The imitation-innovation link, external knowledge search and China's innovation system
| Pages | 727-752 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/JIC-05-2019-0092 |
| Published date | 25 May 2020 |
| Date | 25 May 2020 |
| Author | Jie Wu,Xinhe Zhang,Shuaihe Zhuo,Martin Meyer,Bin Li,Haifeng Yan |
| Subject Matter | Knowledge management,HR & organizational behaviour,Organizational structure/dynamics,Accounting & Finance,Information & knowledge management |
The imitation-innovation link,
external knowledge search and
China’s innovation system
Jie Wu
Department of Management and Marketing, University of Macau, Zhuhai, Macao
Xinhe Zhang
University of Macau, Zhuhai, Macao
Shuaihe Zhuo
Macau University of Science and Technology, Macao, China
Martin Meyer
King’s College, University of Aberdeen Business School, Aberdeen, UK and
School of Technology and Innovation, University of Vaasa, Vaasa, Finland
Bin Li
Shanghai University of Finance and Economics, Shanghai, China, and
Haifeng Yan
East China University of Science and Technology, Shanghai, China
Abstract
Purpose –The authors attempt to answer the basic questions: How is imitation tied to innovation? This
question is addressed in the context of China’s innovation system in the 2000s where Chinese industrial firms
simultaneously implement innovation and imitation strategies in their new product developments.
Design/methodology/approach –The authors first build on lattice theory and supermodularity theory to
provide a rigorous and careful mathematical proof. The authors further conduct the empirical analyses using
an original data on Chinese manufacturing firms’innovation and imitation strategies in the development of
new products in 2002.
Findings –This article reveals the complementarity relation between imitation andinnovation strategies and
identifies external knowledge search as the boundary condition that influences the extent to which two
strategies reinforce each other.
Research limitations/implications –The findings of the imitation-innovation complementarity suggest
that imitation is not only an indispensable strategy independent of innovation, but also is vital to the
effectiveness of innovation itself.
Practical implications –The imitation-innovation complementarity finding provides some evidence for the
contention that Chinese latecomers exploit the synergies of imitation and innovation, transforming themselves
from imitators to innovators and vibrant competitors in the global market (Wu et al., 2016) and, as a result,
national innovation system has evolved from a state-sponsored imitation program to the imitation-innovation
mixture.
Originality/value –In contrast to earlier innovation studies in which innovation and imitation are unrelated,
this study reveals that imitation complements innovation, and the extent of Chinese firms’external knowledge
search affects the complementary relationship between imitation and innovation. These findings add
important insights to the innovation management literature and contribute empirical evidence to the interplay
of innovation and imitation enhancing national innovation system.
Keywords Innovation, Imitation, New product development, Knowledge search, China innovation System
Paper type Research paper
The imitation-
innovation link
727
The authors would like to acknowledge the financial support provided by University of Macau MYRG
(Grant No. MYRG 2018-00171-FBA) for this research.
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
https://www.emerald.com/insight/1469-1930.htm
Received 7 May 2019
Revised 16 February 2020
9 March 2020
3 April 2020
Accepted 6 April 2020
Journal of Intellectual Capital
Vol. 21 No. 5, 2020
pp. 727-752
© Emerald Publishing Limited
1469-1930
DOI 10.1108/JIC-05-2019-0092
Introduction
How is imitation tied to innovation? Two lines of research have addressed the topic of the
relationship between imitation and innovation. In the economics literature, the argument is
often made that imitation is related to convergence or catching up of frontier firms (Aghion
et al., 2001;Davidson and Segerstrom, 1998;Zeng, 2001). In this literature, innovation and
imitation were conceptualized as unrelated, as each was considered to embody a distinct
mindset. While innovation is a necessary condition for an organization’s survival and growth,
imitation is often considered as a spontaneous and haphazard act impeding innovation
(Ethiraj et al., 2008;Lenox et al., 2006;Rivkin, 2000,2001;Winter and Szulanski, 2001). Some
innovation management scholars, however, provide a different argument. Imitation is not
contradictory to, but rather supportive of, innovation because it develops capabilities
consistent with innovation (Bolton, 1993;Hurley and Chater, 2005;Iacoboni, 2009;Wu
et al., 2017).
The question thus arises whether imitation is an enabler or a hindrance of innovation. The
discrepancy between the two arguments on the relationship between imitation and
innovation may be partly due to different foci. The first line of research tends to concentrate
on the imitation-innovation problem of finding effective ways of reconciling the two
strategies, while the second line tends to focus on the assistance of imitation to innovation.
Anecdotal and empirical evidence of a few consummate innovators also acting as imitators
(e.g., Wal-Mart, IBM, Apple, Procter and Gamble, Sherwin-Williams) has suggested a more
complicated relationship. “Even if we’re trying to innovate, we also want to know what other
people have out there, so some of the innovation ... is driven by imitation,”exclaimed by
Lionel L. Nowell, former senior vice president and treasurer, PepsiCo. As Levitt (1966, p. 70)
notes, “to behave lopsidedly as if innovation were a messiah, and especially at the awful
expense of a realistic appreciation of the fructifying power of more systematic imitation,
would be an even greater mistake.”Many successful organizations have used imitation as an
important strategy to outperform competitors and combined it with innovation to offer a
superior product or service features, in particular, the firms from developing economies (e.g.,
Tata and Ranbaxy in India, Odebrecht and Promon in Brazil, Huawei, and Lenovo in China)
having successfully emerged as key players challenging dominant innovators in
international markets. Drawing on these business realities, we define imitation as an
independent, rather than equivalent, to innovation: copying innovations developed by others
(i.e., imitation) will usually be cheaper than executing a firm’s innovative activity (Cappelli
et al., 2014), and conceptualize the relationship between imitation and innovation as the
complementarity.
Although several innovation management scholars have argued that imitation only
provides cost benefits under certain conditions and are less beneficial than innovation in
providing new ideas and technologies, these scholars have tended to conceptualize imitation
as part of an overarching innovation strategy (Arora and Gambardella, 1990;Lichtenthaler,
2009). For example, by distinguishing between pure knowledge transfer and “reflective
imitation,”which requires active adaptation of technology to establish a new setting and
reflects a new user’s particular requirements, Bolton (1993) elevated reflective imitation
strategy beyond simple copying and knowledge transfer to something closer to innovation
strategy. On the other hand, Posen et al. (2013, p. 151) characterized imitation as “a search
process in which a firm attempt to replace a subset of its attributes with those of a high
performing firm.”Moreover, previous studies have typically criticized findings from business
cases, ideas from managerial practices, and anecdotes that provide compelling accounts of
the complementarity between innovation and imitation. Moreover, whether the relationship
between imitation and innovation is affected by certain contextual variables has not been
studied. This represents a significant lacuna because the interplay of innovation and
imitation does not occur in a vacuum and is subject to specific organizational characteristics.
JIC
21,5
728
To continue reading
Request your trial