The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:

https://www.emerald.com/insight/1469-1930.htm

A new theoretical approach to Innovative

literacy in
intellectual capital: Meta-synthesis intellectual
capital
definitions of innovative literacy
€ksel
Asiye Yu 1435
€ I_ .Uzunyol Vocational School, Kocaeli University, Kocaeli, Turkey and
Hereke O.
Business Administration, Gebze Technical University, Gebze, Turkey Received 17 December 2020
€ and G€okhan OZER
Mehmet Şahin GOK € Revised 8 March 2021
28 April 2021
5 June 2021
Business Administration, Gebze Technical University, Gebze, Turkey, and 26 June 2021
 IM
Erşan CI_GER _ 20 July 2021
8 August 2021
Social Sciences Institute, Gebze Technical University, Gebze, Turkey 23 August 2021
Accepted 24 August 2021

Abstract
Purpose – The importance of innovation has drastically increased across diverse academic and industrial
fields. Innovation has been considered an outcome of intellectual capital management. The role of innovative
literacy in intellectual capital management needs to be understood. Employees at all levels of the organisation
carry out managerial and/or technical innovation activities by integrating their knowledge (with other
members, including researchers and developers) and innovative attitude in line with the organisational goals.
This study focuses on the methodological approaches to intellectual capital components at a conceptual level,
based on the framework of innovative literacy, which is not prominent in the literature.
Design/methodology/approach – A meta-synthesis analysis was conducted, examining published articles
from 1990 to 2016 based on selected keywords. The meta-synthesis analysis explored the concept of innovation
literacy by revealing some of the relationships involved in intellectual capital performance.
Findings – The findings point to gaps and methodological weaknesses in innovative literacy research and
provide insights for future research.
Research limitations/implications – While the findings of this study are useful, there are some limitations
and recommendations for future research: One limitation of this study arises from the selection of the articles
used in meta-synthesis analyses; these were published during the period 1990–2016. An expansion of the article
selection to include articles published before 1990 can be useful to better understand the vision on innovation
and intellectual capital. This research fills a conceptual gap in the literature. However, since this concept is
evaluated using the human, customer and structural components of intellectual capital, researchers in the
future can evaluate this concept with other components of intellectual capital. Finally, this research does not
present a hypothesis on the relationship between innovative literacy and intellectual capital.
Originality/value – This study provides a novel conceptual view of integrating theories for ensuring
sustainability of intellectual management and innovative literacy by synthesising findings from academic studies.
Keywords Innovation, Creative thinking, Intellectual capital, Intrapreneurship, Innovative literacy
Paper type Research paper

1. Introduction
Studies on the importance of innovation and the role of creative individuals in technology
have recently attracted much attention. There is a strong relationship between innovation
and employees who take psychological ownership of the company’s growth, which reveals
their innovative behaviour. Acting in line with the corporate goals and assuming the
psychological ownership of the company’s growth, these employees should be regarded as
innovative literate in terms of intellectual capital.
Competition between firms necessitates the efficient use of intellectual capital resources in Journal of Intellectual Capital
information, technology and business. Vol. 23 No. 6, 2022
pp. 1435-1460
Much of the innovation literature has focused on exploring how an organisation can © Emerald Publishing Limited
1469-1930
embrace technological innovation (Crossan and Apaydin, 2010). However, innovation studies DOI 10.1108/JIC-12-2020-0379
JIC should also focus on the intangible asset component. Definitions of intellectual capital
23,6 abound, each emphasising a different aspect of the term. Intellectual capital management
seeks to augment, extract and measure a company’s intangible assets through the evaluation
of systems, processes, procedures and other organisational assets that are not typically
specified under standard management and accounting practices. It assumes that value is
created through the harmony of human, organisational and customer capital (Bontis, 1998;
Stewart, 1997).
1436 In today’s knowledge-based economy, intellectual capital has become a critical factor for
organisations to constantly leverage their value (Serenko and Bontis, 2009). It was just after
that Drucker published “The Rise of Knowledge Society” (Drucker, 1993; Konno and Schillaci,
2021), when “knowledge” had begun to gain attention as a management resource. Based on this
theory, the process of knowledge creation enables companies to create new knowledge and
acquire or foster new internal knowledge assets. Concluding, as we stressed the human
dimension is getting more and more relevance in the current world (Konno and Schillaci, 2021).
Accordingly, creative knowledge-based innovative products and services have
undeniably become the golden key in competition nowadays. Although creativity has been
accepted as the critical element of success and an indispensable part of a successful company
strategy, few companies unveil their workers’ creative thoughts and imaginations.
Studies on the evolving importance of innovation and the role of the creative individual in
technology have become important topics in academic literature. Despite the growing
innovation literature, there is no study on innovative literacy.
The definition of literacy in the classical sense is “to create awareness of lifelong learning,
to develop this awareness, to enable individuals to gain new skills for more effective learning”
(OECD, 2008). Innovative literacy is the ability of the individual to make sense of events
occurring in the environment and society, to be aware of the levels of technological
developments and to understand all innovation-related issues. Innovative literacy can be
conceptualised as possessing basic skills that help understand the nature of innovation
(Y€uksel and G€unce, 2017). Individuals who are innovative literate have an advantage in their
careers in many fields. Considering the intellectual capital components, innovative literacy is
related to human capital.
Our study focuses on examining this relationship; specifically, it is a theoretical study that aims
to better understand innovative literacy in the dimensions of intellectual capital, intrapreneurship
and innovation. It seeks to broaden our understanding of innovative literacy and to provide
important implications for scientists and industry professionals interested in innovation.
We conducted a meta-synthesis of studies within the aforementioned theoretical
framework. A qualitative review is beneficial to the process of creating as holistic a
picture as possible of innovative literacy. Meta-synthesis aims to have a comprehensive
perspective on developing theory to make qualitative findings more accessible and facilitate
higher-order abstraction and generalisability (Aspfors and Fransson, 2015). Besides, new
hypotheses might be developed, and new information might be obtained by searching for
individual studies related to innovative literacy.
The research framework of this meta-synthesis analysis can be seen in Figure 1. The rest of
the study is organised as follows. The next section is a literature review on innovative literacy,
intellectual capital, innovation, innovation-creativity and intrapreneurship. Subsequently, the
methodology of the study is presented, followed by the findings. Finally, we discuss the
findings, drawing conclusions and deriving limitations, and managerial implications.

2. Theoretical framework
2.1 Intellectual capital
Over the last years, the definition of intellectual capital and the related measurement
parameters have been the subject of intensive research and of a number of academic and
 1 Determining the Research Topic
Innovative
literacy in
intellectual
2 Selecting Keywords capital

3 Searching Keywords in Literature 1437

4 Selecting Research Era

5 Eliminating Articles which are not covered in Research Topic

6 Doing Additional Research

7 Archiving the Articles

Figure 1.
8 Forming Meta-Synthesis Distribution Table Flow chart of the study

managerial debates (Fiano et al., 2020). Despite this, there remain a wide range of questions
yet to be answered both theoretically and in practice. The outstanding issues include the
essence of intellectual capital, its structure, measuring and impact on the performance of
organisations (Ferreira et al., 2020).
In the beginning, intellectual capital was merely considered an intangible asset for a
company, but it has since assumed more structured connotations, related to the sustainability
phenomenon and the value creation theme (Dabic et al., 2020).
Numerous definitions of intellectual capital exist in the literature. Stewart (1991) first
referred to it as any “intellectual material” used to create wealth. Later, it was defined as
intellectual capital by John Kenneth Galbraith (Bontis, 1998). Edvinsson and Sullivan (1996)
postulate that intellectual capital comprises all the information within organisations that
might be converted into something of value. According to Roos et al. (1997), intellectual
capital refers to the integrated value of innovation efforts with customers and partners,
relations with company infrastructure and organisation members’ knowledge and skills.
Roos and Roos (1997) define intellectual capital as an element that plays an essential role in
organisations in providing sustainable competitive advantage.
As Nahapiet and Ghoshal (1998) define, intellectual capital is the firm’s total capital or
stock of knowledge-based resources. Many components like structure of companies,
organisational memory, experience, innovative thinking, and employees’ inclusion in an
operation’s creativity are considered essential organisational values. These components rely
on information, innovation, skill of operations and interpretation of this information.
According to Maria Diez et al. (2010), intellectual capital is the combination of human,
organisational and relational resources, as well as an organisation’s activities.
An undoubtedly general consensus on intellectual capital’s key role for value creation and
to achieve a competitive advantage is preeminent today (Rossi and Magni, 2017).
JIC With the rapid growth of the global knowledge economy, intellectual capital has emerged
23,6 as the concept of creating the competitive power of the business world in information-
intensive and rapidly changing business environments (Ling, 2013). Firm value is positively
affected by intangible assets per employee. Companies with employees with extensive
knowledge have the advantage of innovation (Ni et al., 2020).
Moreover, given the growing importance that intangible resources have come to assume
in recent decades, many scholars have proposed different definitions and dimensions of
1438 intellectual capital (Fiano et al., 2020).
In the current rapidly changing business world, companies have been found to rely on
intangible resources to sustain and grow profitabilities (Kweh et al., 2021).
Intellectual capital has been largely expressed as intangible assets. In the OECD report in
1999, it is referred to as the intangible economic values of businesses; it has been classified
into two categories: organisational (structural) and human capital. After this general
definition, other authors have made various groupings in the literature.
The main concepts and definitions of intellectual capital have been broadly studied by
scholars. Intellectual capital was defined as the set of all the competences and knowledge that
can configure the firm’s competitive advantage (Steward, 1997; Orlondo et al., 2020). Stewart
(1997) also defined intellectual capital as structural and customer capital; Sveiby (1997) as
personnel internal structure, external structure; Kaplan and Norton (1992) as competence;
Petrash (1996) as internal process perspective, customer perspective, learning and growth
perspective, and financial perspective and Namasivayam and Denizci (2006) as human,
organisational and customer capital.
Among these, one of the applicable definitions of intellectual capital is presented by
Namasivayam and Denizci (2006), who use the term to express concepts forming existing and
measurable successes in an organisation.
Human capital refers to all knowledge, background and education and individual talent of
the employees in an organisation (Seleim et al., 2004; Namasivayam and Denizci, 2006; Hitt
et al., 2001). McGregor et al. (2004) define the workforce as the total individual competency in
organisations. Products and services produced in organisations are outcomes of knowledge,
experience and employee expertise. Lepak (1999) states that human capital provides a crucial
competitive advantage to an organisation, given the employees’ unique and valuable skills.
Structural capital includes the different varieties of information created in an organisation.
It is the sum of all internal structures, like company culture, management processes and
organisation structure, which facilitate coordination in an operation (Namasivayam and
Denizci, 2006; Ling, 2013). Companies with substantial structural capital also have a culture
that enables their employees to try new things, learn and redesign the work even if they fail
(Bontis, 1998). Hence, the tacit knowledge of employees is converted into know-how.
Therefore, structural capital helps organisations to increase their competitive status and
global enterprises (Ling, 2013).
Customer capital refers to existing and potential customers, brands, customer and brand
loyalty, supplier relations and delivery channels. The customer capital of organisations can
also be defined as the source of any data originating from consumers (Namasivayam and
Denizci, 2006). Companies will be able to be more creative and develop products towards
customers’ demands and expectations, using such data. Customer capital includes external
connections, such as customer loyalty, goodwill and supplier relations (Dzinkowski, 2000).
The most critical subcomponent of intellectual capital is inarguably human capital. In
organisations, people are at the centre of strategic resources, such as brainstorming, ideating,
validating employees’ ideas through examination or using the competencies and experiences
of employees, to reveal new products or processes. Therefore, intellectual capital is a
fundamental building block in innovation activities that can be realised through human-
centred development.
 There have been many studies demonstrating that intellectual capital affects Innovative
organisations’ innovative competencies. Subramaniam and Youndt (2005) state that literacy in
human, structural and customer capital affect companies’ innovation skills. Wu et al.
(2008) claim that intellectual capital increased the innovative performance of an organisation.
intellectual
A company may not be able to generate innovation if it does not recognise intellectual capital capital
as a fundamental part of the organisation (Nejjari and Aamoum, 2020). Darroch (2005) argue
that organisations that can effectively manage information are more innovative.
Globalisation and the increasingly competitive environment have paved the way for 1439
further development and use of intellectual capital in companies.
Organisations with valuable and skilled human resources have a higher potential to
discover new ideas and implement them. Considering that human beings have a unique and
infinite capacity for creativity, it would be proper to remark that intellectual capital holds an
essential position in directing organisations’ innovative processes. Stahle and Hong (2002)
state that intellectual capital is the skill of making something new, which is compatible with
the dynamic changing conditions.
Qualified human resources are a critical link between technological progress and both
economic growth and social development. In this sense, countries need specialised and
effective intellectual capital to adapt to the rapid changes in science and technology and the
new competitive environment.

2.2 Innovation and creativity

Innovation might be defined as converting new ideas in an organisation into valuable
outcomes among partners. Accordingly, data required for innovation come from employees,
suppliers and customers who are the organisation’s internal and external partners. All
products and services produced by organisations are obtained as an outcome of processing
data generated from organisational sources and the subsequent conversion to value.
According to Porter and Stern (2001), innovation has perhaps become the most important
source of competitive advantage in advanced economies and of building innovative capacity.
Innovation is the use of new knowledge to offer a new product or service that customers
want (Afuah, 2003). In this perspective, innovation is based on considering new ideas and
using them efficiently (Amabile et al., 1996; Alegre et al., 2006, cited in Pla-Barber and Joaquin,
2007). In general, innovation is a process that enables achievement of useful outcomes with
the help of science and technology that might result in economic and social benefits;
additionally, the process also involves being vague, unsystematic and open to change.
Innovative capabilities manifested in innovation-related business processes (technical and
non-technical) are beyond resources; they are valuable inputs for firms to develop and
maintain competitive advantage (Ngo and O’Cass, 2013).
However, innovation is complex. The process of innovation must be viewed as a series of
changes in the overall system, comprising not only the hardware but also the market
environment, production facilities and knowledge, and the social contexts of the innovating
organisation (Kline and Rosenberg, 2009).
For decades, the concept of “learning innovation” has been used to think and to explore
what needs to be changed in organisations. Along with the rate of technological change and
increasing competition, it became more critical for companies to renew themselves and learn
how to innovate. Thus, learning innovation is crucial not only for new products and services
but also for sustainable innovation.
Innovation can be analysed under two managerial and technical categories. While
managerial innovation is related to administrative processes, organisational structure and
human resources, technical innovation is involved with the product, service and technology
(Kimberly and Evanisko, 1981, cited in Damanpour and Evan, 1984). Innovation focuses on
JIC the collaboration between the research and industry domain, arising from the need to validate
23,6 the research through practical results related to technical and technological progress
(Gherghina et al., 2020).
However, Chuang et al. (2010) examine managerial innovation in terms of three subgroups:
market, organisational structure and innovation climate, while technical innovation is
considered in terms of two subgroups: product and process innovation. It can be considered a
development process that occurs to manage the interaction between the external factors.
1440 Within the framework of these explanations, innovation can be considered a developmental
process that has emerged to manage the interaction between internal activities and external
factors.
From a macro-perspective, organisational innovation involves forming new opinions and
developing new behaviours in an organisation (Damanpour and Gopalakrishnan, 2001). In
this context, organisational innovations not only improve the promotion of products but
might also have a crucial effect on the performance of the company. Organisational
innovations could enhance business quality and efficiency, increase information and boost
companies’ capacity by learning and using new technologies (Oslo, 2005).
Creativity is not sufficient until it results in new ideas. Innovation is needed to generate
new or current ideas and translate them into actions. It requires applying current knowledge
and developing new appropriate knowledge (Gurteen, 1998), especially in innovation-oriented
companies. Therefore, organisational climate and culture stimulate the innovative status and
creative thinking capacity of the company (Anderson et al., 1992).
Organisations should encourage their employees to develop more innovative products,
processes and services by thinking critically. Therefore, they should guide their teams to use
creative problem-solving techniques. Creative problem-solving and innovation are essential
for companies that want to gain flexibility and improve competitiveness (McFadzean, 1998).
Brainstorming, imaginative thinking and similar techniques are commonly used to
develop creativity among teamwork. However, these are not always sufficient to attain
innovative outcomes. In this stage, the characteristics of a person applying these techniques
are also crucial to achieving expected solutions. Binkley et al. (2010) describe a creative
person’s characteristics in terms of four categories, as shown in Table 1.

2.3 Intrapreneurship
It is vital to know why some organisations are close to innovation, why they develop more
entrepreneurial projects than others and the factors determining innovation (Sunley et al.,
2008; Auer Antoncic and Antoncic, 2011). These organisations’ critical success factors are

Item Description

Ways of thinking Creativity and innovation

Critical thinking, problem-solving, decision-making
Learning to learn, metacognition
Ways of working Communication
Collaboration (teamwork)
Tools for working Information literacy
ICT literacy
Table 1. Living in the world (defining 21st Citizenship – local and global
Binkley’s century skills) Life and career
characteristics of Personal and social responsibility, including cultural awareness
a creative person and competence
based on the innovative intellectual capital within the company. In other words, this is the Innovative
power of innovation-based intrapreneurship. literacy in
Intrapreneurship has been regarded as a multidimensional structure. It represents “the sum of
efforts of a company’s innovation, renewal, and entrepreneurship” (Zahra, 1995). In this vein, it has
intellectual
great importance in creating an organisational culture that fosters innovative and critical thinking. capital
According to Asiaei et al. (2020), managers who claim that the effective integration of the
organisation’s capabilities can support the company’s innovation and better organise, synchronise
and develop venture capital tend to align core resources and talent with strategic practices. 1441
The knowledge, attitudes and behaviours of an organisation’s employees – who constitute
human capital, which is one of the important components of intellectual capital – affect
innovative activities. In addition, the way the institution drives its intrapreneurship and
creativity also affects the innovative activities. The common factor in these two innovative
activity paths is human capital or the employees. Thus, innovative literacy will have an
important place in determining the employees’ ability to search for innovative information,
evaluate this information and use it in a way that helps solve problems.

3. Research methods
One task measuring intellectual capital researchers face is to convince others of the
usefulness of qualitative measures and to demonstrate a meaningful interplay between hard
quantitative measures of performance and softer qualitative performance indicators. From a
strategic perspective, it is often the qualitative measures that are more telling and more
important (Petty and Guthrie, 2000).
Structured literat€ ure review is an the most appropriate methodology to conduct a reliable
analysis of the literature linking intellectual capital and innovation, as well as to present a fair
critique of this literature and to outline future research directions (Buenechea-Elberdin, 2017).
Sandelowski et al. (1997) define the aim of meta-synthesis as making qualitative findings
more accessible for implementation in practice, developing theory, higher-order abstraction
and generalisability. Meta-synthesis might be regarded as a valid technique for examining
qualitative studies (Jensen and Allen, 1996; cited in Walsh and Downe, 2005). Such analyses
also provide detailed results at a theoretical level, which might not be normally possible for
individual empirical reports (Baumeister and Leary, 1997).
The meta-synthesis method is appropriate for this study to determine the relevance of
innovative literacy concepts in intellectual capital literature. Meta-synthesis is used as a
research methodology because its characteristics suit the purposes of this study. Qualitative
analysis is conducted to determine the relationships between innovative literacy and creative
thinking, innovation and intellectual capital. There are two reasons for choosing a qualitative
analysis approach in this research. First, there is a need for developing intellectual capital
literature by investigating the concept of innovative literacy. Therefore, this study aims to
determine the concept of innovative literacy in the literature and reveal the relationships of
the variables that affect it. Second, qualitative approaches serve the scientific field by
providing a much-needed bridge between the concept and the reader, who does not have the
time or resources to trace the wide and scattered variety of articles on a topic.
The meta-synthesis in this study is designed based on Noblit and Hare (1988) and Hoon (2013). A
sampling strategy was used to decide appropriate keywords for the study. Articles on innovation,
critical thinking and innovation, intellectual capital and intrapreneurship were selected.
We conducted our analysis following the guidelines recommended by Tranfield et al.
(2003): planning, execution and reporting. We prepared a work plan during the planning
phase. During the execution phase, we determined the search keywords, data sources and
study selection criteria, followed by the extraction and synthesis of data. This was followed
by the reporting of our findings.
JIC The electronic databases searched were ScienceDirect, Emerald, Web of Science, Scopus,
23,6 PsycINFO, Sage, Taylor and Francis, and Wiley. The selected keywords were searched for in
publication titles, abstracts, keywords or full texts.

3.1 Inclusion and exclusion criteria

Relevant articles based on the selected keywords were collected; however, articles published
before 1990 were not included in the meta-synthesis. The selected analysis period is 1990–2016.
1442 The year 1990 was chosen as the starting point because innovations took centre stage
when the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) published the
Oslo and Frascati Principles.
To answer the research questions of this paper, only the results included in the
“Management” and “Business” fields were considered. In this way, bibliometric analysis was
also conducted to avoid problems in comparing the metrics of scholars or journals from
different research fields (Baima et al., 2020).
The inclusion and exclusion criteria were used to identify relevant studies from those
extracted using the keywords. Initially, 370 articles were reviewed. At this point, once we had
analysed all the main literature, we decided to filter the most appropriate literature for our
research based on thresholds, such as depth of the paper, field of interest and research, period
of interest and publication journal (Magni et al., 2020).
We have examined the content of each document by reading the abstracts of the article to
ensure consistency with the research objective. Therefore, the abstract of each article was
read and highlighted the relationship (Alvino et al., 2020).
The full text for all of selected papers was reviewed in order to make the final decision
about their inclusion in the list (Buenechea-Elberdin, 2017).
After screening, 134 articles were used theoretically, and 65 of these articles were included
in the meta-synthesis. Figure 1 depicts the flow diagram of this study.
The last step involves a systematic literature review. Table 6 categorises the published
journal articles used for the review, and the findings from different articles were included in
the meta-synthesis analysis to provide comparisons.
Consequently, the aim of the study might be defined as (1) setting the theoretical
framework of innovative literacy concept, (2) describing innovative literacy in the context of
its theoretical dimensions, (3) forming a conceptual framework based on innovative literacy
of intellectual capital as the study methodology and (4) examining factors which might have
affected or might have been affected by innovative literacy.

4. Findings
The analyses in this study were aimed at examining the role and place of innovative literacy
in intellectual capital literature. The results of the meta-synthesis analysis reveal the
following conclusions:
Innovative literacy was found in the literature in four different studies as follows: One
study by Erdo gan et al. (2013) is in the robotics domain, while the remaining three (Li et al.,
2009; Kersten and Pardo, 2007; Y€ uksel and G€ unce, 2017) are in education. This indicates that
innovative literacy might be analysed to provide new perspectives on intellectual capital
literature and fill the gap in terms of fields.
A systematic academic literature review is conducted to set a theoretical framework of
innovative literacy concepts. 370 scientific articles related to the topic are chosen from the
academic database. The keywords used to find these articles are shown in Table 2.
These keywords were used as a selection criterion to identify the topic (title, keyword,
abstract) of the selected studies. The final study sample comprised 65 articles that were
published between 1990 and 2016. These studies used quantitative, qualitative and case
Keyword Topic (primary indicators)
Innovative
literacy in
Innovation Firm’s success, innovation, organisational innovativeness, organisational intellectual
change, innovation stimulus, strategic innovation, frugal innovation,
innovation occurs, management innovation, business innovation capital
Creative thinking and Constructive thinking patterns, organisational innovation, innovation roles,
innovation creativity, organisational creativity technology, new ideas
Intellectual capital Technological innovation capabilities, knowledge management capacity, 1443
innovation performance, Learning and knowledge creation, intellectual capital,
social capital, knowledge, entrepreneurialism, organisational culture,
organisational performance, management innovator, organisational decline,
cultural values, ethical organisations Table 2.
Intrapreneurship Entrepreneurs, self-leadership, entrepreneurial orientation, innovation Classification of topic/
corporate entrepreneurship, transactional leadership, transformational keywords used in a
leadership meta-synthesis
Innovative literacy Literacy, innovative literacy approach

study analysis methodologies. All major subthemes covered in these articles were subject to
detailed examination specific coding to make it more manageable during topic unity and
synthesising. The distribution of these 65 articles by topic is shown in Table 3.
The selected topics are those that are answered in response to research questions
(innovation, creative thinking and innovation, intellectual capital, intrapreneurship). A
coding was done for each grouped topic (Table 3). The encodings are arranged based on the
AMA Manual of Style (A Guide for Authors and Editors, 10th edition) instruction. An
acronym is “formed from the initial letter or letters of each of the successive parts of major
parts of a compound term” (AMA, 10th edn). These codes include: Innovation (I), Critical
Thinking and Innovation (CTI), Intellectual Capital (IC) and Intrapreneurship (IP).
Table 4 shows that 41 studies are qualitative, 21 are quantitative and 3 are case studies.
Table 5 shows that distribution of journal based on citation.

Topic Article Frequency

Innovation I1, I2, I3, I4, I5, I6, I7, I8, I9, I10, I11, 28
I12, I13, I14, I15, I16, I17, I18, I19,
I20, I21, I22, I23, I24, I25, I26, I27, I28
Creative thinking and innovation CTI1, CTI2, CTI3, CTI4, CTI5, CTI6 12
CTI7- CTI8- CTI9- CTI10- CTI11- CTI12
Intellectual capital IC1, IC2, IC3, IC4, IC5, IC6, IC7, IC8, 11 Table 3.
IC9, IC10, IC11 Meta-synthesis
Intrapreneurship IP1, IP2, IP3, IP4, IP5, IP6 IP7, IP8, 14 distribution of articles
IP9, IP10, IP11, IP12, IP13, IP14 based on their topics

Method Articles Frequency

Qualitative I3, I5, I7, I9, I11, I12, I13, I14, I15, I16, I18, I19, I20, 41
I21, I23, I25, I28, CTI2, CTI3, CTI5, CTI6, CTI7,
CTI8, CTI9, CTI10, CTI11, CTI12, IC1, IC4, IC5, IC6,
IC9, IP1, IP2, IP3, IP4, IP5, IP6, IP9, IP10, IP11 Table 4.
Quantitative I1, I2, I4, I6, I8, I17, I22, I24, I26, I27, CTI1, CTI4, 21 Meta-synthesis
IC7, IC8, IC10, IC11, IP7, IP8, IP12, IP13, IP14 distribution of articles
Case study I10, IC2, IC3 3 based on their methods
JIC References Citation
23,6
Journal of Business Research 6,849
Int. Journal of Management Reviews 4,594
Journal of Intellectual Capital 4,428
Academy of Management Journal 3,886
Academy of Management Review 3,039
1444 Organization Science 2,811
European Journal of Innovation Management 2,605
Journal of Management 2,335
Management Decision 2,259
Administrative Science Quarterly 2,163
Harvard Business Review 1,412
Journal of Knowledge Management 1,347
Business Strategy and the Environment 1,342
Leader to Leader 1,330
Long Range Planning 1,229
R&D Management 1,196
MPRA Paper 1,189
Journal of Business Venturing 1,133
Int. Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior and Research 1,115
Omega 1,113
American Psychologist 835
Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice 717
Creativity and Innovation Management 690
Cambridge Paper 656
Int. Journal of Technology Management 547
Small Business Economics 538
Technovation 518
MIT Sloan Management Review 487
Int. Entrepreneurship and Management Journal 470
IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management 385
Int. Journal of Cross Cultural Management 346
Journal of Creative Behavior 343
The Journal of Creative Behavior 324
Creativity Research Journal 275
British Journal of Management 236
Int. J. Technology Management 221
Journal of Business Ethics 215
Technological Forecasting and Social Change 214
JSL – Creativity and Innovation 182
Working Paper 163
Int. Journal of Innovation Management 158
SIM 2015/13th International Symposium in Management 126
Journal of Business Strategy 105
Asia Pacific Business Review 55
2nd Global Conference on Business, Economics, Management and Tourism 53
Leadership and Organization Development Journal 35
Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research in Business 31
Table 5. Studies on Science and the Innovation Process 31
Distribution of journal European Journal of Business and Management 9
based on citation Int. Journal of Humanities and Cultural Studies 7

Figure 2 depicts that the number of articles in the meta-synthesis analysis published since
1990 was high in the following years: 1998, 2000, 2004 and 2009.
Figure 3 shows the number of articles by journal name. Journal of Business Ethics and
Journal of Intellectual Capital are the most cited journals.
No Code* Author/Year Methodology Findings/Focus
Innovative
literacy in
_
1 I1 Saleh and Wang (1993) Quantitative The investigation focused on the differences in intellectual
research managerial strategy, organisational structure
and organisational climate capital
2 _
I2 Subramanian and Quantitative Substantive relationships do exist between
Nilakanta (1996) research organisational factors, organisational
_
innovativeness and organisational performance 1445
3 I3 Drucker (1998) Qualitative To master the discipline of innovation we must
research do three things: (1) focus on the mission,
(2) define the results (3) describe what we are
doing and how we are doing it
4 _
I4 Heunks (1998) Quantitative Creativity proved to be important for innovation
research and success only in older firms, which indicates
that innovation asks for an extra effort after the
start-up stage
5 _
I5 Mone et al. (1998) Qualitative An examination of the diverse literature on
research organisational decline shows that there is
disagreement regarding the effects of decline on
innovation
6 _
I6 Sorensen and Stuart Quantitative This study provides strong support for our
(2000) research argument that aging has two seemingly
contradictory consequences for organisational
behaviour, and specifically for innovation
7 _
I7 Storey (2000) Qualitative The article reports on the marked variety of
research managerial interpretations of innovation; it
presents new ways of classifying these
interpretations, and it describes the practical
implications of these insights (and model)
8 _
I8 Boer and During (2001) Quantitative Successful innovation requires a careful balance
research between top-down strategic drive and bottom-up
emergent creativity
9 _
I9 Frambach and Qualitative Organisational innovation adoption, a multi-
Schillewaert (2002) research level framework of determinants and
opportunities for future research
10 I10 Cormican and Case study This paper presents a best practice model that
O’Sullivan (2004) aims to facilitate product innovation
management in a dynamic environment
11 _
I11 Hall (2004) Qualitative It is probably safe to say that there is room for
research further research in this area, as the diffusion of
technology is an important source of economic
and social development
12 _
I12 Lam (2004) Qualitative Organisational cognition, learning and creativity
research rarely relate their work explicitly to innovation
13 I13 Smith and Tushman Qualitative Developed a model of managing strategic
(2005) research contradictions that is associated with
paradoxical cognition
14 _
I14 Adams et al. (2006) Qualitative Developed a synthesised framework of the
research innovation management process consisting of
seven categories: Input management, knowledge
management, innovation strategy,
organisational culture and structure, portfolio
management, project management and Table 6.
commercialisation, and framework Findings from the
systematic literature
(continued ) review
JIC No Code* Author/Year Methodology Findings/Focus
23,6
15 _
I15 Birkinshaw and Mol Qualitative Six common themes emerged from the research
(2006) research that should serve as useful pointers for a
company that would like to direct its
management innovation efforts more seriously
16 _
I16 Hamel (2006) Qualitative A management innovation creates a long-lasting
1446 research advantage when it meets one or more of three
conditions
17 _
I17 Prajogo and Ahmed Quantitative Two hypotheses were supported by the
(2006) research empirical data in which there were significant
relationships between stimulus and capacity and
capacity and innovation performance outcomes
18 _
I18 Du Plessis (2007) Qualitative The nature of global economic growth has been
research changed by the speed of innovation, which has
been made possible by rapidly evolving
technology, shorter product lifecycles and a
higher rate of new product development
19 _
I19 Birkinshaw et al. (2008) Qualitative Developed a framework highlighting the
research important roles of internal and external change
agents in the process
20 _
I20 Baregheh et al. (2009) Qualitative This paper proposes a general and integrative
research definition of organisational “innovation”
21 _
I21 Bartel and Garud Qualitative Offered insights on how innovation narratives
(2009) research operate as cultural mechanisms to facilitate
structures, processes and practices required to
sustain innovation
22 _
I22 Chen and Huang (2009) Quantitative The findings provide evidence that knowledge
research management capacity plays a mediating role
between strategic human resource practices and
innovation performance
23 _
I23 Kline and Rosenberg Qualitative This review of innovation emphasises the need
(2009) research to view the process of innovation as changes in a
complete system of not only hardware but also
market environment, production facilities and
knowledge, and the social contexts of the
innovating organisation
24 _
I24 Jimenez-Jimenez and Quantitative The variables organisational learning and
Sans-Valle (2011) research innovation contribute positively to business
performance and organisational learning affects
innovation
25 _
I25 Bhatti (2012) Qualitative It defined frugal innovation as one that redefines
research business models, reconfigures value chains and
redesigns products to use resources in different
ways
26 _
I26 Camison-Zornoza and Quantitative Organisational innovation favours the
Lopez (2012) research development of technological innovation
capabilities and that both organisational
innovation and technological capabilities for
products and processes can lead to superior firm
performance
27 _
I27 Hogan and Coote (2014) Quantitative Organisational culture, particularly norms,
research artifacts and innovative behaviours
28 _
I28 Lendel et al. (2014) Qualitative A key assumption for the successful realisation
research of the innovation processes is the existence of a
supportive environment for innovation creation

Table 6. (continued )
No Code* Author/Year Methodology Findings/Focus
Innovative
literacy in
29 CTI1 Basadur and Hausdorf Quantitative Employee behaviours toward creativity can intellectual
(1996) research define their potential for acting in a creative
style, and organisations that can incorporate capital
creativity into their culture can further support
creative thinking
30 CTI2 McFadzean (1998) Qualitative Creative problem-solving techniques help to 1447
research structure the group process, if the organisation
itself has a creative culture
31 CTI3 McFadzean (1999) Qualitative This continuum has divided creativity
research techniques into three categories: Preserving,
stretching and breaking paradigms
32 CTI4 Basadur et al. (2000) Quantitative Behavioural skill was the most important
research variable overall: It was directly associated with
behavioural skill in both generating quality
options and evaluating options
33 CTI5 Martins and Qualitative The model designed in this research highlights
Terblanche (2003) research the determinants that play a role in promoting
creativity and innovation
34 CTI6 Mumford et al. (2012) Qualitative Creative thinking appears to call for the effective
research execution of eight core processes: (1) Problem
definition, (2) information gathering,
(3) information organisation, (4) conceptual
combination, (5) idea generation, (6) idea
evaluation, (7) implementation planning and
(8) solution monitoring
35 CTI7 Westwood and Low Qualitative Culture can impact creative and innovation
(2003) research processes
36 CTI8 Alves et al. (2007) Qualitative Creativity, innovation and new product is an
research effective process that requires continuous
re-tuning to get the balance right in ideas
37 CTI9 Baucus et al. (2007) Qualitative Relationships between creativity and ethics
research
38 CTI10 Agbor (2008) Qualitative The creativity of an organisation depends on
research how the leader designs the organisation and
creates the environment that allows creativity to
develop
39 CTI11 Beheshtifar and Zare Qualitative The organisation must understand the
(2013) research behaviour of the employees and create a culture
to drive employees’ creativity in the organisation
40 CTI12 Anderson et al. (2014) Qualitative Without innovation, few organisations can hope
research to survive and prosper
41 IC1 Wiig (1997) Qualitative Intellectual capital management and knowledge
research management must be integrated at an early
stage to monitor progress, achieve the desired
business results and obtain enterprise
management
42 IC2 Masoulas (1998) Case study The intellectual capital of an organisation can be
defined as the combination of intangible assets
of an organisation that adds value to
organisational effort in reaching its
transcendental goal

(continued ) Table 6.
JIC No Code* Author/Year Methodology Findings/Focus
23,6
43 IC3 Lynn (1999) Case study National culture and organisational culture are
important factors to be considered when
attempting to implement an intellectual capital
management system in an organisation
44 IC4 Dzinskovski (2000) Qualitative Intellectual capital management attempts to
1448 research grow, extract and measure a firm’s intangible
assets through assessment of systems
45 IC5 Petty and Guthrie Qualitative Without an improved understanding of how and
(2000) research why organisations develop their intellectual
capital, they remain unenlightened in the ways
and means of improving the stock of intellectual
capital
46 IC6 Bontis (2001) Qualitative Several seminal theories of creativity and
research innovation and comprehensive levels of analysis
framework to review extant research into
individual, team, organisational and multilevel
innovation
47 IC7 Bontis and Fitz- Enz Quantitative The measuring and modelling of human capital
(2002) research are critical and important
48 IC8 Riahi-Belkaoui (2003) Quantitative A test of the relationship between intellectual
research capital and financial performance using 81 US
multinational firms yielded positive and
significant results
49 IC9 Mouritsen (2004) Qualitative This relevance comes in two steps. One type of
research relevance is what typically can be read from
accounting type statements and the second step
is to understand the firm’s knowledge strategy
and its implementation
50 IC10 Subramaniam and Quantitative Human capital by itself was negatively
Youndt (2005) research associated with radical innovative capability
51 IC11 Gogan et al. (2016) Quantitative The proposed model for evaluation intellectual
research capital has a positive impact on organisational
performance, being oriented on intense
development
52 IP1 Hisrich (1990) Qualitative As may be expected, entrepreneurs and
research intrapreneurs are similar in many respects
53 IP2 Hornsby et al. (1993) Qualitative The intrapreneur is in a position to implement
research the idea and initiate the innovation
54 IP3 Baden- Fuller (1995) Qualitative Four proposals have been submitted for a more
research in-depth study of the role of innovation and
corporate entrepreneurship
55 IP4 Morrison (2000) Qualitative The profile of an entrepreneur which emerges
research through the study is one who is intelligent and
analytical
56 IP5 Ward (2004) Qualitative It is clear that knowledge plays a paradoxical
research role in creative endeavours. It is possible to put
knowledge to more effective use and improve
entrepreneurial creativity
57 IP6 Zhao (2005) Qualitative Entrepreneurship and innovation are positively
research related to each other and interact to help an
organisation to flourish; entrepreneurship and
innovation are complementary

Table 6. (continued )
No Code* Author/Year Methodology Findings/Focus
Innovative
literacy in
58 IP7 Chen (2007) Quantitative
Entrepreneurial leadership can stimulate intellectual
research
entrepreneurial team members to be more
creative and entrepreneurs have higher risk- capital
taking, pro-activeness and innovativeness; they
can stimulate their entrepreneurial team to be
more creative during the patent creation process 1449
59 IP8 Wu et al. (2008) Quantitative Specifically, firms that have higher levels of
research social capital and entrepreneurial orientation
tend to amplify the effects of intellectual capital
on innovation
60 IP9 Veeraraghavan (2009) Qualitative The ability to take risks and indulge in creative
research destruction and innovation are shown as
distinguishing features of an entrepreneur
61 IP10 Schaltegger and Qualitative In terms of integrating sustainability
Wagner (2011) research performance into business objectives, smaller
and younger firms are better positioned
62 IP11 Trimi and Berbegal- Qualitative A more customer-centred model is needed;
Mirabent (2012) research customer demands and innovation
63 IP12 Turro et al. (2013) Quantitative The article has several implications from both
research theoretical perspective (innovation within the
firms) and from a practical point of view
(providing insights for governmental policies
innovation and corporate entrepreneurship)
64 IP13 Kassa (2014) Quantitative How organisational and managerial variables
research could be modified in order to facilitate innovation
65 IP14 Ziyae and Heydari Quantitative There is an insignificant and positive
(2016) research relationship between behavioural strategies,
natural reward strategies, constructive thinking
patterns and entrepreneurs’ innovation
Note(s): *CODE: Innovation (I), Creative Thinking and Innovation (CTI), Intellectual Capital (IC),
Intrapreneurship (IP) Table 6.

5 5 5

4 4 4 4

3 3 3

2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2

1 1 1
Figure 2.
Distribution of articles
1990
1993
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2011
2012
2013
2014
2016

by year
JIC
23,6

1450

Figure 3.
Distribution of articles
based on journal

Although the topics of “Creativity”, “Human”, “Human resources”, “Leadership” and

“Information management” are not covered in this study, they are included in the meta-
synthesis analyses as these factors might affect an innovative literate individual. The
classification of 65 selected articles based on the systematic literature review is shown in
Table 6.

5. Results
The contributions of this study to the intellectual capital and innovative literacy literature are
twofold as theoretical and managerial implications.
Drucker (1998) underscores the importance of the innovative learning process: “new
problems require new innovative solutions, what needs to be done is to learn the discipline of
innovation”. It might be said that organisational climate change is required to facilitate an
innovative learning environment for individuals as well as the overall organisation. In this
regard, Saleh and Wang (1993) define an innovative organisation as a dynamic system and
state that an organisational learning structure is necessary for an innovative climate.
Similarly, Hogan and Coote (2014) stress that “values promoting innovation in different
layers of organisational structure mediate on company performance”. According to Bartel
and Garud (2009), an innovative perspective in the organisational climate positively affects
individual and organisational learning processes.
Additionally, Boer and During (2001) highlight the importance of senior management’s
attendance and innovative learning support. Ward (2004) summarises successful innovation
with his proposition: “it should rely on the balance between a top-down strategic guidance
and a bottom-up innovation, and unplanned naturally developing creativity and trial error
learning should be permitted in companies”.
Similarly, McFadzean (1999) stresses that senior management should encourage an
innovative environment in the company and allow people to spend time working on their
ideas. Westwood and Low (2003) state that all people may have the capacity for creativity;
therefore, organisational culture is influential in understanding learning and innovation.
Moreover, Chen and Huang (2009) propose that better information management leads to
higher innovation performance and encourages creative and innovative thoughts.
Agbor (2008) points out that an individual-oriented innovative learning skill in a micro-
perspective benefits institutions from a macro-perspective. It stresses that institutions should
respect ideas, experiences and richness of their viewpoints, and they should contribute to Innovative
setting up a beneficial and meaningful organisational innovation culture. literacy in
Comprehending the intellectual capital–innovation relationship fully is significant both
for academics aiming to grasp potential research opportunities and for managers looking for
intellectual
insights into how to reinforce innovation in their organisations (Buenechea-Elberdin, 2017). capital
Our analysis shows that there has been negligible innovation in intellectual capital
research (Petty and Guthrie, 2000), and the term is not present in annual reports
(Bontis, 2001). 1451
Human capital, which is accepted as the basic element of the intellectual capital approach,
is the sum of an individual’s knowledge, skills, experiences and behaviours, in other words, all
human elements, owned and developed by members of an organisation (Bontis, 2001).
Ward (2004), in his work stating the role of senior management in innovative learning
process, summarises successful innovation with his proposition “it should rely on the balance
between a top-down strategic guidance and a bottom-up innovation, and unplanned naturally
developing creativity and trial error learning should be permitted in companies.”
Mumford et al. (2012); effective execution of eight core processes is necessary for creative
thinking. These processes are: (1) problem definition, (2) information gathering, (3)
information organisation, (4) conceptual combination, (5) idea generation, (6) idea
evaluation, (7) implementation planning and (8) solution monitoring.

6. Discussion
Meta-synthesis findings provide important findings that the concept of innovative literacy is
not in the literature. Investigative, creative and innovative individuals are the inputs of
intellectual capital. The importance of this human resource and innovative thinking has been
studied from various dimensions across empirical and theoretical studies in the literature;
however, there has been no research on measuring an individual’s innovative literacy level.
This study highlights the lack of intellectual capital studies on innovation and human
capability.
In today’s highly uncertain and complex world, an innovative organisational structure is
essential to be more powerful and creative. Although there are several studies on innovation,
there continue to be gaps, especially with regard to describing innovative literacy and
intellectual capital. In this study, innovative literacy is conceptually analysed based on the
different perspectives in the literature.
In the current competitive environment, there is a greater need for creative individuals to
understand, interpret and develop innovation as a tool to gain competitive advantage
depending on the purpose of the innovation. According to this study’s primary assumption,
innovative literacy might be added as a novel characteristic of a creative person. Innovative
structures that affect the management process at the conceptual level for developing an
innovative culture should be considered through a holistic approach.
Managing human resources in an organisation with this approach also increases
innovative performance. The ideas and research and development skills of individuals may
be regarded as a degree of innovative literacy skill. Innovative literacy can be defined as the
characteristic of an employee working in any organisation, engaging in administrative or
technical innovative activities and utilising their knowledge for development and innovation,
in line with the organisation’s aims.

6.1 Theoretical implications

In a theoretical framework, the roles of organisational leaders and followers in innovation
should be considered together; both concepts should be accepted in the definition of
JIC innovative literacy. Transforming the innovations, which are obtained from innovative
23,6 literacy activities of leaders and their followers, into values would be a significant
contribution to the company’s intellectual capital. In this context, intrapreneurs are
considered catalysts of innovative development, as they contribute to organisational aims
and take ownership of the company’s sustainability; they should be regarded as innovative
literates. Organisations in which innovative literates have significant roles, based on the
emergence of new potential innovative individuals, realise their organisational goals,
1452 strengthen loyalty and contribute to sustainability.
The results of the meta-synthesis show that organisations that want to create a culture of
innovation should actively attempt to retain employees with high innovative literacy and
prioritise them while making their career plans. Meta-synthesis offers valuable insights into
the results of various studies conducted in different markets and societies globally. The
concept of innovative literacy is theoretically investigated by conducting a meta-synthesis
analysis in this study. Innovative literacy that tries to measure an individual’s innovative
competency offers great scope for further studies According to the articles in the analysis
table (Table 6), innovation increases organisational performance, encourages
intrapreneurship, contributes to intellectual capital and is related to overall organisational
development.
This study makes valuable contributions to the existing literature. In terms of theoretical
implications, first, it explores the concept of innovative literacy in current studies in the fields
of intellectual capital, intrapreneurship and innovation-creativity by conducting a meta-
synthesis analysis. Second, this work brings a new perspective to intellectual capital. Third, it
reveals that the concept is not present in any intellectual capital component, although
innovative literacy is important for intellectual capital. Fourth, through the meta-synthesis
analysis, this study highlights the gaps in the literature and provides suggestions for future
studies to further explore the field.

6.2 Managerial implications

The findings of this study also offer managerial implications. First, the evaluation of ideas,
research and development abilities, and effective knowledge management are indicators of
innovative literacy ability at the individual level. Therefore, organisations that want to
strategically promote a sustainable culture of innovation should prioritise their efforts to
recruit employees with a high level of innovative literacy as part of their investment plans. It
should also encourage and guide talented individuals to share their human capital.
Second, human capital, which is the sub-component of intellectual capital, refers to the
knowledge, skills and experiences. Firms will have more innovative performance when they
have strong intellectual capital. Organisational structures occupied by innovative literates
that reduce barriers to participation in innovation activities are important because they
encourage the emergence and development of other innovative individuals.
Third, the activities of employees who contribute to the knowledge, skills and experience
characteristics of human capital by innovating will be in line with corporate goals, such as the
growth of the company and their own development. In this case, the agility of the firm will
increase, and it will have a positive impact on its sustainable innovation.
Finally, innovative literate team members should be developed to strengthen an
organisation’s intellectual capital structure.
This study aimed to be a pioneering step in defining and measuring innovative literacy.
However, the debate over whether human capital is a subset or synonym of innovative
literacy can be clarified by further exploring what we mean by “innovative literacy”.
Applying multiple theoretical and managerial perspectives and exploring a wider range of
variables, our understanding of the nature and value of intellectual capital, possibly results in
the formation of a description of the different forms of innovative literacy and the pathways.
7. Limitations Innovative
While the findings of this study are useful, there are some limitations and recommendations literacy in
for future research. One limitation arises from the selection of the articles used in meta-
synthesis analyses; these were published during the 1990–2016 period. An expansion of the
intellectual
article selection period to include articles published before 1990 can be useful to better capital
understand the vision of innovation and intellectual capital.
There are likely to be several articles investigating intangible assets similar to the ones
analysed in this review that simply use different terminology in different contexts. Further, 1453
this research fills a conceptual gap in the literature. However, since this concept is evaluated
using the human, customer and structural components of intellectual capital, researchers in
the future can evaluate this concept with other components of intellectual capital. Finally, this
research does not present a hypothesis on the relationship between innovative literacy and
intellectual capital. Thus, our definition of innovative literacy may need to be broadened.

8. Conclusion
While many studies have examined innovation, some deficiencies persist with regard to
defining the sub-dimensions of innovation: innovative literacy in innovation management is
one of these missing concepts. Thus, this article conducted a meta-analysis to identify the
concept of innovative literacy. By synthesising findings from academic studies, this study
provides a novel conceptual view of integrating theories for ensuring relation intellectual
management and innovative literacy. We found gaps and methodological weaknesses in
innovative literacy research and thus provide insights for future research, which could focus
on developing the scale of innovative literacy and consider the following implications:
(1) Identify innovative literate individuals among former employees in the public and
private sectors of countries,
(2) Identify new recruits with this ability and direct them to the relevant areas and
(3) Encourage students at schools to focus on these subjects by revealing their
innovative literacy skills.
Such studies will contribute to the development of new (special) innovative literacy scales
based on the general scale in all the three cases mentioned above.

References
Adams, R., Bessant, J. and Phelps, R. (2006), “Innovation management measurement: a review”,
International Journal of Management Reviews, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 21-47, doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2370.
2006.00119.x.
Afuah, A. (2003), Innovation Management–Strategies, Implementation, and Profits, Oxford University
Press, New York, New York.
Agbor, E. (2008), “Creativity and innovation: the leadership dynamics”, Journal of Strategic
Leadership, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 39-45.
Alegre, J., Lapiedra, R. and Chiva, R. (2006), “A measurement scale for product innovation
performance”, European Journal of Innovation Management, Vol. 9 No. 4, pp. 333-346, doi: 10.
1108/14601060610707812.
Alves, J., Marques, M.J., Saur, I. and Marques, P. (2007), “Creativity and innovation through
multidisciplinary and multisectoral cooperation”, Creativity and Innovation Management,
Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 27-34, doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8691.2007.00417.x.
Alvino, F., Di Vaio, A., Hassan, R. and Palladino, R. (2020), “Intellectual capital and sustainable
development: a systematic literature review”, Journal of Intellectual Capital, Vol. 22 No. 1,
pp. 76-94, doi: 10.1108/JIC-11-2019-0259.
JIC AMA Manual of Style: A Guide for Authors and Editors, in Manual of Style Committee Retrieved
February 21, 2021, 10th ed., available at: https://www.amamanuelofstyle.com/view/10.1093/
23,6 jama/9780195176339.001.0001/med-9780195176339-chapter-14 (accessed 04 March 2021).
Amabile, T.M., Conti, R., Coon, H., Lazenby, J. and Herron, M. (1996), “Assessing the work
environment for creativity”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 39 No. 5, pp. 1154-1184, doi:
10.5465/256995.
Anderson, N., Hardy, G. and West, M. (1992), “Management team innovation”, Management Decision,
1454 Vol. 30 No. 2, pp. 17-21, doi: 10.1108/00251749210011160.
Anderson, N., Potocnik, K. and Zhou, J. (2014), “Innovation and creativity in organizations”, Journal of
Management, Vol. 40 No. 5, pp. 1297-1333, doi: 10.1177/0149206314527128.
Asiaei, K., Barani, O., Bontis, N. and Arabahmadi, M. (2020), “Unpacking the black box: how
intrapreneurship intervenes in the intellectual capital-performance relationship?”, Journal of
Intellectual Capital, Vol. 21 No. 6, pp. 809-834, doi: 10.1108/JIC-06-2019-0147.
Aspfors, J. and Fransson, G. (2015), “Research on mentor education for mentors of newly qualified
teachers: a qualitative meta-synthesis”, Teaching and Teacher Education, Vol. 48, pp. 75-86,
doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2015.02.004.
Auer Antoncic, J. and Antoncic, B. (2011), “Employee satisfaction, intrapreneurship and firm growth: a
model”, Industrial Management and Data Systems, Vol. 111 No. 4, pp. 589-607, doi: 10.1108/
02635571111133560.
Baden-Fuller, C. (1995), “Strategic innovation, corporate entrepreneurship and matching outside-in to
inside-out approaches to strategy research”, British Journal of Management, Vol. 6 No. Special
Issue, pp. 3-16, doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8551.1995.tb00134.x.
Baima, G., Forliano, C., Santoro, G. and Vrontis, D. (2020), “Intellectual capital and business model: a
systematic literature review to explore their linkages”, Journal of Intellectual Capital, Vol. 22
No. 3, pp. 653-679, doi: 10.1108/JIC-02-2020-0055.
Baregheh, A., Rowley, J. and Sambrook, S. (2009), “Towards a multidisciplinary definition of
innovation”, Management Decision, Vol. 47 No. 8, pp. 1323-1339, doi: 10.1108/
00251740910984578.
Bartel, C.A. and Garud, R. (2009), “The role of narratives in sustaining organizational innovation”,
Organization Science, Vol. 20 No. 1, pp. 107-117, doi: 10.1287/orsc.1080.0372.
Basadur, M. and Hausdorf, P.A. (1996), “Measuring divergent thinking attitudes related to creative
problem solving and innovation management”, Creativity Research Journal, Vol. 9 No. 1,
pp. 21-32, doi: 10.1207/s15326934crj0901_3.
Basadur, M., Runco, M.A. and Vega, L.A. (2000), “Understanding how creative thinking skills,
attitudes and behaviors work together: a causal process model”, Journal of Creative Behavior,
Vol. 34 No. 2, pp. 77-100, doi: 10.1002/j.2162-6057.2000.tb01203.x.
Baucus, M.S., Norton, W.I., Baucus, D.A. and Human, S.E. (2007), “Fostering creativity and innovation
without encouraging unethical behavior”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 81 No. 1, pp. 97-115,
doi: 10.1007/s10551-007-9483-4.
Baumeister, R.F. and Leary, M.R. (1997), “Writing narrative literature reviews”, Review of General
Psychology, Vol. 1 No. 3, pp. 311-320, doi: 10.1037/1089-2680.1.3.311.
Beheshtifar, M. and Zare, E. (2013), “Employee creativity: a compulsory factor in organizations”,
Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research in Business, Vol. 5 No. 2, pp. 242-247.
Bhatti, Y. (2012), “What is frugal, what is innovation? Towards a theory of frugal innovation”,
Working paper, Imperial College London, London, 01 February, doi: 10.2139/ssrn.2005910.
Binkley, M., Erstad, O., Herman, J., Raizen, S., Ripley, M. and Rumble, M. (2010), “Defining 21st
century skills”, Draft white paper 1, ATCS, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne.
Birkinshaw, J. and Mol, M.J. (2006), “How management innovation happens”, MIT Sloan Management
Review, Vol. 47 No. 4, pp. 81-88.
Birkinshaw, J., Hamel, G. and Mol, M.J. (2008), “Management innovation”, Academy of Management Innovative
Review, Vol. 33 No. 4, pp. 825-845, doi: 10.5465/amr.2008.34421969.
literacy in
Boer, H. and During, W.E. (2001), “Innovation, what innovation? a comparison between product,
process and organizational innovation”, International Journal of Technology Management,
intellectual
Vol. 22 Nos 1/2/3, pp. 82-107, doi: 10.1504/IJTM.2001.002956. capital
Bontis, N. (1998), “Intellectual capital: an exploratory study that develops measures and models”,
Management Decision, Vol. 36 No. 2, pp. 63-76, doi: 10.1108/00251749810204142.
1455
Bontis, N. (2001), “Assessing knowledge assets: a review of the models used to measure intellectual
capital”, International Journal of Management Reviews, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 41-60, doi: 10.1111/1468-
2370.00053.
Bontis, N. and Fitz-enz, J. (2002), “Intellectual capital ROI: a causal map of human capital antecedents
and consequents”, Journal of Intellectual Capital, Vol. 3 No. 3, pp. 223-247, doi: 10.1108/
14691930210435589.
Buenechea-Elberdin, M. (2017), “Structured literature review about intellectual capital and
innovation”, Journal of Intellectual Capital, Vol. 18 No. 2, pp. 262-285, doi: 10.1108/JIC-07-
2016-0069.
Camison-Zornoza, C. and Villar-Lopez, A. (2012), “Organizational innovation as an enabler of
technological innovation capabilities and firm performance”, Journal of Business Research,
Vol. 67 No. 1, pp. 2891-2902, doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2012.06.004.
Chen, C.J. and Huang, J.W. (2009), “Strategic human resource practices and innovation performance-
the mediating role of knowledge management capacity”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 16
No. 3, pp. 104-114, doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2007.11.016.
Chen, M.H. (2007), “Entrepreneurial leadership and new ventures: creativity in entrepreneurial teams”,
Creativity and Innovation Management, Vol. 16 No. 3, pp. 239-249, doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8691.2007.
00439.x.
Chuang, L., Liu, C., Tsai, W. and Huang, C. (2010), “Towards an analytical framework of
organizational innovation in the service industry”, African Journal of Business Management,
Vol. 4 No. 5, pp. 790-799, doi: 10.5897/AJBM.9000655.
Cormican, K. and O’Sullivan, D. (2004), “Auditing best practice for effective product innovation
management”, Technovation, Vol. 24 No. 10, pp. 819-829, doi: 10.1016/S0166-4972(03)00013-0.
Crossan, M.M. and Apaydin, M. (2010), “A multi-dimensional framework of organizational innovation:
a systematic review of the literature”, Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 47 No. 6,
pp. 1154-1191, doi: 10.1111/j.1467-6486.2009.00880.x.
Dabic, M., Vlacic, B., Scuotto, V. and Warkentin, M. (2020), “Two decades of the journal of intellectual
capital: a bibliometric overview and an agenda for future research”, Journal of Intellectual
Capital, Vol. 22 No. 3, pp. 458-477, doi: 10.1108/JIC-02-2020-0052.
Damanpour, F. and Evan, W. (1984), “Organizational innovation and performance: the problem of
‘organizational lag’”, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 29 No. 3, pp. 392-409, doi: 10.2307/
2393031.
Damanpour, F. and Gopalakrishnan, S. (2001), “The dynamics of the adoption of product and process
innovations in organizations”, Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 38 No. 1, pp. 45-65, doi: 10.
1111/1467-6486.00227.
Darroch, J. (2005), “Knowledge management, innovation and firm performance”, Journal of Knowledge
Management, Vol. 9 No. 3, pp. 101-115, doi: 10.1108/13673270510602809.
Drucker, P. (1993), “The rise of the knowledge society”, Wilson Quarterly, Vol. 17 No. 2, pp. 52-71.
Drucker, F.P. (1998), “The discipline of innovation”, Leader to Leader, Vol. 9, pp. 13-15, doi: 10.1002/ltl.
40619980906.
Du Plessis, M. (2007), “The role of knowledge management in innovation”, Journal of Knowledge
Management, Vol. 11 No. 4, pp. 20-29, doi: 10.1108/13673270710762684.
JIC Dzinskovski, R. (2000), “The value of intellectual capital”, Journal of Business Strategy, Vol. 21 No. 4,
pp. 3-4, doi: 10.1108/eb040094.
23,6
Edvinsson, L. and Sullivan, P. (1996), “Developing a model for managing intellectual capital”,
European Management Journal, Vol. 14 No. 4, pp. 356-364, doi: 10.1016/0263-2373(96)00022-9.
gan, N., Çorlu, M.S. and Capraro, R.M. (2013), “Defining innovation literacy: do robotics programs
Erdo
help students develop innovation literacy skills?”, International Online Journal of Educational
Sciences, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 1-9.
1456
Ferreira, J.J.M., Fernandes, C. and Veiga, P. (2020), “Multilevel approaches to advancing the
measurement of intellectual capital research field–what can we learn from the literature?”,
Journal of Intellectual Capital, Vols ahead-of-print Nos ahead-of-print, doi: 10.1108/JIC-07-
2020-0221.
Fiano, F., Mueller, J., Paoloni, N., Farina Briamonte, M. and Magni, D. (2020), “Evaluating fashion
retailers’ intellectual capital: key money as a part of customer capital”, Journal of Intellectual
Capital, Vols ahead-of-print Nos ahead-of-print, doi: 10.1108/JIC-12-2019-0287.
Frambach, R.T. and Schillewaert, N. (2002), “Organizational innovation adoption: a multi-level
framework of determinants and opportunities for future research”, Journal of Business
Research, Vol. 55 No. 2, pp. 163-176, doi: 10.1016/S0148-2963(00)00152-1.
Gherghina, Ş.C., Botezatu, M.A., Hosszu, A. and Simionescu, L.N. (2020), “Small and medium-sized
enterprises (SMEs): the engine of economic growth through investments and innovation”,
Sustainability, Vol. 12 No. 1, p. 347, doi: 10.3390/su12010347.
Gogan, L.M., Artena, A., Sarca, I. and Draghici, A. (2016), “The impact of intellectual capital on
organizational performance”, Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 221, pp. 194-202,
doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.05.106.
Gurteen, D. (1998), “Knowledge, creativity and innovation”, Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 2
No. 1, pp. 5-13, doi: 10.1108/13673279810800744.
Hall, H.B. (2004), “Innovation and diffusion”, Paper [No.10d212], National Bureau of Economic
Research, Cambridge and Boston, January, doi: 10.3386/w10212.
Hamel, G. (2006), “The why, what and how of management innovation”, Harvard Business Review,
Vol. 84 No. 2, pp. 72-84.
Heunks, J.F. (1998), “Innovation, creativity and success”, Small Business Economics, Vol. 10 No. 3,
pp. 263-272, doi: 10.1023/A:1007968217565.
Hisrich, R.D. (1990), “Entrepreneurship/intrapreneurship”, American Psychologist, Vol. 45 No. 2,
pp. 209-222, doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.45.2.209.
Hitt, M.A., Bierman, L., Shimizu, K. and Kochhar, R. (2001), “Direct and moderating effects of human
capital on strategy and performance in professional service firms: a resource-based
perspective”, The Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 44 No. 1, pp. 13-28, doi: 10.5465/
3069334.
Hogan, S.J. and Coote, L.V. (2014), “Organizational culture, innovation, and performance: a test of
Schein’s model”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 67 No. 8, pp. 1609-1621, doi: 10.1016/j.
jbusres.2013.09.007.
Hoon, C. (2013), “Meta-synthesis of qualitative case studies”, Organizational Research Methods, Vol. 16
No. 4, pp. 522-556, doi: 10.1177/1094428113484969.
Hornsby, J.S., Naffziger, D.W., Kuratko, D.F. and Montagno, R.V. (1993), “An interactive model of the
corporate entrepreneurship process”, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, Vol. 17 No. 2,
pp. 29-37, doi: 10.1177/104225879301700203.
Jensen, L. and Allen, M. (1996), “Meta-synthesis of qualitative findings”, Qualitative Health Research,
Vol. 6 No. 4, pp. 553-560, doi: 10.1177/104973239600600407.
Jimenez-Jimenez, D. and Sanz-Valle, R. (2011), “Innovation, organizational learning and performance”,
Journal of Business Research, Vol. 64 No. 4, pp. 408-417, doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2010.09.010.
Kaplan, R.S. and Norton, D.P. (1992), “The balanced scorecard–measures that drives performance”, Innovative
Harvard Business Review, Vol. 70 No. 1, pp. 71-79.
literacy in
Kassa, A.G. (2014), “Corporate entrepreneurship and innovation”, European Journal of Business and
Management, Vol. 6 No. 31, pp. 50-68.
intellectual
Kersten, J. and Pardo, L. (2007), “Finessing and hybridizing: innovative literacy practices in reading
capital
first classrooms”, The Reading Teacher, Vol. 61 No. 2, pp. 146-154, doi: 10.1598/RT.61.2.4.
Kimberly, J.R. and Evanisko, M.J. (1981), “Organizational innovation: the influence of individual, 1457
organizational, and contextual factors on hospital adoption of technological and
administrative innovations”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 24 No. 4, pp. 689-713,
doi: 10.5465/256170.
Kline, S.J. and Rosenberg, N. (2009), “An overview of innovation”, in Studies on Science and the
Innovation Process, pp. 173-203, doi: 10.1142/9789814273596_0009.
Konno, N. and Schillaci, C.E. (2021), “Intellectual capital in society 5.0 by the lens of the knowledge
creation theory”, Journal of Intellectual Capital, Vol. 22 No. 3, pp. 478-505, doi: 10.1108/JIC-02-
2020-0060.
Kweh, Q.L., Lu, W.M., Tone, K. and Nourani, M. (2021), “Risk-adjusted banks’ resource-utilization and
investment efficiencies: does intellectual capital matter?”, Journal of Intellectual Capital, Vols
ahead-of-print Nos ahead-of-print, doi: 10.1108/JIC-03-2020-0106.
Lam, A. (2004), “Organizational innovation”, Working paper [No.11539], MPRA, University of London,
London, April.
 and Siantova, E. (2014), “Management of innovation processes in company”,
Lendel, V., Hittmara, S.
2nd Global Conference on Business, Economics, Management and Tourism, University of Zilina,

Zilina, pp. 861-866, doi: 10.1016/S2212-5671(15)00382-2.
Lepak, D.P. and Snell, S.A. (1999), “The human resource architecture: toward a theory of human
capital allocation and development”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 24 No. 1, pp. 31-48,
doi: 10.5465/amr.1999.1580439.
Li, X., Wang, Y., Fu, L. and Xu, M. (2009), “The university library: incubation center of research
innovation literacy”, The Electronic Library, Vol. 27 No. 4, pp. 588-600, doi: 10.1108/
02640470910979552.
Ling, Y.H. (2013), “The influence of intellectual capital on organizational performance-knowledge
management as moderator”, Asia Pacific Journal Management, Vol. 30 No. 3, pp. 937-964,
doi: 10.1007/s10490-011-9257-5.
Lynn, B.E. (1999), “Culture and intellectual capital management: a key factor in successful ICM
implementation”, International Journal of Technology Management, Vol. 18 Nos 5/6/7/8,
pp. 590-604, doi: 10.1504/IJTM.1999.002790.
Magni, D., Pezzi, A. and Vrontis, D. (2020), “Towards a framework of students’ co-creation behaviour
in higher education institutions”, International Journal of Managerial and Financial Accounting,
Vol. 12 No. 2, pp. 119-148, doi: 10.1504/ijmfa.2020.109129.
Marıa Dıez, J., Lizet Ochoa, M., Bego~
na Prieto, M. and Santidrian, A. (2010), “Intellectual capital and
value creation in Spanish firms”, Journal of Intellectual Capital, Vol. 11 No. 3, pp. 348-367, doi: 10.
1108/14691931011064581.
Martins, E.C. and Terblanche, F. (2003), “Building organisational culture that stimulates creativity and
innovation”, European Journal of Innovation Management, Vol. 6 No. 1, pp. 64-74, doi: 10.1108/
14601060310456337.
Masoulas, V. (1998), “Organizational requirements definition for intellectual capital management”,
International Journal of Technology Management, Vol. 16 Nos 1-3, pp. 126-144, doi: 10.1504/
IJTM.1998.002655.
McFadzean, E. (1998), “Enhancing creative thinking within organisations”, Management Decision,
Vol. 36 No. 5, pp. 309-315, doi: 10.1108/00251749810220513.
JIC McFadzean, E. (1999), “Encouraging creative thinking”, Leadership and Organization Development
Journal, Vol. 20 No. 7, pp. 374-383, doi: 10.1108/01437739910302533.
23,6
McGregor, J., Tweed, D. and Pech, R. (2004), “Human capital in the new economy: devil’s bargain?”,
Journal of Intellectual Capital, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 153-164, doi: 10.1108/14691930410512978.
Mone, M.A., McKinley, W. and Barker, V.L., III (1998), “Organizational decline and innovation: a
contingency framework”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 23 No. 1, pp. 115-132, doi: 10.
5465/amr.1998.192965.
1458
Morrison, A. (2000), “Entrepreneurship: what triggers it?”, International Journal of Entrepreneurial
Behavior and Research, Vol. 6 No. 2, pp. 59-71, doi: 10.1108/13552550010335976.
Mouritsen, J. (2004), “Measuring and intervening: how do we theorise intellectual capital management?”,
Journal of Intellectual Capital, Vol. 5 No. 2, pp. 257-267, doi: 10.1108/14691930410533687.
Mumford, M.D., Medeiros, K.E. and Partlow, P.J. (2012), “Creative thinking: processes, strategies and
knowledge”, The Journal of Creative Behavior, Vol. 46 No. 1, pp. 30-47, doi: 10.1002/jocb.003.
Nahapiet, J. and Ghoshal, S. (1998), “Social capital, intellectual capital and the organizational advantage”,
Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 23 No. 2, pp. 242-266, doi: 10.5465/amr.1998.533225.
Namasivayam, K. and Denizci, B. (2006), “Human capital in service organizations: identifying value
drivers”, Journal of Intellectual Capital, Vol. 7 No. 3, pp. 381-393, doi: 10.1108/
14691930610681465.
Nejjari, Z. and Aamoum, H. (2020), “Intellectual capital as a generator of innovation in companies: a
systematic review”, Humanities and Social Sciences Reviews, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 464-479, doi: 10.
18510/hssr.2020.8158.
Ngo, L.V. and O’Cass, A. (2013), “Innovation and business success: the mediating role of customer
participation”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 66 No. 8, pp. 1134-1142, doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.
2012.03.009.
Ni, Y., Cheng, Y.-R. and Huang, P. (2020), “Do intellectual capitals matter to firm value enhancement?
Evidences from Taiwan”, Journal of Intellectual Capital, Vols ahead-of-print, doi: 10.1108/JIC-10-
2019-0235.
Noblit, W.G. and Hare, D. (1988), Meta-Ethnography: Synthesizing Qualitative Studies, Sage, Newbury
Park, California, doi: 10.4135/9781412985000.
Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development (1999), “Guidelines and instructions for
OECD symposium”, International Symposium Measuring Reporting Intellectual Capital:
Experiences, Issues, and Prospects, Paris, June, OECD Publishing, Amsterdam.
Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development/Eurostat (2005), Oslo Manual–Guidelines for
Collecting and Interpreting Innovation Data, OECD Publishing, Paris, doi: 10.1787/9789264013100-en.
Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development (2008), Intellectual Assets and Value
Creation- Synthesis Report, OECD Publishing, Paris, pp. 1-35.
Orlando, B., Ballestra, L.V., Magni, D. and Ciampi, F. (2020), “Open innovation and patenting activity in
health care”, Journal of Intellectual Capital, Vol. 22 No. 2, pp. 384-402, doi: 10.1108/JIC-03-2020-0076.
Petrash, G. (1996), “Dow’s journey to a knowledge value management culture”, European
Management Journal, Vol. 14 No. 4, pp. 365-373, doi: 10.1016/0263-2373(96)00023-0.
Petty, R. and Guthrie, J. (2000), “Intellectual capital literature review”, Journal of Intellectual Capital,
Vol. 1 No. 2, pp. 155-176, doi: 10.1108/14691930010348731.
Pla-Barber, J. and Joaquin, A. (2007), “Analysing the link between export intensity, innovation and
firm size in a science-based industry”, International Business Review, Vol. 16 No. 3, pp. 275-293,
doi: 10.1016/j.ibusrev.2007.02.005.
Porter, M.E. and Stern, S. (2001), “National innovative capacity”, Ch. 2.2, in The Global Competitiveness
Report 2001–2002, Oxford University Press, New York, Vol. 2002, pp. 102-118, available at:
https://www.hbs.edu/faculty/Publication%20Files/Innov_9211_610334c1-4b37-497d-a51a-
ce18bbcfd435.pdf (accessed 17 February 2021).
Prajogo, D.I. and Ahmed, P.K. (2006), “Relationships between innovation stimulus, innovation Innovative
capacity, and innovation performance”, R&D Management, Vol. 36 No. 5, pp. 499-515, doi: 10.
1111/j.1467-9310.2006.00450.x. literacy in
Riahi-Belkaoui, A. (2003), “Intellectual capital and firm performance of us multinational firms: a study
intellectual
of the resource-based and stakeholder views”, Journal of Intellectual Capital, Vol. 4 No. 2, capital
pp. 215-226, doi: 10.1108/14691930310472839.
Roos, G. and Roos, J. (1997), “Measuring your company’s intellectual performance”, Long Range
Planning, Vol. 30 No. 3, pp. 413-426, doi: 10.1016/s0024-6301(97)90260-0. 1459
Roos, J., Edvinsson, L., Roos, G. and Dragonetti, N.C. (1997), Intellectual Capital: Navigating the New Business
Landscape, New York University Press, New York, NY, doi: 10.1007/978-1-349-14494-5.
Rossi, M.V. and Magni, D. (2017), “Intellectual capital and value co-creation: an empirical analysis
from a marketing perspective”, Electronic Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 15 No. 3,
pp. 147-158.
Saleh, S.D. and Wang, C.K. (1993), “The management of innovation: strategy, structure, and
organizational climate”, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, Vol. 40 No. 1,
pp. 14-21, doi: 10.1109/17.206645.
Sandelowski, M., Docherty, S. and Emden, C. (1997), “Focus on qualitative methods qualitative meta-
synthesis: issues and techniques”, Research in Nursing and Health, Vol. 20 No. 4, pp. 365-372,
doi: 10.1002/(sici)1098-240x(199708)20:4<365::aid-nur9>3.0.co;2-e.
Schaltegger, S. and Wagner, M. (2011), “Sustainable entrepreneurship and sustainability innovation:
categories and interactions”, Business Strategy and the Environment, Vol. 20 No. 4, pp. 222-237,
doi: 10.1002/bse.682.
Seleim, A., Ashour, A. and Bontis, N. (2004), “Intellectual capital in Egyptian software firms”, The
Learning Organization, Vol. 11 Nos 4-5, pp. 332-346, doi: 10.1108/09696470410538233.
Serenko, A. and Bontis, N. (2009), “Global ranking of knowledge management and intellectual capital
academic journals”, Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 13 No. 1, pp. 4-15, doi: 10.1108/
13673270910931125.
Smith, W.K. and Tushman, M.L. (2005), “Managing strategic contradictions: a top management model
for managing innovation streams”, Organization Science, Vol. 16 No. 5, pp. 522-536, doi: 10.1287/
orsc.1050.0134.
Sorensen, J.B. and Stuart, T.E. (2000), “Aging, obsolescence, and organizational innovation”,
Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 45 No. 1, pp. 81-112, doi: 10.2307/2666980.
Stewart, T.A. (1991), “Intellectual capital: brainpower”, Fortune, Vol. 27 No. 6, pp. 44-45.
Stewart, T.A. (1997), Intellectual Capital: The New Wealth of Nations, Doubleday/Currency,
New York, NY.
Storey, J. (2000), “The management of innovation problem”, International Journal of Innovation
Management, Vol. 4 No. 3, pp. 347-369, doi: 10.1142/S1363919600000196.
Stahle, P. and Hong, J. (2002), “Dynamic intellectual capital in global rapidly changing industries”,
Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 6 No. 2, pp. 177-189, doi: 10.1108/13673270210424693.
Subramanian, A. and Nilakanta, S. (1996), “Organizational innovativeness: exploring the relationship
between organizational determinants of innovation, types of innovations, and measures of
organizational performance”, Omega, Vol. 24 No. 6, pp. 631-647, doi: 10.1016/S0305-0483(96)
00031-X.
Subramaniam, M. and Youndt, M.A. (2005), “The influence of intellectual capital on the types of
innovative capabilities”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 48 No. 3, pp. 450-463, doi: 10.
5465/amj.2005.17407911.
Sunley, P., Pinch, S., Reimer, S. and Macmillen, J. (2008), “Innovation in a creative production system:
the case of design”, Journal of Economic Geography, Vol. 8 No. 5, pp. 675-698, doi: 10.1093/jeg/
lbn028.
JIC Sveiby, K.E. (1997), The New Organizational Wealth: Managing and Measuring Knowledge-Based
Assets, Berrett Koehler, San Francisco, California.
23,6
Tranfield, D., Denyer, D. and Smart, P. (2003), “Towards a methodology for developing evidence-
informed management knowledge by means of systematic review”, British Journal of
Management, Vol. 14 No. 3, pp. 207-222, doi: 10.1111/1467-8551.00375.
Trimi, S. and Berbegal-Mirabent, J. (2012), “Business model innovation in entrepreneurship”,
International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Vol. 8 No. 4, pp. 449-465, doi: 10.1007/
1460 s11365-012-0234-3.
Turro, A., Urbano, D. and Peris-Ortiz, M. (2013), “Culture and innovation: the moderating effect of
cultural values on corporate entrepreneurship”, Technological Forecasting and Social Change,
Vol. 88, pp. 360-369, doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2013.10.004.
Veeraraghavan, V. (2009), “Entrepreneurship and innovation”, Asia Pacific Business Review, Vol. 5
No. 1, pp. 14-20, doi: 10.1177/097324700900500102.
Walsh, D. and Downe, S. (2005), “Meta-synthesis method for qualitative research: a literature review”,
Journal of Advanced Nursing, Vol. 50 No. 2, pp. 204-211, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2648.2005.03380.x.
Ward, T.B. (2004), “Cognition, creativity and entrepreneurship”, Journal of Business Venturing, Vol. 19
No. 2, pp. 173-188, doi: 10.1016/S0883-9026(03)00005-3.
Westwood, R. and Low, D.R. (2003), “The multicultural muse”, International Journal of Cross Cultural
Management, Vol. 3 No. 2, pp. 235-259, doi: 10.1177/14705958030032006.
Wiig, K.M. (1997), “Integrating intellectual capital and knowledge management”, Long Range
Planning, Vol. 30 No. 3, pp. 399-405, doi: 10.1016/S0024-6301(97)90256-9.
Wu, W.Y., Chang, M. and Chen, C. (2008), “Promoting innovation through the accumulation of
intellectual capital, social capital and entrepreneurial orientation”, R&D Management, Vol. 38
No. 3, pp. 265-267, doi: 10.1111/1467-9914.00120-i1.
Y€ unce, N. (2017), “A model suggestion for increasing innovative literacy in vocational
uksel, A. and G€
high schools”, International Journal of Academic Value Studies, Vol. 3 No. 17, pp. 66-76, doi: 10.
23929/javs.658.
Zahra, S.A. (1995), “Corporate entrepreneurship and financial performance: the case of management
leveraged buyouts”, Journal of Business Venturing, Vol. 10 No. 3, pp. 225-247, doi: 10.1016/0883-
9026(94)00024-O.
Zhao, F. (2005), “Exploring the synergy between entrepreneurship and innovation”, International
Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour and Research, Vol. 11 No. 1, pp. 25-41, doi: 10.1108/
13552550510580825.
Ziyae, B. and Heydari, R. II (2016), “Investigating the effect of self-leadership on entrepreneurs’
innovation in small and medium-sized enterprises”, International Journal of Humanities and
Cultural Studies, Vol. 2 No. 4, pp. 1169-1182.

Corresponding author
Asiye Y€
uksel can be contacted at: asiye.yuksel@kocaeli.edu.tr

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com