Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Innovation-branding: should all firms be equally ambidextrous?

Innovation-branding: should all firms be equally ambidextrous? The fundamental question asked in this study is – should all firms engage in innovation and branding activities to the same extent to achieve their goals? The purpose of this paper is to answer this question, a strategic typology that integrates branding and innovation (BI) from an organizational ambidexterity perspective is proposed.Design/methodology/approachThis paper builds theory by proposing a typology. Integrating the literature on BI, organizational ambidexterity and resource/knowledge-based view of firms, this study posits that to create a value proposition, a firm could choose to engage in innovation and branding activities in a variety of ways depending on their dominant strategic orientation along two dimensions of ambidexterity.FindingsThe four proposed typical branding-innovation orientations are low innovation × low branding; low innovation × high branding; high innovation × low branding; and high innovation × high branding.Practical implicationsA firm should choose its dominant strategic orientation depending on conditions such as market, consumers, needs and demand and resources.Originality/valueBy framing the innovation-branding paradox within an organizational ambidexterity framework, the proposed typology helps integrate two complementary and yet conflicting organizational functions by shifting the focus from an operational to a strategic level. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Journal of Product & Brand Management Emerald Publishing

Innovation-branding: should all firms be equally ambidextrous?

Loading next page...
 
/lp/emerald-publishing/innovation-branding-should-all-firms-be-equally-ambidextrous-6rdxe1v8eY

References

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
Emerald Publishing
Copyright
© Emerald Publishing Limited
ISSN
1061-0421
eISSN
1061-0421
DOI
10.1108/jpbm-07-2019-2476
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

The fundamental question asked in this study is – should all firms engage in innovation and branding activities to the same extent to achieve their goals? The purpose of this paper is to answer this question, a strategic typology that integrates branding and innovation (BI) from an organizational ambidexterity perspective is proposed.Design/methodology/approachThis paper builds theory by proposing a typology. Integrating the literature on BI, organizational ambidexterity and resource/knowledge-based view of firms, this study posits that to create a value proposition, a firm could choose to engage in innovation and branding activities in a variety of ways depending on their dominant strategic orientation along two dimensions of ambidexterity.FindingsThe four proposed typical branding-innovation orientations are low innovation × low branding; low innovation × high branding; high innovation × low branding; and high innovation × high branding.Practical implicationsA firm should choose its dominant strategic orientation depending on conditions such as market, consumers, needs and demand and resources.Originality/valueBy framing the innovation-branding paradox within an organizational ambidexterity framework, the proposed typology helps integrate two complementary and yet conflicting organizational functions by shifting the focus from an operational to a strategic level.

Journal

Journal of Product & Brand ManagementEmerald Publishing

Published: May 21, 2021

Keywords: Innovation; Co-creation; Branding; Typology; Ambidexterity; Exploration; Exploitation

References