Can innovation and compliance go together?
A conceptual framework
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.23925/2179-3565.2024v15i2p33-51Palabras clave:
Innovation, Compliance, Theory of Knowledge, Information flow, Intellectual capital, RiskResumen
This essay aims to identify the points of congruence and divergence between the need for coexistence of compliance and innovation in companies. This essay discusses how innovation interferes with economic dynamics, and how compliance can be used to control and limit innovation. We identified factors that influence the highest level of compliance and that favor the innovative capabilities of companies. The joint analysis of these factors allowed the elaboration of eight theoretical propositions that connect compliance and innovation, being such coexistence is not an option for companies, but a necessity, exposing an antagonistic and symbiotic relationship between the two themes. We believe that this essay enriches the existing literature by connecting several research that, in a first analysis, do not establish a connection. We propose a conceptual framework with propositions to be empirically tested by future studies. In addition, we were able to expose that compliance has been a neglected term in academic research, requiring further studies on how organizations can benefit from it. We point out the various nuances of possibilities that the symbiotic relationship between compliance and innovation can give rise to. Companies that have innovative processes or partnerships for this purpose must implement compliance in their governance structure, but horizontally, defining people or sectors responsible for carrying out internal and external compliance in an active position, in the various stages of building innovation: development, testing and production. Managers should be aware that compliance should not be so rigid as to restrict freedom, self-direction and promote excessively high costs.
Citas
Aguilera, R. V., Waldman, D.A. and Siegel, D.S. (2022). Responsibility and Organization Science: Integrating Micro and Macro Perspectives. Organization Science, 33(1), 483–494. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2021.1518
Ahmed, R.R., Streimikiene, D. and Zheng, X. (2021). The Impact of Proactive Environmental Strategy on Competitive and Sustainable Development of Organizations. Journal of Competitiveness, 13(4), 5–24. https://doi.org/10.7441/joc.2021.04.01
Andersen, K. V., Beukel, K. and Tyler, B. B. (2021). Learning to Litigate: the Relationship Between Past Litigation Experience and Litigation Outcomes in the Chinese Intellectual Property System. Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research, 73, 479–500. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41471-021-00118-4
Arbix, G., Miranda, Z., Toledo, D. C. de, and Zancul, E. de S. (2018). Made in China 2025 e Industrie 4.0: a difícil transição chinesa do catching up à economia puxada pela inovação, Tempo Social, 30(3), 143-170. https://doi.org/10.11606/0103-2070.ts.2018.144303
Argote, L., Guo, J., Park, S.S. and Hahl, O. (2022). The Mechanisms and Components of Knowledge Transfer: The Virtual Special Issue on Knowledge Transfer Within Organizations. Organization Science, 33(3), 1232–1249. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2022.1590
Awa, H. O., Ukoha, O., and Igwe, S. R. (2017). Revisiting technology-organization-environment (T-O-E) theory for enriched applicability. The Bottom Line, 30(1), 2–22. https://doi.org/10.1108/bl-12-2016-0044
Broadstock, D. C., Matousek, R., Meyer, M., and Tzeremes, N G. (2020). Does corporate social responsibility impact firms' innovation capacity? The indirect link between environmental & social governance implementation and innovation performance. Journal of Business Research, 119, 99-110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.10.061
Bueno, E., Del Real, H., Fernández, P., Longo, M., Merino, C., Murcia, C. and Salmador, M.P. (2011). Modelo Intellectus: Medición Y Gestión Del Capital Intelectual. Documentos Intellectus, 9/10, 1-76.
Cammelli, F., Levy, S.A., Grabs, J., Valentim, J.F. and Garrett, R.D. (2022). Effectiveness-equity tradeoffs in enforcing exclusionary supply chain policies: Lessons from the Amazonian cattle sector. Journal of Cleaner Production, 332, 130031. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.130031
Carvalho, et al. (Org.) (2019). Manual de Compliance. Rio de Janeiro: Forense.
Chen, J., Zhu, Z. and Xie, H. Y. (2004). Measuring intellectual capital: a new model and empirical study. Journal of Intellectual capital, 5(1), 195-212. https://doi.org/10.1108/14691930410513003
Demirkan, I., Yang, Q., and Jiang, C.X. (2019). Corporate entrepreneurship of emerging market firms: current research and future directions. New England Journal of Entrepreneurship, 22(1), 5-30. https://doi.org/10.1108/NEJE-04-2019-0024
Dieng-Kuntz, R. (2006). Corporate semantic webs. In: Schwartz, D. (Ed.). Encyclopedia of knowledge management, Hershey: Idea Group Publishing.
Dosi, G., Nelson, R., and Winter, S. G. (2000). Introduction: the nature and dynamics of organizational capabilities. In: Dosi, G., Nelson, R., and Winter (Ed.). Nature & dynamics of organizational capabilities. New York: Oxford University Press, 1-22.
Dwenger, N. and Treber, L. (2022). Shaming for Tax Enforcement, Management Science, No. June, 0–32. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2021.4295
Ferenhof, H.A., Durst, S., Zaniboni Bialecki, M. and Selig, P.M. (2015). Intellectual capital dimensions: state of the art in 2014. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 16(1), 58-100. https://doi.org/10.1108/JIC-02-2014-0021
Freeman, C., and Soete, L. (2008). A economia da inovação industrial, Campinas: Unicamp Editora.
Gloet, M., and Terziovski, M. (2004). Exploring the relationship between knowledge management practices and innovation performance. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, 15(5), 402-409. https://doi.org/10.1108/17410380410540390
Gogokhia, T. and Berulava, G. (2021). Business environment reforms, innovation and firm productivity in transition economies. Eurasian Business Review, Springer International Publishing, 11(2), 221–245. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40821-020-00167-5
Ha, L.T. and Thanh, T.T. (2022). Effects of digital public services on trades in green goods: Does institutional quality matter?, Journal of Innovation and Knowledge, Elsevier Espana, 7(1), 100168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jik.2022.100168
Holt, G. E. (2006). SOX: “best practices” or too much accountability. The Bottom Line, 19(3), 139–145. https://doi.org/10.1108/08880450610682554
Hull, J., Gupta, A., and Kloppenburg, S. (2021). Interrogating the promises and perils of climate cryptogovernance: Blockchain discourses in international climate politics. Earth System Governance, 9, 100117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esg.2021.100117
Jain A., and Ranjan S. (2020). Implications of emerging technologies on the future of work. IIMB Management Review, 32(4), 2020, 448-454. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iimb.2020.11.004
Jensen, M., and Meckling, W. (1976). Theory of the firm: managerial behavior, agency cost, and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3(4), 305-360. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-405X(76)90026-X
Jordão, R.V.D., Almeida, V.R.D., and Novas, J. (2022). Intellectual capital, sustainable economic and financial performance and value creation in emerging markets: the case of Brazil. The Bottom Line, 35(1), 1-22. https://doi.org/10.1108/BL-11-2021-0103
Joullié, J.E. and Gould, A.M. (2021). Theory, explanation, and understanding in management research. BRQ Business Research Quarterly, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1177/23409444211012414
Jum'a, L., Zimon, D., Ikram, M., and Madzík, P. (2022). Towards a sustainability paradigm; the nexus between lean green practices, sustainability-oriented innovation and Triple Bottom Line. International Journal of Production Economics, 24, 108393. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2021.108393
Keller, A., Lumineau, F., Mellewigt, T. and Ariño, A. (2021). Alliance governance mechanisms in the face of disruption. Organization Science, 32(6), 1542–1570. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2021.1437
Kogut, B., and Zander, U. (2003). Knowledge of the firm and the evolucionary theory of the multinational corporation. Journal of International Business Studies, 5(1), 516-529. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490248
Kotler, P., and Keller, K. (2006). Administração de Marketing, 12 edição, São Paulo: Pearson Prentine Hall.
Le, H. T., and Hoang, D. P. (2021). Economic sanctions and environmental performance: The moderating roles of financial market development and institutional quality. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 22, 19657–19678 doi:10.1007/s11356-021-17103-3.
Liang, C.J., Chen, T.Y. and Lin, Y.L. (2013). How do different business models affect intellectual capital?. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 14(2), 176-191. https://doi.org/10.1108/14691931311323832
Lupova-Henry, E., Blili, S. and Dal Zotto, C. (2021). Designing organised clusters as social actors: a meta-organisational approach. Journal of Organization Design, Springer International Publishing, 10(1), 35–54. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41469-021-00092-5
Njoroge, M., Anderson, W., and Mbura, O. (2019). Innovation strategy and economic sustainability in the hospitality industry. The Bottom Line, 32(4), 253–268. https://doi.org/10.1108/bl-03-2019-0080
Nonaka, I. (2007). The Knowledge-creating Company, Harvard Business Review, 1, 162-171.
Nonaka, I., and Konno, N. (1998). The Concept of “Ba”: Building a Foundation for Knowledge Creation. California Management Review, 40(3), 40-54. https://doi.org/10.2307/41165942
Nonaka, I., and Takeuchi, H. (1997). Criação de Conhecimento na Empresa, 12a. Edição. Rio de Janeiro: Campus.
Oliveira, R. T. de, Verreynne, M., Steen, J, and Indulska, M. (2021). Creating value by giving away: A typology of different innovation revealing strategies. Journal of Business Research, 127, 137-150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.01.038
Oliveira Júnior, M. M. (2001). Gestão Estratégica do Conhecimento: Integrando Aprendizagem, Conhecimento e Competências. São Paulo: Atlas.
Parnell, B., Stone, M., and Aravopoulou, E. (2018). How leaders manage their business models using information. The Bottom Line, 31(2), 150–167. https://doi.org/10.1108/bl-04-2018-0017
Peukert, C., Bechtold, S., Batikas, M. and Kretschmer, T. (2022). Regulatory Spillovers and Data Governance: Evidence from the GDPR. Marketing Science, June, 0–23. https://doi.org/10.1287/mksc.2021.1339
Ren, S., He, D., Yan, J., Zeng, H., and Tan, J. (2022). Environmental labeling certification and corporate environmental innovation: The moderating role of corporate ownership and local government intervention. Journal of Business Research, 140, 556-571. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.11.023
Rupeika-Apoga, R., Petrovska, K., and Bule, L. (2022). The Effect of Digital Orientation and Digital Capability on Digital Transformation of SMEs during the COVID-19 Pandemic. Journal of Theoretical and Applied Electronic Commerce Research, 17(2), 669-685. https://doi.org/10.3390/jtaer17020035
Schulz, K., and Feist, M. (2021). Leveraging blockchain technology for innovative climate finance under the Green Climate Fund, Earth System Governance, 7, 100084. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esg.2020.100084
Schumpeter, J.A. (1982). Teoria do desenvolvimento econômico, São Paulo: Editora Abril.
Setzer, V. W. (2001). Dado, Informação, Conhecimento e Competência. In: Setzer, V. W. (Org). Os Meios Eletrônicos e a Educação. Uma Visão Alternativa. São Paulo: Escrituras, Coleção Ensaios Transversais.
Stiegler, B. (1998). Technics and time 1, Stanford, Stanford University Press.
Stone, M., Aravopoulou, E., Evans, G., Aldhaen, E., Parnell, Brett D. (2018). From information mismanagement to misinformation – the dark side of information management. The Bottom Line, 32(1), 47-70. https://doi.org/10.1108/BL-09-2018-0043
Temel, S., Mention, A.-L. and Yurtseven, A.E. (2021). Cooperation for innovation: more is not necessarily merrier. European Journal of Innovation Management. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJIM-10-2020-0392
Thongsri, N., and Chang, A.K. (2019). Interactions Among Factors Influencing Product Innovation and Innovation Behaviour: Market Orientation, Managerial Ties, and Government Support. Sustainability, 11(2793), 21-32. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11102793
Tian, H., Otchere, S. K, Dogbe, C. S. K., Addy, W. O., and Hammond, F. (2021a). New Product Creativity Mediating the Relationship Between Organizational Bricolage and the Competitive Advantage of SMEs. Journal of Competitiveness, 13(4), 151–166. https://doi.org/10.7441/joc.2021.04.09
Tian, H. yun, Dogbe, C.S.K., Bamfo, B.A., Pomegbe, W.W.K. and Borah, P.S. (2021b). Assessing the intermediary role of relationship ending capability and dark side between network embeddedness and SMEs’ innovation performance. Journal of Competitiveness, 13(1), 146–163. https://doi.org/10.7441/joc.2021.01.09
Trivedi, K., and Srivastava, K.B.L. (2022). The role of knowledge management processes in leveraging competitive strategies to achieve firm innovativeness. The Bottom Line, 35(2/3), 53-72. https://doi.org/10.1108/BL-06-2021-0071
Watz, M. and Hallstedt, S.I. (2022). Towards sustainable product development – Insights from testing and evaluating a profile model for management of sustainability integration into design requirements. Journal of Cleaner Production, 346, 131000. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.131000
Wu, H.Y., Chen, J.K. and Chen, I.S. (2010). Innovation capital indicator assessment of Taiwanese Universities: A hybrid fuzzy model application. Expert Systems with Applications, 37(2), 1635-1642. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2009.06.045
Zhu, Y., Liu, J., Lin, S. and Liang, K. (2022). Unlock the potential of regional innovation environment: The promotion of innovative behavior from the career perspective, Journal of Innovation & Knowledge, 7(3), 100206. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jik.2022.100206
Zhu, Z. (2006). Nonaka meets Giddens: A critique; Knowledge. Management Research & Practice, 4(2), 106-115. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.kmrp.8500091
Descargas
Publicado
Número
Sección
Licencia
This Journal is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivers 4.0 International license.
1.The author (s) authorize the publication of the article in the journal;
2.The author (s) warrant that the contribution is original and unpublished and is not in the process of being evaluated in other journal (s);
3. The journal is not responsible for the opinions, ideas and concepts emitted in the texts, as they are the sole responsibility of its author (s);
4. The editors are entitled to make textual adjustments and to adapt the articles to the standards of publication.
