Inmr from scan full#

In light of the tenets of resource-based view (RBV), the success of a firm depends on the resources it has at its disposal and its ability to control such resources, including intangible assets ( Galbreath, 2005). Indeed, empirical evidence shows a positive association between innovation and intangible assets in Brazilian firms ( Miranda et al., 2013 Santos et al., 2012).Ī strategic resource controlled by the firm, corporate culture, is a potential source of sustainable competitive advantage ( Barney, 1986 Flamholtz and Randle, 2012). In this context, it is assumed that the set of elements which make up creative culture raises the firm’s level intangibility. Such characteristics are expected to promote innovation ( Denison and Spreitzer, 1991). Firms with creative cultural potential present traits of entrepreneurship, flexibility and creativity ( Acar and Acar, 2014 Cameron and Quinn, 2006 Tseng, 2010). Corporate culture is not defined by a single aspect but is a combination of cultural traits in which, in general, one culture prevails over the others ( Wu et al., 2011), with the need to preserve a balance between the different cultures ( Cameron and Quinn, 2006).įor the purposes of this study, the discussion centers on the creative (innovative) culture type, or adhocracy thus, external focus and organic structure, according to the dimensions proposed by Cameron et al.

Organic or flexible structure is the combination of collaborative and creative culture, whereas mechanistic or stable structure is the combination of competitive and control culture ( Cameron et al., 2006). Internal focus is the combination of collaborative and control culture, while external focus is the combination of creative and competitive culture ( Cameron et al., 2006). (2006) also defend the existence of two dimensions to explain the corporate culture profiles: focus (internal and external) and structure (organic and mechanistic).

The CVF model is centered on corporate values perceived as predominant in the firm’s conduct and as translating a given cultural trait which guides the firm’s actions.Ĭameron et al. (2006), corporate culture may be segregated into four types: collaborative (“clan”), creative (“adhocracy”), competitive (“market”) and controlling (“hierarchy”) ( Cameron and Quinn, 1999). Based on the competing values framework (CVF), initially proposed by Quinn and Rohrbaugh (1983) and more recently by Cameron et al. Scholars are giving increasing attention to the topic because of the great importance of corporate culture and its implications for firms ( Barney, 1986 Han, 2012 Zheng et al., 2010).

Inmr from scan full#

The full terms of this licence may be seen at Ĭompaines have invested much effort in an attempt to survive on today’s competitive markets ( Fekete and Böcskei, 2011), thereby undergoing changes in several organizational aspects, including their culture, responsible for influencing the creation of competitive advantage, in view of the fact that culture can determine the degree of success of a firm ( Han, 2012).

Anyone may reproduce, distribute, translate and create derivative works of this article (for both commercial and non-commercial purposes), subject to full attribution to the original publication and authors. This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) licence. Published in Innovation & Management Review. Copyright © 2018, Marcia Martins Mendes De Luca, Paulo Henrique Nobre Parente, Emanoel Mamede Sousa Silva and Ravena Rodrigues Sousa.