Investigating the principal barriers to innovation in telecommunication enterprises operating in a d

IJournals: International Journal of Social Relevance & Concern ISSN-2347-9698 Volume 6 Issue 3 March 2018

Investigating the principal barriers to innovation in telecommunication enterprises operating in a dynamic and unstable macroeconomic environment Author: Samuel Solomon Chinhanga (Administrative Assistant, University of Zimbabwe, Faculty of Commerce, +263 773 840 309, schinhanga@gmail.com)

Abstract This study attempts to assess and highlights the principal barriers that affect innovation in telecommunication firms operating in unstable, turbulent and dynamic macro – economic environment. As a result of globalisation, highly technological and competition involved in the nature of the industry, innovation and is a pre - requisite of the industry.

That being the case, there are a number of barriers that firms in the telecommunication industry face. This, as a result calls for innovation and creativity by the enterprises. The study takes a qualitative approach, where interviews were carried out to collect data that was analysed NVivo analytical tools. The results showed that, innovation and creativity is necessary despite barriers encountered.

Introduction This study focuses on telecommunication firms operating in unstable, turbulent dynamic-macro environment. These firms are faced by competition from developed countries as a result of globalisation. Therefore, they have to come up with innovative and creativity strategies in order to counter barriers to innovation they are likely to face. The study took a qualitative approach where 28 respondents from four telecommunication firms that took part in the study. The results of the study, established that, innovation and creativity lead to better firm performance, despite the barriers that are encountered in the process.

1. Background and Literature review Scholars tend to concur on the significance and role of innovation towards business performance in both small-tomedium enterprises as well as large enterprises (Acs and Audretsch, 2010; Dogson, 2013). The propensity and capacity to be innovative in the business fraternity is always acknowledged as the single most important factor towards firm competitiveness (Tidd et al., 2005). Effectively, it follows then that the culture of innovation in business is a pre– requisite success-factor for sustainable success, particularly in a market where there is stiff competition. It has been observed that, in order to maintain worldwide competitiveness, innovation has been a dominant factor for an organisation with a focus of the future. It is a catalyst for organisational growth since it drives success in the future and is the engine that allows businesses to sustain their viability in a global economy (Gaynor, 2002).

Basing on the foregoing argument, in this era of digitalised technology, where there is hyper competition from across the world, with new technological innovations emerging at every turn, telecommunication companies, in particular, are constantly faced with the challenge to maintain competitive advantage (Tushman and Andersen, 2006). Firms in the telecommunication industry are operating in an increasingly high competitive market in which innovation is considered an important factor for business performance (Begonja, et al., 2016).

This assertion is corroborated by Oke, et al., (2007) who state that, firms in the telecommunication industry should keep abreast with technological changes taking place globally, from time to time, in order for them to operate competitively. The significance of innovation in the telecommunications industry can be exemplified by the leading US telecom company, AT&T, which invests heavily in the research and development of newer technologies through its

Samuel Solomon Chinhanga, vol 6 Issue 3, pp 44-55 March 2018

IJournals: International Journal of Social Relevance & Concern ISSN-2347-9698 Volume 6 Issue 3 March 2018 sister company AT&T Labs, and this has over the years enabled it to be ahead of the game in light of the competition from other telecoms giants such as Verizon, T-Mobile and Sprint (Faulhaber, 2011).

In developing economies, however, the culture of innovation has been established as being rather limited (Ogbo, 2012; Mohamed, 2016), when compared to the developed economies. The biggest challenge being faced by firms in the telecommunication firms in developing countries is the availability of modern technology, equipment, and so on. The equipment, machinery and technology are also expensive to acquire and requires a significant amount of foreign currency. The relative distribution of revenue from the various telecommunication revenue streams is presented from the Figure 1 below. Their biggest challenge is lack of capitalisation, unavailability of modern technology, equipment, machinery and so on, which are expensive to acquire and require foreign currency, which is in short supply at the moment.

Figure 1: Africa Telecoms Revenue Streams From the illustration above, generally, the revenue of telecommunications company is largely voice-driven, mobile voice (Global System for Mobile Communications, GSM) being the highest followed by fixed voice. The third significant revenue stream is mobile broadband, which has been on the rise over the past years, as compared to voice, which on average, has tended to be rather constant. While the foregoing is the aggregate for Africa, it should be noted that the relative performance of telecommunication companies across Africa, differ significantly (Njeri, 2017).

One of the principal factors behind the relative discrepancy is the relative variation in the macro-economic environments with poor performers being relatively characterized by low innovativeness as compared with the innovative companies (Filippetti and Archibugi, 2011; Stork et al., 2016). Further, the relative discrepancy in the levels of performance in various African telecommunications companies further supported by Njeri (2017), as being a result of the various barriers to innovation adoption that result in the differing levels of performance, at least holding the population constant. The majority of the researches conducted in the context of Africa have tended to single out the economic environment as the principal challenge citing largely, low disposable income and high unemployment rates (Slyke et al., 2008; Mothobi, 2017).

2. Problem While the significance of innovation in the telecommunications sector is acknowledged globally, and regionally, there tend to be significant problems that are affecting the full adoption of an innovative culture among telecommunications companies in African countries characterised by dynamic and unstable macro-economic environments. This is characteristic of the Zimbabwean macro-economic environment, as a case in point. This problem with respect to Zimbabwe is evidenced from Figure 2 below. Š 2018, iJournals All Rights Reserved

www.ijournals.in

Page 45

IJournals: International Journal of Social Relevance & Concern ISSN-2347-9698 Volume 6 Issue 3 March 2018

Figure 2: Zimbabwean GSM Voice Traffic Trend Source: POTRAZ (2017) From the above, the trend of the GSM voice traffic volume has been on the decline in Zimbabwe, despite the continual increase in the number of subscribers. The telecommunication industry in Zimbabwe, whose revenue has long been driven by mobile voice traffic, as one of the factors, is being threatened by competition from across the globe as the non–GSM alternatives such as VOIP solutions (Skype, Facebook Live, Google Hangouts) flood the market.

It is the key research argument that for telecommunication firms in Zimbabwe to survive in this kind of environment, they have to come up with innovative survival strategies (Acs and Audretsch, 2010; Dogson, 2013). Nevertheless, this has not been evident, and hence the need for this research to establish the principal barriers to innovation that are affecting the performance of telecommunication enterprises operating in a dynamic and unstable macro-economic environment, with Zimbabwean telecommunications companies as a case study of this research.

3. Objectives The key research objective of this study was to establish the principal barriers to innovation in telecommunication enterprises in Zimbabwe.

4. Prior Work There is a paucity of studies on the influence of innovation on business performance (Soderquist and Chetty, 2013).

Nevertheless, hardly have researches been done in the context of developing economies to ascertain the major barriers to innovation and creativity. It is currently acknowledged that firms in Zimbabwe are currently operating in an environment that is characterised by an ever-increasing global competition, changing customer tastes and demands, rapid technological changes as well as uncertainty in the market (Droge et al., 2008; Im et al., 2013).

That being the case, innovation is definitely needed in order to achieve sustainable competitive advantage as well as success and improved performance as the firms enter a foreign market with firms in similar industry and some offering substitute products and services (Damanpour and Gopalakrishnan, 2001). Innovative firms have been identified as being more flexible to respond to changes taking place rapidly , while they can go that extra mile of creating new opportunities and also exploiting those already in existence (Cingöz, ‎2013).

© 2018, iJournals All Rights Reserved

www.ijournals.in

Page 46

IJournals: International Journal of Social Relevance & Concern ISSN-2347-9698 Volume 6 Issue 3 March 2018 Given the importance of innovation in improving firm performance, in unfavourable environments, quite a number of studies have tried to identify the factors that can enhance innovation (Koc and Ceylan, 2007). Currently, one of the variables deemed to have great influence on innovation is organisational culture of which each organisation is identified by its unique culture (Buschgens et al., 2013; Lin et al., 2013). Since organisational culture influences employees’‎behaviour,‎it‎may‎lead‎the‎human‎resources‎to‎accept‎innovation as an important element that enhance firm performance (Hartmann, 2006).

One has to take note of the fact that, the external environment including global competition are the source of major threats‎facing‎today’s‎businesses‎as‎the‎environment‎often‎imposes major constraints on the choices managers have to make for their businesses (Minniti, 2010). This means that, firms in every sector of the industry, from telecommunications, manufacturing, agriculture, mining among others, face a similar uncertain future as a lot of factors in‎the‎external‎environment‎cause‎turbulence‎and‎uncertainty‎for‎business‎firms’‎performance‎and‎future‎survival.

Research has shown that, in recent years, current markets seem to have evolved from somewhat predictable entities to more turbulent and unpredictable settings (Bettis and Hit, 2005). The slow dissolution of industry boundaries through the convergence of technologies and the lowering of barriers to entry, have resulted in a number of firms embarking on innovation and creativity in order for them to survive competition (Chakravarthy, 2007). Another important reason for this‎rapid‎rate‎of‎change‎is‎the‎increased‎‘interconnectedness’‎between‎different‎systems‎is‎the‎‘elimination’‎of‎borders‎ as a result of improved communication due to continuous developments in technology (Trist, 2005).

The emergence of markets in turbulent environments are usually a result of no clear boundaries between or within an industry and competition and new technological breakthroughs while regulation in settings like this, classical schools of strategy have demonstrated their limits (Brown and Eisenhardt, 2008b). Economists or planners do not have the time to gather the necessary data, let alone analyse it, to find a position to go after in an ever changing turbulent and dynamic environment (Thompson, 2007).

According to some research findings, while using systems thinking, we can clearly see that, finding a fit between an organisation and its environment is an almost impossible task, yet every move an organisation engages in, to maximise its fit, perturbs its environment instantly (Tushman and Anderson,2010). Therefore, the quest for fit becomes another source of change in the system which further affects the environment, as such, environments change happen on different levels and with different impacts to businesses depending on their competitiveness (Weick, 2005).

While there are quite a number of factors that facilitates innovation and creativity, there are also some factors that cause or result in barriers to innovation and creativity. They range from lack of modern technology, knowledge and expert skills, and lack of capitalisation to acquire plants and machinery as well as government policy among others. It has to be noted that, the current fragmented approaches to policy formulation on management of innovation affect the ability of firms to innovate (Tidd and Bessant 2009).

Adams et al. (2006); Arnold (2004); and Hildalgo and Albors (2008) have noted that, policy deficiency is persistent in a number of governments and hence act as a barrier to innovation to a number of firms, particularly in developing countries. Most organisations in developing countries face a host of other barriers besides those stated above. Some of the firms do not survive for long because of barriers such in availability of resources and unfavorable policies as well as weak institutional regimes (Abor and Quarterly, 2010; Minniti, 2006).

Barriers to innovate in the firms have been dominant with financial bottlenecks, hindered access to external capital, high innovation costs as well as high economic risks (SCB, 2006). In addition, there is lack or shortage of qualified human capital, expertise to manage innovation process effectively and efficiently, for instance, lack of knowledge and skills to manage projects. Lack of knowledge to penetrate global markets, in the global village, has been identified as a barrier to innovation.

Since innovation is a difficult process that involves risks that new products, services and technologies may fail in gaining commercial success, barriers to innovation have been encountered in the form of bureaucratic hurdles, long administrative procedures, restrictive laws and regulations as well as lack of intellectual property rights. It is a fact that, © 2018, iJournals All Rights Reserved

www.ijournals.in

Page 47

IJournals: International Journal of Social Relevance & Concern ISSN-2347-9698 Volume 6 Issue 3 March 2018 both large and small organisations face financial barriers to innovation. However, small firms or enterprises mainly encounter shortages of qualified human capital for innovation (Lim, 2016).

The‎ emerging‎ research‎ on‎ barriers‎ has‎ analysed‎ both,‎ the‎ determinants‎ of‎ firms’‎ perception‎ of‎ mainly‎ financial‎ obstacles‎to‎innovation‎and‎their‎deterring‎impact‎on‎firms’‎decisions‎to‎engage in innovation activity, the intensity of their investments and the propensity to innovate (Mancusi and Vezzulli 2014; 2014; Pellegrino and Savona, 2013).

While significant efforts have been made to investigate the subject of innovation and its barriers in the Zimbabwean context, along with other countries in dynamic and unstable micro-economic environments, there is a significant gap in literature as the principal factors in the context of such environments has not been researched on.

5. Approach For this study, owing to its exploratory nature, as a methodological strategy, this was based on the interpretivism research philosophy over the positivism philosophy mainly as a result of the need to focus on the qualitative intricacies of the study (Bryman and Bell, 2015). Effectively, the research was based on the inductive approach, where the key themes were extracted from the research, as put forth by Leedy and Ormrod (2014). With respect to the research design, this took the form of a case study, both in the industry context as well as country context. This study was delimited to the context of the telecommunications industry, as well; the geographical context was defined based on the macro-economic environment being dynamic and unstable.

The data was collected using the interview guide, from 28 key research informants identified using the purposive sampling technique (Creswell, 2014) from 4 major telecommunications companies in Zimbabwe. Upon the transcription of the data collected, QSR Nvivo was used as the computational data analysis tool, to help extract the themes emerging from the study. While other scholars, such as Yin (2014), call for the use of predefined template coding, because this study was based on the inductive approach, the hierarchical thematic coding was used to extract the emerging themes from the data (Creswell, 2014).

6. Results The respective full-breath of the themes extracted is presented in Figure 3. From the overall presentation, the themes extracted were: cash shortages, competition due to globalisation, continual need for research, continual need for staff development, creation of parallel market, depleting market, high innovation or technology costs, market volatility, poor profitability, price distortions, price instability, rationalisation, shortage of forex, shortage of raw materials, shortages of products and services, speculation-prone environment, as well as unaffordability of commodities and services.

Figure 3: Emerging Themes - Impact of Macro-Economic Environment on Innovation Source: Primary Data (NVivo v11) Lewis, 2004. © 2018, iJournals All Rights Reserved

www.ijournals.in

Page 48

IJournals: International Journal of Social Relevance & Concern ISSN-2347-9698 Volume 6 Issue 3 March 2018 In summary, from the review of the above extracted themes, it can be seen that the unstable, turbulent and dynamic environment affects negatively and indirectly on innovation and creativity. The indirect impact is seen from the symptoms of the unstable market environment, explored in the first objective, such as shortages of cash, forex, raw materials, among others, emerging again as affecting innovation and creativity. The respective word cloud assessing the respective weights emerging from the analysis is summarized in Figure 4 below.

Figure 4: Word Cloud - Barriers to Innovation and Creativity Source: Primary Data (NVivo v11) Lewis, 2004.

From the analysis, the major impediments cited were the shortages, of mainly forex, and the shortage of resources. The shortage of technology and equipment were as well extracted from the word cloud above.

6.1 Shortage of Cash/Forex: The role of forex towards the facilitation of innovation and creativity was extracted as the main barrier. From the perspective of literature, this was confirmed, and according to Katila and Shane (2005) financial constraints limit innovation of firms. Further, some research has revealed that, workers tend to blame their poor innovativeness on the lack of funding and on the firm withholding necessary resources (Gomez and Vargas, 2009). As Nohria and Gulati (1996) observed, the lack of financial slack prevents experimentation which is important for innovation. In addition, Gibbert et al., (2007), found that, constrained financial resources are detrimental to the performance and novelty of research endeavours.

Hoegl et al., (2008),‎ argue‎ that,‎ the‎ availability‎ of‎ financial‎ resources‎ triggers‎ the‎ individual’s‎ motivation‎ and‎ commitment‎ to‎ the‎ firm,‎ thereby‎ enhancing‎ the‎ firm’s‎ innovation‎ performance.‎ On‎ the‎ other‎ hand,‎ Whited‎ and‎ Wu‎ (2006), discovered that, financially challenged firms earn higher returns than less financial challenged firms, while Srinivasan et al. (2017), found that, some firms turn financial challenges into performance advantage. Viewed differently, Srinivasn et al. (2011), discovered a positive effect of Research and Development spending during recession on profit for large firms compared to small firms, with Hottenrott and Peters (2012) showing that, innovation can be achieved inspite of financial constraints given strong innovative capabilities.

6.2 Turbulent Macro-Economic Environment The turbulence of the macro-economic environment was the second-highest factor that the research extracted as being a significant factor towards the innovativeness or creativity of the employees. This can best be explained in the case of Zimbabwe, whose industry has since dwindled over the years, resulting in the closure of many companies (CZI, 2014).

© 2018, iJournals All Rights Reserved

www.ijournals.in

Page 49

IJournals: International Journal of Social Relevance & Concern ISSN-2347-9698 Volume 6 Issue 3 March 2018 It can be established that, from the findings, the Zimbabwean businesses are operating in a highly turbulent macro – environment.

It can be established that, from the perspective of the literature, the impact of turbulence on the facilitation of innovation has been investigated and validated in a series of empirical studies, most of which focused on the private sector firms. Most of these studies support the proposition that, turbulence has a negative effect on innovativeness (Lin and Germain, 2003; Kuivalainen et al., 2004; Power and Reid, 2005).

6.3 Shortage of Resources and Raw Materials The shortage of resources and raw materials emerged again as the third key factor that affect the innovativeness of firms. Research confirms the significance of resources towards innovativeness. In particular, some research suggests that, resource challenges may positively influence innovation and innovation – related performance (Esty and Porter, 2005; Gibbert et al., 2006; Hoegl et al., 2008; Filippetti and Archibugi, 2011). Nevertheless, quite a number of other scholars and practitioners view this premise as unrealistic (Maine, 2008; Gomez and Vargas, 2009).

It is important to note that, dynamic capabilities result from complicated organisational and strategic routines (Zollo and‎Winter,‎2002),‎through‎which‎managers‎recognise‎and‎renew‎firm’s‎resource‎base‎to‎generate‎economically‎value‎– creating strategies (Foss and Lindberg, 2013; Giniuniene, 2015). Thus, these capabilities are the fundamental drivers of creation, evolution and recombination of other resources to provide new sources of growth (Zander and Kogut, 1995; Froehlich, 2017).

6.4 High Cost of Technology and Machinery The other significant impediment was the high cost of technology. With respect to the high cost of technology and machinery, in the context of Zimbabwe, this was broadly related to the high propensity to import the appropriate technologies, as such, technologies could not be sources from within. The further lack of forex, which, in Zimbabwe can best be sourced from the parallel market in lieu of the formal financial institutions, made the expenses involved in the procurement of the technologies much higher. The cost of technologies has been a significant factor towards the innovation capabilities by the countries across the world. The higher the costs, according to Huda and Hussin (2010), the lower are the propensity to venture into innovative practices.

ICT offers opportunities to provide better and improved products and services; hence, it is seen as an enabler for enhancing customer services in order to meet the ever-changing customer tastes and expectations. There is need for improvement on cost control measures, to ensure effective marketing strategies to boost revenue inflows and expand opportunities for the telecommunication industry (Inversini and Masiero, 2014; Kucukusta et al., 2015; Law et al., 2014).

The telecommunication industry heavily relies on ICT in order to improve productivity and efficiency, hence, improvement on customer satisfaction (Kim and Qu, 2014; Lam and Qu, 2007). Therefore, embarking on huge ICT projects may be very costly, as they would require large sums of money for capitalisation (Huda and Hussin, 2010; Ye et al., 2006). As such, the projects can have a huge implication for telecommunication operations (Sigala, 2005), customer service (Ip et al., 2011), as well as on HR management practices (Burke and NG, 2006; Deery and Jago, 2015), which may be a barrier in terms of cost and trigger resistance by other stakeholders.

7. Implications From the foregoing major themes extracted, it can be confirmed that they have one thing in common, –need for forex.

Turbulent macro-economic environments are characterized by poor forex inflows, and usually high trade deficits, as is the case with Zimbabwe. Further, the shortage of resources and raw materials is again symptomatic of the shortage of forex, which could otherwise be used to facilitate the availability of the resources and raw materials in short supply.

More importantly, is the high cost of technology and machinery; the equipment is not locally available but is found in the foreign markets, where forex is needed to procure it.

It then follows then that, the principal barrier to innovation, is the forex availability. This applies well to the telecommunications industry, as the companies rely on the procurement of special equipment from countries such as China and Japan. Subsequently, the telecommunications industries can be rendered idle or forced to stick to their © 2018, iJournals All Rights Reserved

www.ijournals.in

Page 50

IJournals: International Journal of Social Relevance & Concern ISSN-2347-9698 Volume 6 Issue 3 March 2018 traditional mode of business, and non-innovative, as the availability of modern equipment would be thwarted by the inadequacy of forex (Benner and Tushman, (2003).

From the foregoing argument, the in availability of forex directly affects companies whose innovations are reliant on importation of such technologies. This has been stated earlier, that the accelerated pace of technological change has produced a pervasive demand for continuous innovation (in products or services and organisational design) that holds the potential to make a product line, or even an entire business segment, virtually obsolete (Luftman and Derksen, 2012).

ICT adoption has been studied in both developed and developing countries, Kurnia, et al. (2015), confirming that findings from developed economies are not directly applicable to developing economies as a result of differences in infrastructure, culture, and more importantly the non-affordability of the technologies. It is very expensive for developing economies to set up state-of- the-art infrastructure like in developed economies (Im, et al.,2013).

Subsequently, it is out of the significant shortages in supply of the local products as well as the shortages of forex that results in the creation of parallel markets (Chirwa, 2017; Huett, 2014; Merriden, 2001). These parallel markets often results in the disparity in pricing models, with the cheapest prices often being the imports due technological developments in those countries.

As a result, Benner and Tushman, (2015), observed that, the local industry suffers at the mercy of the parallel market, due to the indiscriminately high cost of products. The latter has a negative effect on innovation and creativity as the local industries battle to square off with the flooding imports, and thus poor profitability, leaving less funds for the prioritization of other auxiliary expenses such as research and development as put forth by (Luftman and Derksen 2012).

When environments are highly dynamic, uncertainty may not allow an organisation to respond to the need for change, to predict customer demands, to question the current strategic direction, as well as to look at other ways to deal with the situation (Hrtmann, 2006). This is the exact situation which most Zimbabwean telecommunications companies find themselves in. Hardly are they investing in research, as these are perceived as an unnecessary expense, with the key priorities being made to sustain the key functions of the organisation, and hardly is the emphasis on growth (Sibanda, 2014).

This is supported by Barney et al. (2001), Eisenhardt and Martin (2000) and Fiol (2001), who argue that competitive advantage, cannot be sustained in dynamic and rapidly changing markets. The process of generating creative ideas (creativity) within such harsh environments and their subsequent implementation (innovation) have been consistently found to be riddled by tensions (Lewis, 2004), paradoxes (Miron et al., 2004), contradictions (King et al., 1991) and dilemmas (Benner and Tushman, 2003).

In light of the above arguments Slyke et al. (2008a), is of the opinion that it is, very unfortunate to note that in contrast with the prevailing ill-contrived strategies by most local businesses, a turbulent environment where external changes are non–linear and discontinuous, can also be a big source of opportunities for firms to strengthen their existing capabilities and or as well as develop completely new ones that allow firms to overcome their organisational inertia and myopia of learning (Ambrosini and Bowman 2009; Schilke, 2014).

8. Conclusion From the foregoing, the major research contribution is the establishment of the forex aspect as the principal factor behind the poor-innovativeness in telecommunication companies that operate in a dynamic and unstable macroeconomic environment. Effectively, this can override the arguments that point to either the ignorance of the management on the need to be innovative, or the absence of an innovation-oriented culture within the organisations.

This can best be supported from the perspective that much of the needed technologies for the telecommunications industry are outsourced, and thus albeit the awareness of the management to innovations that could be implemented, the principal barrier, which is forex availability always impede the innovativeness efforts by the specific companies.

Š 2018, iJournals All Rights Reserved

www.ijournals.in

Page 51

IJournals: International Journal of Social Relevance & Concern ISSN-2347-9698 Volume 6 Issue 3 March 2018

References Abor, J. and Quarterly, P. (2010). Issues in SME Development in Ghana and South Africa. International Research Journal of Finance and Economics, ISSN 1450 - 2887 Issue 39.

Adams, R., Jeanrenaud, S., Bessant, J., Overy, P. and Denyer, D. (2012). Innovating for Sustainability. A Systematic Review of Body Knowledge. Network for Business Sustainability: Ontario.

Acs, Z.J. and Audretsch, D.B. (2010). Entrepreneurship, Innovation and Tchnological Change. Foundations and Trends in Entrepreneurship. Vol.1, No.4, 97 - 99.

Adams,S., Bessant, J. and Phelps, R. (2006). Innovation management measurement: a review. International Journal of Management, Reviews, 8, 21-47.

Arnold, E. (2004). ‘Evaluation‎ Research‎ and‎ Innovation‎ Policy:‎ A‎ Systems‎ World‎ Needs‎ Systems‎ Evaluations,’ Research Evaluation, 13, 3-17.

Ambrosini, V. and Bowman, C. (2009). What are dynamic capabilities and are they a useful construct in strategic management? International Journal of Management Review, 11 (1), 29-49.

Barney,‎J.B.,‎Wright,M.‎and‎Ketchen,‎D.J.Jr.‎(2001).‎‘The‎resource- based view of firm:ten years after 1991.’ Journal of Management. Vol.27 No.6, 625-641.

Begonja, M., Cicek, F., Balboni, B. and Gerbin, A. (2016). Innovation and business performance determinants of SMEs in Adriatic region that social innovation. Economic Research Ekonomska Istrazivanja, 29 (1), 1136 - 1149.

Benner, M.J. and Tushman, M. (2003). Exploitation, Exploration and Process Management: the Productivity Dilemma Revisited. Academy of Management Review, 28 (2), 238-256.

Benner,‎M.J.‎and‎Tushman,‎M.L.‎(2015).‎Reflections‎on‎the‎2013‎decade‎award:‎‘exploitation,‎exploration‎and‎process‎ management:‎the‎productivity‎dilemma‎revisited’ ten years later.

Bettis, R.A. and Hit, M.A. (2005). The new competitive landscape. Strategic Management Journal, 16 (1), 1-19.

Brown, L. and Eisenhardt, K. (2008b). The art of continuous change: Linking complexity theory and time-paced evolution in relentlessly shifting organisations. Administration Science Quarter, 42, 1-34.

Bryman,‎A.‎and‎Bell,‎E.‎(2015).‎‘Qualitative‎Data‎Analysis‎in‎Business‎Research‎methods,‎4 th ed, Oxford University Press.

Burke,‎ R.‎ and‎ NG.‎ E.‎ (2006).‎ ‘The‎ changing‎ nature‎ of‎ work‎ and organisations: implications for human resource management,’‎Human Resource Management Review. Vol. 16 No.2,86-94.

Buschgens, T., Bausch, A. and Balkin, D. (2013). Organisational culture and innovation: A meta - analytic review.

Journal of Product Innovation Management, 30 (4), 1-19.

Chakravarthy,‎ B.S.‎ (1997).‎ ‘A‎ new‎ strategy‎ framework‎ for‎ copying‎ with‎ turbulence,’‎ Sloan Management Review, Winter, 69-82.

Cingoz,‎ A.‎ and‎ Akdogan,‎ A.A.‎ (2013).‎ ‘Strategically‎ Flexibility,‎ Environmental‎ Dynamism‎ and‎ Innovation‎ Performance,’‎An Emperical Study, Prodedia - Social and Behavioual Sciences, Vol.99, 2, 582 - 589.

Cresswell, J. (2013). Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design, Sage, Los Angeles, CA. CZI, (2014). Confederation of Zimbabwe Industries.

Damanpour, F. and Capalakrishnan, S. (2001). The dynamics of the adoption of products and process innovations in organisations, Journal of Management Studies, 38, 45-65.

Deery,M.‎and‎Jago,‎L.(2015).‎‘Revisiting‎talent‎management,‎work-life‎balance‎and‎retention‎strategies,’‎International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol.27 No.3, 453-472.

Doson, M. (2013). Systems thinking market failure and the development of innovation policy: the case of Australia.

Research Policy, 40 (9), 1145-1156.

Droge, C., Calantone, R. and Harmanciogly, N. (2008). New product success, is it really controllable by managers in highly turbulent environment. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 25 (3), 271 -286.

Eisenhardt,‎K.M.‎and‎Martin,J.A.‎(2001).‎‘Dynamic‎capabilities:‎What‎are‎they?’‎Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 21 (10/11), 1105-1121.

Esty, D.C. and Porter, M.E (2005). National Environmentla Performance: An Empirical Analysis of Policy Results and Determinants. Environmental and Development Economics, 10, 391-439.

Faulhaber,‎G.R.‎(2011).‎‘Economics‎of‎neutrality:‎A‎review.‎ Communications and Convergence Review. Vol.3, No.1, 53-64.

Filippetti, A. and Archibugi, D. (2011). Innovation in Times of Crisis: National Systems of Innovation Structure and Demand. Research Policy, 40, 179-192.

© 2018, iJournals All Rights Reserved

www.ijournals.in

Page 52

IJournals: International Journal of Social Relevance & Concern ISSN-2347-9698 Volume 6 Issue 3 March 2018 Fiol,‎ M.(2001).‎ ‘Revisiting‎ an‎ identity‎ based‎ view‎ of‎ sustainable‎ competitive‎ advantage,’‎ Journal of Management, Vol.27 No.6, 691-699.

Foss, J.N. and Lindberg, S. (2013). Micro foundations for strategy: a goal – framing perspective on the drivers of value creation.’‎Academy of Management Perspectives, Vol. 27 No.2, 85-102.

Froehlich,‎D.E‎(2017).‎Older‎managers’‎informal‎learning‎in‎Knowledge-intensive organisations: Investigating the role of learning approaches among Australian bank mangers. The International Journal of Human Resources Management, 28 (2), 399-416.

Gaynor, J. (2002). Juvenile fire setter intervention handbook. United States Fire Administration.

Retrieved from http://www.usfa.fema.gov(downloads/pdf.publications/fa-210.pdf.

Gibbert, M., Hoegl, M. and Valikangas, L. (2007). In praise of resource constraints, MIT Sloan Management Review, 48 (3),: 15-17.

Giniuniene, J.(2015). Dynamic Capabilities, Innovation and Organisational Learning: Interrelations and Impact on Firm Performance. Prosedia-Social and Behavioural Sciences, 213, 985-1001.

Gomez, J. and Vargas, P. (2009). The effect of Financial Constraints, Absorptive Capacity and Complementaries on the Adoption of Multiple Process Technologies. Research Policy, 38, 106-199.

Hartmann, A. (2006). The role of organisational culture in motivating innovative behaviour in construction. Innovation, 613, 159-172.

Hildalgo, A. and Albors, J. (2008). Innovation management techniques and tools: a review from theory and practice, R&D Management, 38, 113-127.

Hoegl,‎ M.,‎Gibbert,‎ M.‎and‎ Mazursky,‎ D.‎(2008).‎‘Financial‎constraints‎in‎innovation‎ projects:‎When‎is‎less‎ more?’‎ Research Policy. Vol.37 No.8, 1382-1391.

Hottenrott,‎H.‎and‎Peters,‎B.‎(2012).‎‘Innovative‎Capability‎and‎Financing‎ Constraints‎ for‎Innovation:‎More‎Money,‎ More‎Innovation?’‎Review of Economics and statistics, 94 (4): 1126-1142.

Huda, M.Q. and Hussin, H. (2010). Information Technology Communication for the Muslim World, IEEE, Jakarta, Decemeber 13-14, A18-A25.

Huet, I.92014). Resaerch and teaching nexus in post 92 Universities. Tension and challenges. In: Society for Research on Higher Education, Conference 2014, https://www.srhe.ac.uk/conference2014/abstracts/0193,pdf. Accessed, 2February, 2012.

Im, S., Montonya, M.M. and Workman, J.P. (2013). Antecedents and consequences of creativity in product innovation teams. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 30 (1), 170-185.

Inversini,‎A.‎and‎Masiero,‎L.(2014).‎‘Selling‎rooms‎online:‎the‎use‎of‎social‎media‎and‎online‎travel‎ agents.’‎International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol.26 No. 2, 272-292.

Ip,‎C.,‎Leung,‎R.‎and‎Law,‎R.‎(2011).‎‘Progress‎and‎development‎of‎information‎and‎communication‎and‎technologies‎ in‎hospitality.’‎International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol.23 No.4, 533-551.

Katila, R. and Shanen, S. (2005). When Does Lack of Resources Make New Firms Innovative? Academy of Management Journal, 48 (5), 814-829.

Kim,‎ M.‎ and‎ Qu,‎ H.‎ (2014).‎‘Travellers’‎ behavioural‎ intention‎ toward‎ hotel‎ self-service‎ kiosks‎ usage.’‎ International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 26 No.2, 225-245.

Koc, T. and Ceylon, C. (2007). Factors impacting the innovative capacity in large - scale companies, Technovation, 27 (3), 105-114.

Kucukusta,‎D.,‎Law,‎R.,‎Besbes,‎A.‎and‎Legoherel,‎P.‎(2015).‎‘Re-examining perceived usefulness and ease of use in online‎booking:‎the‎case‎of‎Hong‎Kong‎online‎users,’‎International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 27 No.2, 185-198.

Kuivalainen, O., Sundquist, S., Puumalainen, K. and Cadogan, J.(2004). The effect of environmental turbulence and leader characteristics on international performance: Are knowledge-based firms different? Canadian Journal of Administrative Science, 21, 35-50.

Kurnia,‎S.,‎ Choudrie,‎J.,‎Mahbubur,‎R.M.‎and‎ Alzougool,‎ B.‎‘E-commerce technology adoption: a Malasian grocery SME‎retail‎sector‎study.’‎Journal‎of‎Business‎Research,‎Vo.68,‎1906-1918.

Lam,‎ T.V‎ and‎ Qu,‎ H.‎ (2007).‎ ‘A‎ study‎ of‎ hotel‎ employee‎ behavioural‎ intentions‎ towards‎ adoption‎ of‎ information‎ technology,’‎International Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 26 No.1, 49-65.

Law,‎R.‎Buhalis,‎D.‎and‎Cobanoglu,‎(2014).‎‘Progress‎on‎information‎and‎communication,‎technologies‎in‎hospitality‎ and‎tourism.’‎International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 26 No.5, 727-750.

© 2018, iJournals All Rights Reserved

www.ijournals.in

Page 53

IJournals: International Journal of Social Relevance & Concern ISSN-2347-9698 Volume 6 Issue 3 March 2018 Leedy, P.D. and Ormrod, J.E. (2014). Practical Research Planning Design. 10 th ed. Edinburgh, England: Pearson Education Limited.

Lewis,‎ R.B.‎ (2004).‎ ATLAS.‎ Ti‎ 5.0:a‎ comparative‎ review‎ of‎ two‎ popular‎ qualitative‎ data‎ analysis‎ programs,’‎ Field Methods. Vol. 16 No.4, 439-464.

Li, E.Y., Liao, C.H. and Yen, H.R. (2013). Co-authorship networks and research impact: a social capital perspective.

Research Policy, 42 (9), 1515-1530.

Lim, L. (2016). Brand Bull Run: why some brands grow faster than others. Singapore: Louken Academy.

Lin, E., McDnough, S.J. and Lin, C. (2013). Managing the exploitation/exploration paradox: The role of learning capacity and innovation ambidexterity. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 30 (2), 262 -278.

Lin, X. and German, R. (2003). Organisational structure, context, customer orientation and performance: Lessons from Chines state-owned enterprise. Strategic Management Journal, 24, 1131-1151.

Luftan, J. and Derksen, B. (2012). Key issues for ICT executives 2012: doing more with less. MIS Quarterly Executive, 11, 207-218.

Maine,‎ E.‎ (2008).‎ Radical‎ Innovation‎ through‎ International‎ Corporate‎ Venturing:‎ Degussa’s‎ commercialization‎ of‎ Nanomaterials. R&D Management, 38, 358-371.

Mancusi,‎M.L.‎and‎Vezzulli,‎A.‎(2014).‎‘R&D‎and‎Credit‎Rationing‎in‎SMEs.’‎‎Economic Inquiry, 52 (3), 1153-1172.

Merriden, T.(2001). Irrisistable Forces: The Business Legacy of Naspter and the Growth of the Underground Internet.

Capstone Publishing, Oxford.

Minniti,‎M.‎(2006).‎Global‎Entrepreneurship‎Monitor,’‎2005‎Executive‎Report,‎London‎Business‎School,‎London.

Miron, E., Erez, M. and Naveh, E. (2004). Do personal characteristics and cultural values that promote innovation, quality and efficiency complete or complement each other? Journal of Organisational Behaviour, 25, 175-179.

Mohamed, S.C (2016). Beyond codes of conduct towards a public service ethos in S. Africa. Lessons to be learned from Finland and Denmark. African Journal of Public Affairs 9 (30: 39-51.

Mothobi, O and Grzybowski, L. (2017). Infrastructure deficiencies and adaptions of mobile money in sub -Saharan Africa. Paper presented at the CASE Conference on Economic Development in Africa (19 -21March). Accessed August, 2016.

Njeri, J.N. (2014).‎ Influence‎ of‎ Boards‎ of‎ Management‎ Governance‎ Practices‎ on‎ Teachers’‎ Job‎ Satisfaction‎ in‎ Secondary Schools in Ndeiya Division, Liumuru, Kenya. University of Nairobi.

Nohria, N. and Gulati, R. (1996). Is slack good or bad for innovation? Academy of Management Journal, 39, (5), 12451264.

Ogbo,‎A.‎(2012).‎‘The‎role‎of‎entrepreneurship‎in‎economic‎development:‎the‎Nigerian‎perspective,’‎European Journal of Business Management, Vol.4 No.8, 95 - 96.

Oke,‎ A.,‎ Burke,‎ G.‎ and‎ Myers,‎ A.‎ (2007).‎ ‘Innovation‎ types‎ and‎ performance‎ in‎ growing‎ UK‎ SMEs’‎ International.‎ Journal of Operational and Production Management, Vol.27No.7, 735-753.

Pellegrino,‎ G.‎ and‎ Savona,‎ M.‎ (2013).‎ ‘Is‎ Money‎ All?‎ Financing‎ Versus‎ Knowledge‎ and‎ Demand‎ Constratints‎ to‎ Innovation.’‎UNU-MERIT Working Paper Series 029.

SCB (2016). Creating statistics on environmental technology. Stockholm.

Peters, M. (2012). The impact of technology-push and demand-pull policies on technical change. Does the locus of policies matter? Research Policy, 41, (8), 1296-1308.

Power,‎B.‎and‎Reid,‎G.‎(2005).‎‘Flexibility,‎firm-specific turbulence and the performance of the long-lived small firm.

Review of Industrial Organisation, 26, 415-443.

SBC, (2016).

Schilke,‎O.‎(2014).‎‘Second-order dynamic capabilities: how do they matter? Academy of Management Perspectives, 28 (4), 368-380.

Sibanda, M (2013). Debt cancellation: Chombo torches storm. Daily News 24, July, 2013.

Sigala,‎ M.‎ (2005).‎ ‘Integrating‎ customer‎ relationship‎ management‎ in‎ hotel‎ operations:‎ managerial‎ and‎ operational implications.’‎International Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol.24 No.3, 391-413.

Slyke,‎C.V.,‎Belanger,‎F.‎and‎Comunale,‎C.CL.‎(2008a).‎‘Factors‎influencing‎the‎adoption‎of‎web-based shopping: the impact‎of‎trust.’‎Data for Advanced Information Systems, Vol.35 No.2, 32-49.

Soderquist,‎A.‎and‎Chetty,‎S.K.‎(2013).‎‘Strength‎of‎Ties‎Involved‎in‎International‎New‎Ventures,’‎European Business Review 25 960, 536-552.

Srinivasan, R., Lilien, G.L. and Rangaswamy, A. (2011). The Emergence of dominant designs. Journal of Marketing 70 (2), 1-7. © 2018, iJournals All Rights Reserved

www.ijournals.in

Page 54

IJournals: International Journal of Social Relevance & Concern ISSN-2347-9698 Volume 6 Issue 3 March 2018 Srivasan, M.S., Bewsell, D. and Jongmans, C. (2017). Just-in-case to justified irrigation:Applying co-innovation principles to irrigation water management. Outlook on Agriculture42:233-242.

Storke, P., Baker, C. and Linchy,J. (2016). The role of embedded individual values belief and attitudes and spiritual capital in shaping everyday post secular organisational culture. European Management Review, 13, 37 -51.

Thompson, L. (2003). Improving the creativity of organisational work groups. Academy of Management Executive, 17 (1), 96-11.

Tidd, J., Bessant, J. and Pavitt, K. (2005). Managing Innovation: Integrating Technological Market and Organisational Change, 3rd ed, New York: John Wiley and Sons.

Tidd, J. and Bessant, J. (2009). Managing Innovation: Integrating Technological Market Organisational Change.

Chichester: John Wiley and Sons.

Trist,‎E.‎(1983).‎‘Reference‎organisations‎and‎the‎development‎of‎organisational‎domains,’‎Human Relations, 36, 269284.

Tushman, M.L. and Anderson, P. (2006). Managing Strategic Innovation and Change. A Collection of readings, Oxford University Press.

Weick, K. (2005). Organising failures of imagination, International Public Management Journal, 8, 425-438.

Whited, T. and Wu,G. (2006). Financial constraints risk. Review of Financial Studies, 19, 531-559.

Yeh,‎Y.J.,‎Lai,‎S.Q.‎and‎Ho,‎C.T.‎(2006).‎Knowledge‎management‎enablers:‎a‎case‎study.’‎Industrial Management and Data Systems, Vol. 106, No.6, 793-810.

Yin, R.K. (2014). Case Study Research Design and Methods 5 th ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Zander, U and Kogut, B. (1995). Knowledge and the speed of transfer and imitation of organisational capabilities. An empirical test. Organ. Science. 6, 76-92.

Zollo, M. and Winter, S.G. (2002). Deliberate Learning and the Evolution of Dynamic Capabilities. Organisation Science, 13 (3), 339-351.

© 2018, iJournals All Rights Reserved

www.ijournals.in

Page 55