The Effect of Attitude on Innovation Generation in Open Innovation Teams

Year 2022, Volume: 9 Issue: 2, 153 - 173, 01.07.2022

Sezer Ayaz , Belkıs Özkara

Abstract

Open innovation has been studied in many different sample groups and cultures. However, relationship between open innovation attitude and open innovation generating capacity on open innovation teams is investigated for the first time in Turkey. The data were obtained through a questionnaire. Descriptive statistics, ANOVA, independent samples t-test, simple linear regression analysis and Pearson correlation analysis were used to analyze data. In consequence of analysis and tests, significant differences were found as to demographic characteristics of respondents belonging to different groups. In result of correlation analysis, no significant relationship was found between open innovation attitude and open innovation generation capacity at the p <.01 level. The regression analysis showed that there is no significant predictor at p <.05 level between open innovation attitude and open innovation generation capacity. The results can be used in businesses to create new innovation strategies and for academicians to new researches on this subject.

Keywords

Open innovation, attitude, innovation generation capacity

Açık İnovasyon Takımlarında Tutumun İnovasyon Üretme Üzerindeki Etkisi

Abstract

Açık inovasyon birçok farklı örneklem grubu ve kültürde incelenmiştir. Ancak, açık inovasyon ekiplerinde açık inovasyon tutumu ile açık inovasyon üretme kapasitesi arasındaki ilişki Türkiye'de ilk kez araştırılmıştır. Veriler anket yoluyla elde edilmiştir. Verilerin analizinde tanımlayıcı istatistikler, ANOVA, bağımsız örnekler t testi, basit doğrusal regresyon analizi ve Pearson korelasyon analizi kullanılmıştır. Analiz ve testler sonucunda, farklı gruplara ait katılımcıların demografik özelliklerine göre önemli farklılıklar bulunmuştur. Korelasyon analizi sonucunda açık inovasyon tutumu ile açık inovasyon üretme kapasitesi arasında p<.01 düzeyinde anlamlı bir ilişki bulunamamıştır. Regresyon analizi, açık inovasyon tutumu ile açık inovasyon üretme kapasitesi arasında p <.05 düzeyinde anlamlı bir yordayıcı olmadığını göstermiştir. Elde edilen sonuçlar işletmelerin yeni inovasyon stratejileri oluşturmalarında ve akademisyenlerin bu konuda yeni araştırmalar yapmalarında kullanılabilir.

Keywords

Açık inovasyon, tutum, inovasyon üretme kapasitesi

References

• Ajzen, I. (1991). The Theory of Planned Behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. 50. 179-211. 10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T.
• Ajzen, I., Fishbein, M. (1977). Attitude-behavior relations: A theoretical analysis and review of empirical research. Psychol. Bull. 84:888-918
• Arnold, J., Cooper, C. L., & Robertson, I. T. (1991). Work psychology. Understanding human behaviour in the workplace. Pitman, London
• Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2012). Sosyal bilimler için veri analiz el kitabı. Ankara: Pegem Akedemi Yayıncılık.
• Büyüköztürk, Ş., Kılıç Çakmak, E., Akgün, Ö.E., Karadeniz, Ş. & Demirel, F. (2014). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri (17. Baskı). Ankara: Pegem Yayınları
• Chae, B., Li, X. & Zhu, R. (2013). Judging product effectiveness from perceived spatial proximity. Journal of Consumer Research, 40(2), 317-335.
• Chesbrough, H. (2003). Open innovation: the new imperative for creating and profiting from technology. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
• Chesbrough, H. (2003). The Era of Open Innovation, MIT sloan Management Rewiew, Vol. 44, Issue 3, 35-41.
• Chesbrough, H. W. & Appleyard, M. M. (2007). Open Innovation and Strategy. California Management Review, 50(1), 57–76.
• Coulter, K. S. & Norberg, P. A. (2009). The effects of physical distance between regular and sale prices on numerical difference perceptions. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 19(2), 144-157.
• Davidson, A. R., Jaccard, J. J. (1979). Variables that moderate the attitude-behavior relation: Results of a longitudinal survey. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 37: 1 364-76
• Dodgson, M. Gann, D. & Salter, A. (2006).The role of technology in the shift towards open innovation: The case of Procter and Gamble. Research and Development Management, 36, 333–346.
• Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford University Press.
• Gabrenya, W. K., Arkin, R. M. (1979). The effect of commitment on expectancy value and expectancy weight in social decision making. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 5:86-90
• Gassmann, O (2006). Opening up the innovation process: Towards an agenda. RandD Management, 36, 223–228.
• Huang, F., Rice, J. (2009). The role of absorptive capacity in facilitating “open innovation” outcomes: a study of australian SMEs in the manufacturing sector. International Journal of Innovation Management Vol. 13, No. 2 pp. 201–220.
• JISC (2009). Facilitating Open Innovation: Landscape and Feasiblity Study, JISC Business and Community Engagement Programme, October.
• Karasar, N. (2004). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri [Scientific research methods] (13. Ed.). Ankara: Nobel Publishing.
• King, B. T., Janis, 1. L. (1956). Comparison of the effectiveness of improvised versus non-improvised role-playing in producing opinion changes. Hum. Relat. 9: 1 77-86
• Kline, R.B. (2011). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. Newyork: The Guilford Press, 3.Baskı.
• Lichtenthaler, U. (2006). Technology exploitation strategies in the context of open innovation. International Journal of Technology Intelligence and Planning, 2(1), 1–21.
• Morris, M., Bessant, J., & Barnes, J. (2006). Using learning networks to enable industrial development: Case studies from South Africa. International Journal of Operations & Production Management.
• Nisbett, R. E., Ross, L. (1980). Human inference: Strategies and shortcomings of social judgment. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
• Ovacı, C. (2015). Açık İnovasyon ve Tüketicilerin Birlikte Yaratma Davranışlarını Etkileyen Faktörler. Anadolu Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Doktora Tezi, Eskişehir.
• Penrose, E.G. (1959). The Theory of the Growth of the Firm. New York:Wiley.
• Powell, R. (1991). Absolute and relative gains in international relations, American Political Science Review, 85(4), 1303–1320.
• Prajogo, D., Ahmed, P. (2006). Relationships between innovation stimulus, innovation capacity, and innovation performance. R&D Management. 36. 10.1111/j.1467 9310.2006.00450.x.
• Seltzer, E., Mahmoudi, D. (2013). Citizen participation, open innovation, and crowdsourcing: Challenges and opportunities for planning. Journal of Planning Literature, 28(1), 3-18.
• Sieg, J. H., Wallin, M. W. & Von Krogh, G. (2010). Managerial challenges in open innovation: a study of innovation intermediation in the chemical industry. Research and Development Management, 40(3), 281-291.
• Schumpeter, J.A. (1942). Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy. Harper. NY.
• Schwartz, S. H. (1978). Temporal instability as a moderator of the attitude-behavior relationship. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 36: 715-24
• Stone, J., Cooper, J. (2003). The effect of self-attribute relevance on how selfesteem moderates attitude change in dissonance processes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 39(5), 508-515.
• Taylor, S. E., Fiske, S. T. (1978). Salience, attention, and attribution: Top of the head phenomena. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 11, 249-288.
• Thomas, M., Tsai, C. I. (2012). Psychological distance and subjective experience: How distancing reduces the feeling of difficulty. Journal of Consumer Research, 39(2), 324-340.
• Ural, A., Kılıç, İ. (2005). Bilimsel araştırma süreci ve SPSS ile veri analizi. Ankara: Detay Yayıncılık.
• West, J., Gallagher, S. (2006). Challenges of open innovation: The paradox of firm investment in open-source software. Research and Development Management, 36, 319–331.
• Wicker, A. W. (1969). Attitudes versus action: The relationship of verbal and overt behavioral responses to attitude objects. J. Soc. Issues 25:41-78
• Vrande, V. V. D., Jong, J. P. J. D., Vanhaverbeke, W. & Rochemont, M. D. (2009). Open innovation in SMEs: Trends, motives and management challenges. Technovation, Volume 29, Issues 6–7, 423-437.