Search results

This paper aims to identify the winning combination of innovation capabilities for selected Brazilian agribusiness firms along different value chain links.

Adopting a quantitative approach, the authors analyzed the relationship between innovation capabilities and innovative performance of 300 agribusiness firms through a multi-regression technique.

The results showed that transaction, management and development capabilities can improve agribusiness firms’ performance in underdeveloped value chains.

For future research, the authors recommend analyzing further links such as traders and retailers to find the innovation capability for the entire agribusiness value chain.

Upstream firms should adopt new management techniques and tools, efficiently using their resources, while downstream firms should absorb and transform new technologies into products and processes.

The authors suggest formulating public policies that propose the recombination of innovation capabilities to organize agribusiness firms and avoid commodity-oriented market dependence.

The literature on agribusiness explains innovation at the chain level, based primarily on scientific advancements rather than on innovation at the firm level. In this sense, this study provides empirical evidence that can help boost innovation in agribusiness firms.

This paper investigates which innovation capabilities are more important for driving technological and non-technological innovations and which of the two innovation types has the greatest impact on the financial performance of manufacturing companies.

Based on a theoretical model of four innovation capabilities – two technological: Technology Development Capability and Operations Capability, and two non-technological: Management Capability and Transaction Capability – a database of 1,331 Brazilian manufacturing companies was analyzed through partial least squares structural equation modelling (PLS-SEM).

The results indicate that technological capabilities (Technology Development and Operations) have a greater impact on technological innovation. However, both technological capabilities also affect non-technological innovation, with the Technology Development Capability being the most influential in this relationship. Results also indicate that non-technological capabilities (Management and Transaction) have a greater impact on non-technological innovation. Nevertheless, both non-technological capabilities also impact technological innovation, especially the Transaction Capability, which is the most influential in this relationship. Furthermore, it was identified that non-technological innovation has a more significant impact on financial performance than technological innovation, presenting a novel finding to the field of innovation in manufacturing.

This manuscript refutes prior discussions and opens new possibilities for the interconnection of dynamic and ordinary innovation capabilities in two different arrangements, each aimed at improving a specific type of innovation. A theoretical framework is proposed to highlight that, depending on the innovation type focused on, ordinary innovation capabilities can be more relevant than dynamic ones for innovation in the manufacturing sector. From these theoretical advancements, practitioners can understand that investments in non-technological resources, skills and routines can also boost technological innovation, as well as sales, profit and market share growth.

This paper aims to identify and compare the arrangements of innovation capabilities and their correlation with the socio-environmental responsibility of two groups: companies with less socio-environmental concern (Group Gray) and companies with greater socio-environmental concern (Group Green).

Descriptive and quantitative research with 1,322 Brazilian manufacturing companies was conducted. We analyzed (1) the actual arrangement of capabilities and (2) the ideal arrangement of capabilities with the greatest impact on innovation.

Results suggest that there is a difference in the arrangement of capabilities between the two groups. Also, there is a difference between the capabilities that effectively receive the companies' attention and the capabilities that should be valued and developed. Green companies must focus their efforts on Transaction capability, followed respectively by Management, Development and Operation capabilities. Gray companies must focus on Development capability, followed by Management, Transaction and Operation capabilities.

By identifying the ideal capability arrangement, this research provides important information that can guide managers in planning internal strategies for investments, prioritizing management efforts and rearranging capabilities to boost innovation for sustainability.