Orchestration of innovation networks in collaborative settings

Abstract

Purpose Few papers address innovation activities among tourism entities. The purpose of this paper is to elucidate the extent to which the theoretical framework of network orchestration can explain the system of relations underlying roles and behaviors of tourism actors in collaborative innovation settings. Design/methodology/approach Using interview data collected from destination management organizations and their destination partners within two polar-sampled North American destinations, this study identifies relationships which underlie the behaviors of tourism and hospitality actors engaged in collaborative innovative activities. To understand these relationships, this study abductively imposes the emergent theoretical framework of network orchestration and offers practical implications for conducting successful innovation among tourism collaborators. Findings First, orchestration of knowledge mobility processes in collaborative innovation settings is associated with trust, perceived fairness and the search for experts within the network. Second, orchestration of innovation appropriability processes is associated with forging shared ownership and knowledge exchange with “dissimilar” partners. Third, orchestration of network stability processes is associated with enhancing the reputation of influential actors within the tourism destination, and shared visioning of future innovation outcomes. Originality/value This paper contributes to the collaborative innovation landscape by testing the emerging theoretical framework of network orchestration and proposing practical implications for hospitality and tourism actors engaged in innovative activities. The research further demonstrates the value of abductive reasoning for elucidating theory from interview evidence and proposes a model for future studies on collaborative innovation networks.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 39 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.