Organizational and communication studies have established that communication plays a critical role in organizational innovation, because internal and external communication allows individuals, groups, and organizations to recombine existing knowledge into new ideas. In light of this, this research re-directs our attention to the specific communicative antecedents of an organization’s overall propensity for innovation. Survey data from 293 nonprofit organizations showed that interorganizational partnership diversity, knowledge sharing via the use of information communication technologies (ICTs), and entrepreneurial orientation affect organizational innovativeness, with differential effects on administrative innovativeness and technological innovativeness. Specifically, interorganizational partnership diversity promoted administrative innovativeness but had an inverted U-shaped curvilinear relationship with technological innovativeness. Effective ICT-mediated knowledge sharing improved technological innovativeness only. The combination of interorganizational partnership diversity and EO (i.e., proactiveness) increased administrative innovativeness. However, interorganizational partnership diversity and effective knowledge sharing indirectly influenced technological innovativeness via proactiveness. This study advances research on organizational innovation, ICTs, and interorganizational networks.
AbrahamsonE.RosenkopfL. (1997). Social network effects on the extent of innovation diffusion: A computer simulation. Organization Science, 8(3), 289–309.
2.
AtoubaY. C. (2019). Let’s start from the beginning: Examining the connections between partner selection, trust, and communicative effectiveness in voluntary partnerships among human services nonprofits. Communication Research, 46(2), 179–207.
3.
BarleyW. C. (2015). Anticipatory work: How the need to represent knowledge across boundaries shapes work practices within them. Organization Science, 26(6), 1612–1628.
4.
BockG. -W.ZmudR. W.KimY. -G.LeeJ. -N. (2005). Behavioral intention formation in knowledge sharing: Examining the roles of extrinsic motivators, social-psychological forces, and organizational climate. MIS Quarterly, 29(1), 87–111.
5.
BolandR. J.LyytinenK.YooY. (2007). Wakes of innovation in project networks: The case of digital 3-D representations in architecture, engineering, and construction. Organization Science, 18(4), 631–647.
6.
ChoiS. Y.LeeH.YooY. (2010). The impact of information technology and transactive memory systems on knowledge sharing, application, and team performance: A field study. MIS Quarterly, 34(4), 855–870.
7.
ChuiM.ManyikaJ.BughinJ.DobbsR.RoxburghC.SarrazinH.SandsG.WestergrenM. (2012). The social economy: Unlocking value and productivity through social technologies. McKinsey Global Institute.
8.
CummingsJ. N. (2004). Work groups, structural diversity, and knowledge sharing in a global organization. Management Science, 50(3), 352–364.
9.
CurtisL.EdwardsC.FraserK. L.GudelskyS.HolmquistJ.ThorntonK.SweetserK. D. (2010). Adoption of social media for public relations by nonprofit organizations. Public Relations Review, 36(1), 90–92.
10.
CzepielJ. A. (1975). Patterns of interorganizational communications and the diffusion of a major technological innovation in a competitive industrial community. Academy of Management Journal, 18(1), 6–24.
11.
DaftR. L. (1978). A dual-core model of organizational innovation. Academy of Management Journal, 21(2), 193–210.
12.
DamanpourF. (1988). Innovation type, radicalness, and the adoption process. Communication Research, 15(5), 545–567.
13.
DamanpourF. (1991). Organizational innovation: A meta-analysis of effects of determinants and moderators. Academy of Management Journal, 34(3), 555–590.
14.
DamanpourF. (1992). Organizational size and innovation. Organization Studies, 13(3), 375–402.
15.
DamanpourF.Sanchez-HenriquezF.ChiuH. (2018). Internal and external sources and the adoption of innovations in organizations. British Journal of Management, 29(4), 712–730.
16.
DewettT.JonesG. R. (2001). The role of information technology in the organization: A review, model, and assessment. Journal of Management, 27, 313–346.
17.
DruckerP. F. (2015). Innovation and entrepreneurship. Routledge.
18.
EllisonN. B.GibbsJ. L.WeberM. S. (2015). The use of enterprise social network sites for knowledge sharing in distributed organizations: The role of organizational affordances. American Behavioral Scientist, 59(1), 103−123.
19.
FuJ. S.CooperK. R. (2020). Interorganizational network portfolios of nonprofit organizations: Implications for collaboration management. Nonprofit Management & Leadership. Advance online publication. http://doi.org/10.1002/NML.21438
20.
FulkJ.YuanY. C. (2013). Location, motivation, and social capitalization via enterprise social networking. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 19(1), 20–37.
21.
FultonB. R. (2018). Organizations and survey research: Implementing response enhancing strategies and conducting nonresponse analyses. Sociological Methods & Research, 47(2), 240–276.
22.
GarnerJ. T. (2009). Strategic dissent: Expressions of organizational dissent motivated by influence goals. International Journal of Strategic Communication, 3(1), 34–51.
23.
GibbsJ. L.RozaidiN. A.EisenbergJ. (2013). Overcoming the “ideology of openness”: Probing the affordances of social media for organizational knowledge sharing. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 19(1), 102–120.
24.
GillR.GaneshS. (2007). Empowerment, constraint, and the entrepreneurial self: A study of women entrepreneurs. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 35(3), 268–293.
25.
GoesJ. B.ParkS. H. (1997). Interorganizational links and innovation: The case of hospital services. Academy of Management Journal, 40(3), 673–696.
26.
HargadonA. B.SuttonR. I. (1997). Technology brokering and innovation in a product development firm. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42, 716–749.
27.
HelmS. T.AnderssonF. O. (2010). Beyond taxonomy: An empirical validation of social entrepreneurship in the nonprofit sector. Nonprofit Management & Leadership, 20(3), 259–276.
28.
HendersonR.ClarkK. (1990). Architectural innovation: The reconfiguration of existing product technologies and the failure of established firms. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1), 9–30.
29.
HultG. T. M.HurleyR. F.KnightG. A. (2004). Innovativeness: Its antecedents and impact on business performance. Industrial Marketing Management, 33(5), 429–438.
30.
IyengarR.Van den BulteC.ValenteT. W. (2011). Opinion leadership and social contagion in new product diffusion. Marketing Science, 30(2), 195–212.
31.
JaskyteK. (2011). Predictors of administrative and technological innovations in nonprofit organizations. Public Administration Review, 71(1), 77–86.
32.
JaskyteK. (2013). Does size really matter? Organizational size and innovations in nonprofit organizations. Nonprofit Management & Leadership, 24(2), 229–247.
33.
KeytonJ.FordD. J.SmithF. I. (2008). A mesolevel communicative model of collaboration. Communication Theory, 18(3), 376–406.
34.
KimberlyJ. R.EvaniskoM. J. (1981). Organizational innovation: The influence of individual, organizational, and contextual factors on hospital adoption of innovations. Academy of Management Journal, 24(4), 689–713.
35.
KreissD.SafferA. J. (2017). Networks and innovation in the production of communication: Explaining innovations in U.S. electoral campaigning from 2004 to 2012. Journal of Communication, 67(4), 521–544.
36.
KuhnT.CormanS. R. (2003). The emergence of homogeneity and heterogeneity in knowledge structures during a planned organizational change. Communication Monographs, 70(3), 198–229.
37.
LaiC. -H.SheB.YeX. (2019). Unpacking the network processes and outcomes of online and offline humanitarian collaboration. Communication Research, 46(1), 88–116.
38.
LeeC.LeeK.PenningsJ. M. (2001). Internal capabilities, external networks, and performance: A study on technology-based ventures. Strategic Management Journal, 22(6/7), 615–640.
39.
LeonardiP. M. (2007). Activating the informational capabilities of information technology for organizational change. Organization Science, 18(5), 813–831.
40.
LeonardiP. M. (2009). Why do people reject new technologies and stymie organizational changes of which they are in favor? Exploring misalignments between social interactions and materiality. Human Communication Research, 35(3), 407–441.
41.
LeonardiP. M. (2014). Social media, knowledge sharing, and innovation: Toward a theory of communication visibility. Information Systems Research, 25(4), 796–816.
42.
LeonardiP. M. (2015). Ambient awareness and knowledge acquisition: Using social media to learn “who knows what” and “who knows whom.”MIS Quarterly, 39(4), 747–762.
43.
LewisL. K. (2007). An organizational stakeholder model of change implementation communication. Communication Theory, 17(2), 176–204.
44.
LewisL. K. (2011). Organizational change: Creating change through strategic communication. Wiley-Blackwell.
45.
LewisL. K.SeiboldD. R. (1996). Communication during intraorganizational innovation adoption: Predicting users’ behavioral coping responses to innovations in organizations. Communication Monographs, 63(2), 131–157.
46.
LurtzK.KreutzerK. (2017). Entrepreneurial orientation and social venture creation in nonprofit organizations: The pivotal role of social risk taking and collaboration. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 46(1), 92–115.
47.
MajchrzakA.CooperL. P.NeeceO. E. (2004). Knowledge reuse for innovation. Management Science, 50(2), 174–188.
48.
MajchrzakA.RiceR. E.MalhotraA.KingN.BaS. (2000). Technology adaptation: The case of a computer-supported inter-organizational virtual team. MIS Quarterly, 24(4), 569–600.
49.
McDonaldR. E. (2007). An investigation of innovation in nonprofit organizations: The role of organizational mission. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 36(2), 256–281.
50.
MeyskensM.Robb-PostC.StampJ. A.CarsrudA. L.ReynoldsP. D. (2010). Social ventures from a resource-based perspective: An exploratory study assessing Ashoka fellows. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 34(4), 661–680.
51.
MongeP. R.CozzensM. D.ContractorN. (1992). Communication and motivational predictors of the dynamics of organizational innovation. Organization Science, 3(2), 250–274.
52.
MorrisM. G.WebbJ. W.FranklinR. (2011). Understanding the manifestation of entrepreneural orientation in the nonprofit context. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 35, 947–971.
53.
NahS.SaxtonG. D. (2013). Modeling the adoption and use of social media by nonprofit organizations. New Media & Society, 15(2), 294–313.
54.
NunnallyJ. C.BernsteinI. H. (1994). Psychometric theory. McGraw-Hill.
55.
PalmerD. A.JenningsP. D.ZhouX. (1993). Late adoption of the multidivisional form by large U.S. corporations: Institutional, political, and economic accounts. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38(1), 100–131.
56.
Pérez-LuñoA.WiklundJ.CabreraR. V. (2011). The dual nature of innovative activity: How entrepreneurial orientation influences innovation generation and adoption. Journal of Business Venturing, 26(5), 555–571.
57.
PhelpsC. C. (2010). A longitudinal study of the influence of alliance network structure and composition on firm exploratory innovation. Academy of Management Journal, 53(4), 890–913.
58.
PodsakoffP. M.MacKenzieS. B.LeeJ. Y.PodsakoffN. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879–903.
59.
PooleM. S. (2003). Innovation in nonprofit organizations: A selective review and introduction. In KaplanH. (Ed.), Organizational innovation: Studies of program change in community agencies (pp. 1–12). Springer.
60.
PooleM. S.Van de VenA. H.DooleyK.HolmesM. E. (2000). Organizational change and innovation processes: Theory and methods for research. Oxford University Press.
61.
PowellW. W.KoputK. W.Smith-DoerrL. (1996). Interorganizational collaboration and the locus of innovation: Networks of learning in biotechnology. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41(1), 116–145.
62.
PreacherK. J.HayesA. F. (2004). SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect effects in simple mediation models. Behavior Research Methods, 36(4), 717–731.
63.
RauchA.WiklundJ.LumpkinG. T.FreseM. (2009). Entrepreneurial orientation and business performance: An assessment of past research and suggestions for the future. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 33(3), 761–787.
64.
RiceR. E. (1987). Computer-mediated communication and organizational innovation. Journal of Communication, 37(4), 65–94.
65.
RogersE. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations. Free Press.
66.
SammarraA.BiggieroL. (2008). Heterogeneity and specificity of inter-firm knowledge flows in innovation networks. Journal of Management Studies, 45(4), 800–829.
67.
SampsonR. C. (2007). R&D alliances and firm performance: The impact of technological diversity and alliance organization on innovation. Academy of Management Journal, 50(2), 364–386.
68.
ShinJ.ChoiY. K. (2019). Organizational innovativeness and its determinants in South Korean nonprofit human service organizations. Nonprofit Management & Leadership, 30(1), 51–68.
69.
ShumateM.AtoubaY.CooperK. R.PilnyA. (2014). Two paths diverged: Examining the antecedents to social entrepreneurship. Management Communication Quarterly, 28(3), 404–421.
70.
TaylorM.PerryD. C. (2005). Diffusion of traditional and new media tactics in crisis communication. Public Relations Review, 31(2), 209–217.
71.
TeoH. -H.WeiK. K.BenbasatI. (2003). Predicting intention to adopt interorganizational linkages: An institutional perspective. MIS Quarterly, 27(1), 19–49.
72.
TrantopoulosK.von KroghG.WallinM. W.WoerterM. (2017). External knowledge and information technology: Implications for process innovation performance. MIS Quarterly, 41(1), 287–300.
73.
Van de VenA. H.AngleH. L.PooleM. S. (2000). Research on the management of innovation: The Minnesota studies. Oxford University Press.
74.
Van de VenA. H.PooleM. S. (1995). Explaining development and change in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 510–540.
75.
van WijkJ.ZietsmaC.DoradoS.De BakkerF. G.MartíI. (2019). Social innovation: Integrating micro, meso, and macro level insights from institutional theory. Business & Society, 58(5), 887–918.
76.
WeberM. S.MongeP. R. (2017). Industries in turmoil: Driving transformation during periods of disruption. Communication Research, 44(2), 147–176.
77.
WeerawardenaJ.MortG. S. (2012). Competitive strategy in socially entrepreneurial nonprofit organizations: Innovation and differentiation. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 31(1), 91–101.
78.
WolfeR. A. (1994). Organizational innovation: Review, critique and suggested research directions. Journal of Management Studies, 31(3), 405–431.
79.
WooD. (2019). Reconceptualizing interorganizational collaborations as tensile structures: Implications of conveners’ proactive tension management. Communication Monographs, 86(2), 158–183.
80.
YuY.DongX. -Y.ShenK. N.KhalifaM.HaoJ. -X. (2013). Strategies, technologies, and organizational learning for developing organizational innovativeness in emerging economies. Journal of Business Research, 66(12), 2507–2514.
81.
YuanY. C.CosleyD.WelserH. T.XiaL.GayG. (2009). The diffusion of a task recommendation system to facilitate contributions to an online community. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 15(1), 32–59.
82.
ZaccaroS. J.DubrowS.KolzeM. (2018). Leadership traits and attributes. In AntonakisJ.DayD. V. (Eds.), The nature of leadership (3rd ed., pp. 29–55). Sage.
83.
ZornT. E.FlanaginA. J.ShohamM. D. (2011). Institutional and noninstitutional influences on information and communication technology adoption and use among nonprofit organizations. Human Communication Research, 37(1), 1–33.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
