MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405197251 · doi:10.1108/ijppm-12-2023-0675

Effects of market pressure on organisational innovation performance: mediating roles of commitment to innovate, resource to innovate and manager innovation capability

2024· article· en· W4405197251 on OpenAlexaff
Noufou Ouédraogo, William Wei, Ali Muhammad, Mohammed Laid Ouakouak

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Productivity and Performance Management · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicEnvironmental Sustainability in Business
Canadian institutionsAlgoma UniversityMacEwan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOriginalityBusinessKnowledge managementResource (disambiguation)Structural equation modelingMarketingEmpirical researchQuestionnaireInnovation managementSurvey data collectionCreativityPsychologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose The purpose of this research is to investigate the effects of market pressure on organisational innovation performance through commitment and resource to innovate and manager innovation capability. Design/methodology/approach A quantitative study was conducted with 273 participants working in different organisations. These participants were drawn from the LinkedIn network of one of the researchers. The data were collected using a survey questionnaire uploaded onto www.surveymonkey.com. The data were analysed using SPSS and AMOS, and structural equation modelling techniques were used to test the hypotheses. Findings We found that market pressure has a positive effect on both commitment to innovate and resource to innovate. In turn, both commitment to innovate and resource to innovate influence manager innovation capability. We also found that manager innovation capability positively affects organisational innovation performance. Furthermore, manager innovation capability is a mediator in the relationship between commitment to innovate and organisational innovation performance as well as in the relationship between resource to innovate and organisational innovation performance. Finally, the relationship between manager innovation capability and organisational innovation performance is moderated by both extrinsic and intrinsic motivations to innovate. Practical implications Our study provides empirical evidence of the roles of commitment to innovate, resource to innovate and manager innovation capability in enhancing the innovation performance of organisations. Therefore, organisations should show their commitment to innovate, provide resources to innovate, develop managers’ capabilities to innovate and use a mix of intrinsic and extrinsic motivators to boost their innovation performance. Originality/value This study offers new insights into the dynamics of how market pressure leads to innovation within organisations.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.039
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.039
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.218 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Productivity and Performance ManagementSame topicEnvironmental Sustainability in BusinessFrench-language works237,207