In the Industry 4.0 scenario, innovation emerges as a clear driver for the economic development of societies. This effect is particularly true for the least developed countries. Nevertheless, there is a lack of studies that analyze this phenomenon in these nations. In this context, this study aims to examine the impact of perceived barriers to innovation to predict companies′ innovative intentions in an emerging economy. This study is a preliminary effort to use data mining and symmetry-based learning concepts, especially classification, to assist the identification of strategies to incentivize intention to innovate in companies. Using the decision tree classification technique, we analyzed a sample of Chilean companies (N = 5876). The sample was divided into large enterprises (LEs) and small and medium enterprises (SMEs). In the group of large companies, the barriers that most impact the intention to innovate are innovation cost, lack of demand innovations, and lack of qualified personnel. Alternatively, in the group of small-medium companies, the barriers that most impact the intention to innovate are lack of own funds, lack of demand innovations, and lack of information about technology. These results show how the perceptions of barriers are significant to predict the intentions of innovation in Chilean companies. Furthermore, the perceptions of these barriers are contingent on the organizational sizes. These findings contribute to understanding the effect of contingencies on innovative intention in an emerging economy.

Purpose: Environmental uncertainty (EU) and firm size (FS) generate inertial forces that can push small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) to emphasize either exploration or exploitation. In this article, the authors explore how structural (e.g. formal processes, control and discipline) and social (e.g. employee support and decision-making involvement) managerial instruments counteract such inertial forces and enable SME ambidexterity. Building on the organization-context literature, the authors propose a model in which EU and firms' size moderate the relationship between structural and social managerial instruments on SME ambidexterity.Design/methodology/approach: The authors examined a moderation model using surveys of chief executive officers (CEOs) and performance archival data from 237 Chilean SMEs.Findings: The authors find that the positive effect of structure on SME ambidexterity decreases with FS. In contrast, social instruments have a positive effect on ambidexterity for larger firms, especially for those operating in uncertain environments. In cases in which EU and firms' size reinforce the exploration or exploitation tendencies of SMEs, structural and social instruments play a complementary role in achieving ambidexterity.Originality/value: The authors contribute by proposing a contingent mix of structural and social instruments to enable SME ambidexterity. These results inform policymakers and SME managers by suggesting strategies to promote ambidexterity based on firms' size and EU.

Process Management Programs (PMPs) rely heavily on the standardization of activities to improve organizational efficiency and reliability. Standardization, however, can lead to rigidity and inertia, which may eventually inhibit exploration and innovation. While scholars have provided cognitive and routine-based arguments to cope with this dilemma, the fact that standardization is a social process that requires collaboration between individuals has been overlooked. In this paper, we propose that standardization can improve a team’s social capital and thereby facilitate the activities that enable exploration. Specifically, we hypothesize that standardization relates positively to external communication, psychological safety, and the perception of support for innovation in operational teams. These three social capital attributes mediate the relationship between standardization and exploration. We tested this multilevel mediation model by analysing 431 members of 62 operational teams in a large multinational mining company that had recently implemented a Process Management Program (Lean Management). Our multilevel mediation results confirmed that standardisation promoted exploration by enhancing the teams’ social capital. For robustness we tested our model with a second survey of 450 workers of different companies and obtained similar results. Therefore, we propose that the productivity dilemma can be balanced by improving operational teams’ social capital.

This article aims to evaluate improvements in opportunities for research partnerships focused on innovation, considering the ISO 56003 guidelines, Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) concepts, and the experiences of the authors of this article, who are researchers in various areas (ex post facto). The results presented arise from structured debates and discussions. As a result of the analysis and reflections carried out, some improvement opportunities in most of the partnerships established among research groups can be visualised. Partners in a research group often debate aspects related to technical knowledge associated with the research and contractual procedures in detail; however, they do not equally emphasise other important partnership management aspects, such as the analysis of the research impacts on all stakeholders, the definition and adoption of a governance policy to better conduct the interaction among members, and other actions that can enhance the partnerships. This article can be characterised as a synthesis of lessons learned, in addition to a presentation of guidelines mentioned in the literature. This knowledge can be useful to other researchers in planning new partnerships or evaluating existing ones. For deciding whether to enter into a partnership or withdraw from it, the information presented here is of great value.