociale geografie 102:5, 532-547. [CrossRef]
91. Anne LinkeInstitute of Communication and Media Studies, University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany Ansgar ZerfassInstitute
of Communication and Media Studies, University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany. 2011. Internal communication and innovation
culture: developing a change framework. Journal of Communication Management 15:4, 332-348. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
92. Arnifa Asmawi, Avvari V. Mohan. 2011. Unveiling dimensions of organizational culture: an exploratory study in Malaysian
R&D organizations. R&D Management 41:5, 509-523. [CrossRef]
93. Gregorio Martnde Castro, Pedro LpezSez and Miriam DelgadoVerdeRaquel SanzValleAssociate Professor at the
Department of Management, University of Murcia Julia C. NaranjoValenciaAssociate Professor at the Department of
Industrial Engineering, National University of Colombia. Campus La Nubia, Manizales, Colombia Daniel Jimnez
JimnezAssociate Professor at the Department of Management, University of Murcia. Campus de Espinardo, Murcia,
Spain Laureano PerezCaballeroDoctoral student at the Department of Management, University of Murcia. Campus de
Espinardo, Murcia, Spain. 2011. Linking organizational learning with technical innovation and organizational culture. Journal
of Knowledge Management 15:6, 997-1015. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
94. Asef KarimiDepartment of Agricultural Extension and Education, College of Agriculture, University of Tehran, Karaj,
Iran Iraj MalekmohamadiCollege of Entrepreneurship, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran Mahmoud Ahmadpour
DaryaniDepartment of Agricultural Extension and Education, College of Agriculture, University of Tehran, Karaj, Iran
Ahmad RezvanfarDepartment of Agricultural Extension and Education, College of Agriculture, University of Tehran, Karaj,
Iran. 2011. A conceptual model of intrapreneurship in the Iranian agricultural extension organization. Journal of European
Industrial Training 35:7, 632-657. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
95. Peter Nielsen and Palle RasmussenAalborg University, DenmarkInocencia Mara MartnezLenBusiness Management
Department, Technical University of Cartagena, Cartagena, Spain Jose A. MartnezGarcaTechnical University of Cartagena,
Cartagena, Spain. 2011. The influence of organizational structure on organizational learning. International Journal of
Manpower 32:5/6, 537-566. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
96. Hsing-Er Lin, Edward F. McDonough. 2011. Investigating the Role of Leadership and Organizational Culture in Fostering
Innovation Ambidexterity. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management 58:3, 497-509. [CrossRef]
97. Karen Smith. 2011. Cultivating innovative learning and teaching cultures: a question of garden design. Teaching in Higher
Education 16:4, 427-438. [CrossRef]
98. James C. Sarros, Anne M. Sarros. 2011. Five years on: leadership challenges of an experienced CEO. School Leadership &
Management 31:3, 235-260. [CrossRef]
99. Daniel I. PrajogoDepartment of Management, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia Christopher M. McDermottLally
School of Management and Technology, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, New York, USA. 2011. The relationship
between multidimensional organizational culture and performance. International Journal of Operations & Production
Management 31:7, 712-735. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
Downloaded by Multimedia University At 19:14 13 September 2016 (PT)
100. Ambika Koonj Beharry, Kit Fai PunManaging innovation practices of SMEs in the Caribbean: An exploratory study 324-328.
[CrossRef]
101. James C. SarrosDepartment of Management, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia Brian K. CooperDepartment of
Management, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia Joseph C. SantoraDepartment of Management, Monash University,
Melbourne, Australia School of International Management, Ecole des Ponts ParisTech, Paris, France. 2011. Leadership vision,
organizational culture, and support for innovation in notforprofit and forprofit organizations. Leadership & Organization
Development Journal 32:3, 291-309. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
102. Jan Terje KarlsenNorwegian School of Management BI, Oslo, Norway. 2011. Supportive culture for efficient project
uncertainty management. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business 4:2, 240-256. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
103. Richa AwasthyOrganizational Behaviour Area, International Management Institute, New Delhi, India Vijayalakshmi
ChandrasekaranOrganizational Behaviour Area, IFMR, Chennai, India Rajen K. GuptaHuman Behaviour and Organizational
Development Area, Management Development Institute, Gurgaon, India. 2011. Topdown change in a public sector bank:
lessons from employees' livedin experiences. Journal of Indian Business Research 3:1, 43-62. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
104. Julia C. NaranjoValenciaFacultad de Administracin, Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Manizales, Colombia Daniel
JimnezJimnezDepartmento Organizacin de Empresas y Finanzas, Faculty Economa y Empresa, Universidad de Murcia,
Campus de Espinardo, Espinardo (Murcia), Spain Raquel SanzValleDepartmento Organizacin de Empresas y Finanzas,
Faculty Economa y Empresa, Universidad de Murcia, Campus de Espinardo, Espinardo (Murcia), Spain. 2011. Innovation
or imitation? The role of organizational culture. Management Decision 49:1, 55-72. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
105. B. YanAn approach to new product development management in SMEs 1072-1076. [CrossRef]
106. Ali E. Akgn, Halit Keskin, John C. Byrne. 2010. Procedural Justice Climate in New Product Development Teams:
Antecedents and Consequences. Journal of Product Innovation Management 27:7, 1096-1111. [CrossRef]
107. Rutaichanok Jingjit, Marianna Fotaki. 2010. Confucian Ethics and the Limited Impact of the New Public Management
Reform in Thailand. Journal of Business Ethics 97:S1, 61-73. [CrossRef]
108. Julia C. Naranjo ValenciaUniversidad Nacional de Colombia, Sede Manizales, Colombia Raquel Sanz ValleFacultad de
Economa y Empresa, Universidad de Murcia, Murcia, Spain Daniel Jimnez JimnezFacultad de Economa y Empresa,
Universidad de Murcia, Murcia, Spain. 2010. Organizational culture as determinant of product innovation. European Journal
of Innovation Management 13:4, 466-480. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
109. Dinh Thai Hoang, Barbara Igel, Tritos Laosirihongthong. 2010. Total quality management (TQM) strategy and
organisational characteristics: Evidence from a recent WTO member. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence 21:9,
931-951. [CrossRef]
110. Dunhu LiuResearch on Risk Control of Knowledge Share in Knowledge Network Based on Relation Capital 1-4. [CrossRef]
111. Nigar Demircan akar, Alper Ertrk. 2010. Comparing Innovation Capability of Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises:
Examining the Effects of Organizational Culture and Empowerment. Journal of Small Business Management 48:3, 325-359.
[CrossRef]
112. Tua A. BjrklundAalto University Design Factory, Espoo, Finland. 2010. Enhancing creative knowledgework: challenges
and points of leverage. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business 3:3, 517-525. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
113. Sibylle HeilbrunnRuppin Academic Center, Emek Hefer, Israel. 2010. Entrepreneurial opportunities in changing
communities. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development 17:2, 247-259. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
114. Understanding Large-Scale Project Failure . [CrossRef]
115. Athanasios Hadjimanolis. 2010. Methods of Political Marketing in (Trans)Formation of Innovation Culture. Journal of
Political Marketing 9:1-2, 93-110. [CrossRef]
116. Nilmini Wickramasinghe, Arthur Tatnall, Rajeev K. Bali. 2010. Using Actor-Network Theory to Facilitate a Superior
Understanding of Knowledge Creation and Knowledge Transfer. International Journal of Actor-Network Theory and
Technological Innovation 2:4, 30-42. [CrossRef]
117. Juliet MacMahon, Sarah MacCurtain, Michelle OSullivanBullying, Culture, and Climate in Health care Organizations: A
theoretical Framework 82-96. [CrossRef]
118. T. Gorschek, S. Fricker, K. Palm, S. Kunsman. 2010. A Lightweight Innovation Process for Software-Intensive Product
Development. IEEE Software 27:1, 37-45. [CrossRef]
119. Chun-Liang Chen, Yi-Long Jaw. 2009. Building global dynamic capabilities through innovation: A case study of Taiwan's
cultural organizations. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management 26:4, 247-263. [CrossRef]
120. Michele O'DwyerDepartment of Management and Marketing, Kemmy Business School, University of Limerick, Limerick,
Ireland Audrey GilmoreUniversity of Ulster, Newtownabbey, UK David CarsonUniversity of Ulster, Newtownabbey, UK.
2009. Innovative marketing in SMEs: a theoretical framework. European Business Review 21:6, 504-515. [Abstract] [Full
Text] [PDF]
121. Kriengsak PanuwatwanichGriffith School of Engineering, Griffith University, Gold Coast, Australia Rodney A.
Downloaded by Multimedia University At 19:14 13 September 2016 (PT)
StewartGriffith School of Engineering, Griffith University, Gold Coast, Australia Sherif MohamedGriffith School of
Engineering, Griffith University, Gold Coast, Australia. 2009. Validation of an empirical model for innovation diffusion in
Australian design firms. Construction Innovation 9:4, 449-467. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
122. Michele O'Dwyer, Audrey Gilmore, David Carson. 2009. Innovative marketing in SMEs: an empirical study. Journal of
Strategic Marketing 17:5, 383-396. [CrossRef]
123. Kriengsak Panuwatwanich, Rodney A. Stewart, Sherif Mohamed. 2009. Critical pathways to enhanced innovation diffusion
and business performance in Australian design firms. Automation in Construction 18:6, 790-797. [CrossRef]
124. Eric Brun, Alf Steinar Saetre. 2009. Managing Ambiguity in New Product Development Projects. Creativity and Innovation
Management 18:1, 24-34. [CrossRef]
125. Michele O'DwyerDepartment of Management and Marketing, Kemmy Business School, University of Limerick, Limerick,
Ireland Audrey GilmoreUniversity of Ulster, Jordanstown, Co. Antrim, Northern Ireland David CarsonUniversity of Ulster,
Jordanstown, Co. Antrim, Northern Ireland. 2009. Innovative marketing in SMEs. European Journal of Marketing 43:1/2,
46-61. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
126. Meng-Lei Monica Hu, Jeou-Shyan Horng, Yu-Hua Christine Sun. 2009. Hospitality teams: Knowledge sharing and service
innovation performance. Tourism Management 30:1, 41-50. [CrossRef]
127. Eric BrunDepartment of Business Administration, University of Stavanger, Stavanger, Norway Alf Steinar SaetreThe
Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Industrial Economics and Technology Management, Trondheim, Norway
Martin GjelsvikInternational Research Institute of Stavanger, Stavanger, Norway. 2009. Classification of ambiguity in new
product development projects. European Journal of Innovation Management 12:1, 62-85. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
128. MARISA SMITH, MARCO BUSI, PETER BALL, ROBERT VAN DER MEER. 2008. FACTORS INFLUENCING
AN ORGANISATION'S ABILITY TO MANAGE INNOVATION: A STRUCTURED LITERATURE REVIEW AND
CONCEPTUAL MODEL. International Journal of Innovation Management 12:04, 655-676. [CrossRef]
129. Kriengsak PanuwatwanichGriffith School of Engineering, Griffith University, Gold Coast, Australia Rodney A.
StewartGriffith School of Engineering, Griffith University, Gold Coast, Australia Sherif MohamedGriffith School of
Engineering, Griffith University, Gold Coast, Australia. 2008. The role of climate for innovation in enhancing business
performance. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management 15:5, 407-422. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
130. Taran Patel, Chirag Patel. 2008. Learning cultures for sustained innovation success. Innovation: The European Journal of
Social Science Research 21:3, 233-251. [CrossRef]
131. Sukhvir Singh PanesarCenter for Maintenance and Asset Management, University of Stavanger, Stavanger, Norway and
AGR EMI Team, Sandnes, Norway Tore MarkesetCenter for Maintenance and Asset Management, University of Stavanger,
Stavanger, Norway. 2008. Development of a framework for industrial service innovation management and coordination.
Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering 14:2, 177-193. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
132. Riikka EllonenLappeenranta University of Technology, School of Business and Technology Business Research Center,
Lappeenranta, Finland Kirsimarja BlomqvistLappeenranta University of Technology, School of Business and Technology
Business Research Center, Lappeenranta, Finland Kaisu PuumalainenLappeenranta University of Technology, School of
Business and Technology Business Research Center, Lappeenranta, Finland. 2008. The role of trust in organisational
innovativeness. European Journal of Innovation Management 11:2, 160-181. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
133. Klaus-Peter Wiedmann, Axel Lippold, Holger Buxel. 2008. Status quo der theoretischen und empirischen
Innovationskulturforschung sowie Konstruktkonzeptualisierung des Phnomens Innovationskultur. der markt 47:1, 43-60.
[CrossRef]
134. Jukka OjasaloLaurea University of Applied Sciences, Espoo, Finland. 2008. Management of innovation networks: a case study
of different approaches. European Journal of Innovation Management 11:1, 51-86. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
135. JOHAN FRISHAMMAR, HKAN YLINENP. 2007. MANAGING INFORMATION IN NEW PRODUCT
DEVELOPMENT: A CONCEPTUAL REVIEW, RESEARCH PROPOSITIONS AND TENTATIVE MODEL.
International Journal of Innovation Management 11:04, 441-467. [CrossRef]
136. YANNIS HATZIKIAN, JOHN BOURIS. 2007. INNOVATION MANAGEMENT AND ECONOMIC PERSPECTIVES:
THE CASE OF GREECE. Journal of Enterprising Culture 15:04, 393-419. [CrossRef]
137. K. Yang. 2007. Examining Perceived Honest Performance Reporting by Public Organizations: Bureaucratic Politics and
Organizational Practice. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 19:1, 81-105. [CrossRef]
138. ShuiYee WongDepartment of Manufacturing Engineering and Engineering Management, City University of Hong Kong,
Kowloon, Hong Kong, China KwaiSang ChinDepartment of Manufacturing Engineering and Engineering Management,
City University of Hong Kong, Kowloon, Hong Kong, China. 2007. Organizational innovation management. Industrial
Management & Data Systems 107:9, 1290-1315. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
139. Judy H. Gray, Iain L. Densten. 2007. How Leaders Woo Followers in the Romance of Leadership. Applied Psychology 56:4,
Downloaded by Multimedia University At 19:14 13 September 2016 (PT)
558-581. [CrossRef]
140. Paul Shum, Grier Lin. 2007. A world class new product development best practices model. International Journal of Production
Research 45:7, 1609-1629. [CrossRef]
141. Dinh Thai HoangSchool of Management, Asian Institute of Technology, Klong Luang, Pathumthani, Thailand
Barbara IgelSchool of Management, Asian Institute of Technology, Klong Luang, Pathumthani, Thailand Tritos
LaosirihongthongIndustrial Engineering Department, Faculty of Engineering, Thammasat University, Klong Luang,
Pathumthani, Thailand. 2006. The impact of total quality management on innovation. International Journal of Quality &
Reliability Management 23:9, 1092-1117. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
142. Professor Francisco Jaview CarrilloRon DvirDirector of Innovation Ecology, Israel. Yael SchwartzbergInstitute for Democratic
Education, Israel. Haya AvniPisga Be'er Sheva, Israel. Carol WebbResearch officer at Knowledge and Innovation Systems
Centre, School of Applied Sciences, Cranfield University, Cranfield, UK. Fiona LetticeSenior Lecturer at the Norwich
Business School, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK.. 2006. The future center as an urban innovation engine. Journal
of Knowledge Management 10:5, 110-123. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
143. Matjaz MulejMajda BasticFaculty of Economics and Business, University of Maribor, Maribor, Slovenia Gabrijela Leskovar
SpacapanFaculty of Economics and Business, University of Maribor, Maribor, Slovenia. 2006. What do transition
organizations lack to be innovative?. Kybernetes 35:7/8, 972-992. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
144. CameloOrdaz CarmenFacultad de CC. EE. y Empresariales, Universidad de Cdiz, Cdiz, Spain FernndezAlles Mara de
la LuzFacultad de CC. EE. y Empresariales, Universidad de Cdiz, Cdiz, Spain MartnezFierro SalustianoFacultad de CC.
EE. y Empresariales, Universidad de Cdiz, Cdiz, Spain. 2006. Influence of top management team vision and work team
characteristics on innovation. European Journal of Innovation Management 9:2, 179-201. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
145. Graydon Davison, Paul Hyland. 2006. Continuous innovation in a complex and dynamic environment: The case of the
Australian health service. International Journal of Technology Management & Sustainable Development 5:1, 41-59. [CrossRef]
146. Marcus Arvidsson, Curt R Johansson, sa Ek, Roland Akselsson. 2006. Organizational climate in air traffic control. Applied
Ergonomics 37:2, 119-129. [CrossRef]
147. HANNA-KAISA ELLONEN, PIIA KARHU. 2006. ALWAYS THE LITTLE BROTHER? DIGITAL-PRODUCT
INNOVATION IN THE MEDIA SECTOR. International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management 03:01, 83-105.
[CrossRef]
148. Dermot Fennelly, Kathryn Cormican. 2006. Value chain migration from production to product centred operations: an analysis
of the Irish medical device industry. Technovation 26:1, 86-94. [CrossRef]
149. Paul HumphreysUniversity of Ulster, Belfast, UK Rodney McAdamUniversity of Ulster, Belfast, UK Jonathon
LeckeyUniversity of Ulster, Belfast, UK. 2005. Longitudinal evaluation of innovation implementation in SMEs. European
Journal of Innovation Management 8:3, 283-304. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
150. Graydon DavisonCollege of Law and Business, School of Management, University of Western Sydney, Penrith South DC,
New South Wales, Australia. 2005. Configured for innovation: the case of palliative care. European Journal of Innovation
Management 8:2, 205-226. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
151. Young Hoon Kwak, Kenneth Scott LaPlace. 2005. Examining risk tolerance in project-driven organization. Technovation
25:6, 691-695. [CrossRef]
152. Fang ZhaoSchool of Management, Business Faculty, RMIT University, Melbourne, Australia. 2005. Exploring the synergy
between entrepreneurship and innovation. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research 11:1, 25-41.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
153. Sandra G. Leggat, Judith DwyerInspiring Innovation 209-231. [CrossRef]
154. GRO ELLEN MATHISEN, STALE EINARSEN, KARI JORSTAD, KOLBJORN S. BRONNICK. 2004. Climate for
work group creativity and innovation: Norwegian validation of the team climate inventory (TCI). Scandinavian Journal of
Psychology 45:5, 383-392. [CrossRef]
155. Ron DvirFounder and CEO, Innovation Ecology, Pardesiya, Israel (ron@futurecenter.co.il) Edna PasherCEO, Management
Consultants, Herzliya, Israel (edna@pasher.co.il). 2004. Innovation engines for knowledge cities: an innovation ecology
perspective. Journal of Knowledge Management 8:5, 16-27. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
156. Kathryn Cormican, David OSullivan. 2004. Auditing best practice for effective product innovation management. Technovation
24:10, 819-829. [CrossRef]
157. Md Zabid Abdul RashidCentre for Graduate Studies, Open University Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia Murali
SambasivanUniversity Putra Malaysia, Selangor, Malaysia Azmawani Abdul RahmanUniversity Putra Malaysia, Selangor,
Malaysia. 2004. The influence of organizational culture on attitudes toward organizational change. Leadership & Organization
Development Journal 25:2, 161-179. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
158. Claudine A. Soosay, Paul W. Hyland. 2004. Driving Innovation in Logistics: Case Studies in Distribution Centres. Creativity
Downloaded by Multimedia University At 19:14 13 September 2016 (PT)