This study aims to map the evolving relationship between Internet technology and innovation performance by conducting a comprehensive bibliometric analysis. The study collects and merges data from the Web of Science and Scopus databases, comprising 906 research articles published between 1994 and 2023. Internet technology, defined as digital communication tools and infrastructures (e.g. the Internet, mobile technologies and ICT), has profoundly transformed how organisations innovate. We analyse co-occurrence and co-citation networks to identify key trends, thematic clusters and influential research contributions via the Biblioshiny tool in RStudio. The findings reveal emerging themes such as artificial intelligence, digital transformation and sustainable development, which are reshaping innovation strategies across industries. This analysis displays enduring themes like ICT, innovation performance and China, signalling their sustained relevance. The study also highlights research gaps, particularly in the areas of digital integration in small-scale industries and the impact of Internet technologies on firm performance. Our findings provide a roadmap for future research, guiding scholars and practitioners towards the most pressing areas for further exploration in this rapidly evolving field.
EvansPCAnnunziataM. Industrial internet: pushing the boundaries. General Electr Report2012: 488–508.
2.
PaunovCRolloV.Has the internet fostered inclusive innovation in the developing world?World Develop2016; 78: 587–609.
3.
LyytinenKRoseGM.The disruptive nature of information technology innovations: the case of internet computing in systems development organizations. MIS Quart2003: 557–596. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/30036549.
4.
RajapathiranaRJHuiY.Relationship between innovation capability, innovation type, and firm performance. J Innovat Knowl2018; 3: 44–55.
5.
De LucaLMAtuahene-GimaK. Market knowledge dimensions and cross-functional collaboration: examining the different routes to product innovation performance. J Market2007; 71: 95–112.
6.
ChunSAShulmanSSandovalR, et al. Government 2.0: making connections between citizens, data and government. Inform Polity2010; 15: 1.
7.
NietoMJSantamaríaL.The importance of diverse collaborative networks for the novelty of product innovation. Technovation2007; 27: 367–377.
8.
RussellMGSmorodinskayaNV.Leveraging complexity for ecosystemic innovation. Technol Forecast Social Change2018; 136: 114–131.
9.
LaursenKSalterA.Open for innovation: the role of openness in explaining innovation performance among UK manufacturing firms. Strat Manag J2006; 27: 131–150.
10.
OzerM.Managers at work: using the Internet in new product development. Res Technol Manag2003; 46: 10–16.
11.
KitsiosFKamariotouM.Service innovation process digitization: areas for exploitation and exploration. J Hospital Tour Tech2021; 12: 4–18.
12.
JiangRSaeedMYangS, et al. The impact-mechanism of ‘Internet+’ on the innovation performance of traditional enterprises: empirical evidence from China. Technol Forecast Social Change2023; 186: 122129.
13.
YangMZhengSZhouL.Broadband internet and enterprise innovation. China Econ Rev2022; 74: 101802.
14.
XueL-LShenC-CLinC-N.Effects of internet technology on the innovation performance of small-scale travel agencies: organizational learning innovation and competitive advantage as mediators. J Knowl Econ2023; 14: 1830–1855.
15.
WangJWangWRanQ, et al. Analysis of the mechanism of the impact of internet development on green economic growth: evidence from 269 prefecture cities in China. Environ Sci Pollut Res2022; 29: 9990–10004.
16.
ZhangHSunZElahiE, et al. Internet development, level of industrial synergy, and urban innovation. Sustainability2021; 13: 12410.
17.
AijazASooriyabandaraM.The tactile internet for industries: a review. Proc IEEE2019; 107: 414–435.
18.
MarcelJSEdisonS. A System Engineering Approach to e-Infrastructure. In: BorisC (ed.) Systems Engineering. Rijeka: Intechopen, 2012, pp. Ch13.
19.
GubbiJBuyyaRMarusicS, et al. Internet of Things (IoT): a vision, architectural elements, and future directions. Future Gener Comput Syst2013; 29: 1645–1660.
20.
CastellsM.The rise of the network society. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & sons, 2011.
21.
LiXYuanJShiY, et al. Emerging trends and innovation modes of internet finance – results from co-word and co-citation networks. Future Internet2020; 12: 52.
22.
NambisanSLyytinenKMajchrzakA, et al. Digital innovation management. Reinventing innovation management research in a digital world. MIS Quar2017; 41: 223–238.
23.
GuanJMaN.Innovative capability and export performance of Chinese firms. Technovation2003; 23: 737–747.
24.
SchillingMA.Strategic management of technological innovation. Columbus, OH: McGraw-Hill, 2017.
25.
DodgsonM.The management of technological innovation: strategy and practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008.
26.
de Carvalho PereiraFVerocaiHDCordeiroVR, et al. Bibliometric analysis of information systems related to innovation. Proced Comput Sci2015; 55: 298–307.
27.
SunYGrimesS.The emerging dynamic structure of national innovation studies: a bibliometric analysis. Scientometrics2016; 106: 17–40.
28.
HuLWuPChenH.Enterprise innovation performance: bibliometric review and future research trends. Open Access Libr J2022; 9: 1–15.
29.
LeHTTDaoQTMPhamV-C, et al. Global trend of open innovation research: a bibliometric analysis. Cogent Bus Manag2019; 6: 1633808.
30.
ZhangXMengYChenH, et al. A bibliometric analysis of digital innovation from 1998 to 2016. J Manag Sci Eng2017; 2: 95–115.
31.
ChengCWangLXieH, et al. Mapping digital innovation: a bibliometric analysis and systematic literature review. Technol Forecast Social Change2023; 194: 122706.
32.
Vatananan-ThesenvitzRSchallerA-AShannonR.A bibliometric review of the knowledge base for innovation in sustainable development. Sustainability2019; 11: 5783.
33.
PengRChenJWuW.Mapping innovation research in organizations: a bibliometric analysis. Front Psychol2021; 12: 750960.
34.
CanoJALondoño-PinedaACastroMF, et al. A bibliometric analysis and systematic review on E-marketplaces, open innovation, and sustainability. Sustainability2022; 14: 5456.
35.
StrielkowskiWSamoilikovaASmutkaL, et al. Dominant trends in intersectoral research on funding innovation in business companies: a bibliometric analysis approach. J Innovat Knowl2022; 7: 100271.
36.
FarooqAFeizollahAur RehmanMH.Federated learning research: trends and bibliometric analysis. In: MhuRGaberMM (eds) Federated learning systems: towards next-generation AI. Cham: Springer, 2021, pp. 1–19.
37.
LaatoSFarooqAVilppuH, et al. Higher education during lockdown: literature review and implications on technology design. Educ Res Int2022; 2022: 7201043.
38.
FarooqR. Knowledge management and performance: a bibliometric analysis based on Scopus and WOS data (1988–2021). J Knowl Manag2023; 27: 1948–1991.
39.
KasaraneniHRosalineS.Automatic merging of scopus and web of science data for simplified and effective bibliometric analysis. Ann Data Sci2022; 11: 785–802.
40.
CaputoAKarginaM.A user-friendly method to merge Scopus and Web of Science data during bibliometric analysis. J Market Anal2022; 10: 82–88.
41.
AriaMCuccurulloC.bibliometrix: an R-tool for comprehensive science mapping analysis. J Inform2017; 11: 959–975.
42.
TranfieldDDenyerDSmartP.Towards a methodology for developing evidence-informed management knowledge by means of systematic review. Brit J Manag2003; 14: 207–222.
43.
FahimniaBSarkisJDavarzaniH.Green supply chain management: a review and bibliometric analysis. Int J Prod Econ2015; 162: 101–114.
44.
van OorschotJAWHHofmanEHalmanJIM. A bibliometric review of the innovation adoption literature. Technol Forecast Social Change2018; 134: 1–21.
45.
Vom BrockeJSimonsARiemerK, et al. Standing on the shoulders of giants: challenges and recommendations of literature search in information systems research. Commun Assoc Inform Syst2015; 37: 9.
46.
RaghuramSTuertscherPGarudR.Research note – mapping the field of virtual work: a co-citation analysis. Inform Syst Res2010; 21: 983–999.
47.
NiuBHongSYuanJ, et al. Global trends in sediment-related research in earth science during 1992–2011: a bibliometric analysis. Scientometrics2014; 98: 511–529.
48.
GillHSYates-MercerP.The dissemination of information by local authorities on the World Wide Web. J Inform Sci1998; 24: 105–112.
49.
LeinerBMCerfVGClarkDD, et al. A brief history of the Internet. ACM SIGCOMM Comput Commun Rev2009; 39: 22–31.
50.
SánchezADde la Cruz Del Río RamaMGarcíaJÁ.Bibliometric analysis of publications on wine tourism in the databases Scopus and WoS. Europ Res Manag Busines Econ2017; 23: 8–15.
51.
MerigóJMMas-TurARoig-TiernoN, et al. A bibliometric overview of the Journal of Business Research between 1973 and 2014. J Business Res2015; 68: 2645–2653.
52.
KokolP.Discrepancies among Scopus and Web of Science, coverage of funding information in medical journal articles: a follow-up study. J Med Libr Assoc2023; 111: 703–708.
53.
EchchakouiS. Why and how to merge Scopus and Web of Science during bibliometric analysis: the case of sales force literature from 1912 to 2019. J Market Anal2020; 8: 165–184.
54.
KumpulainenMSeppänenM.Combining Web of Science and Scopus datasets in citation-based literature study. Scientometrics2022; 127: 5613–5631.
55.
OduroSDe NiscoAMainolfiG.Do digital technologies pay off? A meta-analytic review of the digital technologies/firm performance nexus. Technovation2023; 128: 102836.
56.
RousseauSRousseauR.Bibliometric techniques and their use in business and economics research. J Econ Surv2021; 35: 1428–1451.
57.
KoenigsmarckMGeissdoerferM.Mapping socially responsible investing: a bibliometric and citation network analysis. J Clean Prod2021; 296: 126376.
58.
FarrukhMMengFRazaA, et al. Twenty-seven years of sustainable development journal: a bibliometric analysis. Sustain Develop2020; 28: 1725–1737.
59.
FreemanLC.Centrality in social networks conceptual clarification. Social Netw1978; 1: 215–239.
60.
González-TeruelAGonzález-AlcaideGBarriosM, et al. Mapping recent information behavior research: an analysis of co-authorship and co-citation networks. Scientometrics2015; 103: 687–705.
61.
CoboMJLópez Herrera-AGHerrera Viedma-E, et al. Science mapping software tools: review, analysis, and cooperative study among tools. J Am Soc Inform Sci Technol2011; 62: 1382–1402.
62.
WhiteHDGriffithBC.Author cocitation: a literature measure of intellectual structure. J Am Soc Inform Sci1981; 32: 163–171.
63.
ApriliyantiIDAlonI.Bibliometric analysis of absorptive capacity. Int Business Rev2017; 26: 896–907.
64.
ChenCChenC.Mapping scientific frontiers. London: Springer, 2003, pp. 1–344.
65.
OmotehinwaTO. Examining the developments in scheduling algorithms research: a bibliometric approach. Heliyon2022; 8: e09510.
66.
AhmadFBaskALaariS, et al. Business management perspectives on the circular economy: present state and future directions. Technol Forecast Soc Change2023; 187: 122182.
67.
BouwmanHNikouSde ReuverM.Digitalization, business models, and SMEs: how do business model innovation practices improve performance of digitalizing SMEs?Telecommun Policy2019; 43: 101828.
