Abstract
An inconvenient truth about innovation projects is that they frequently fail. Innovation and failure are so entwined that the probability of failure increases with the intensity of innovation. However, while some innovation projects fail, some organisations fail to learn from their failures despite the importance of such failures in avoiding failure in the future. Drawing on a scarce stream of work, this study contributes to the literature on Learning From Innovation Failure (LFIF) by drawing on two complementary theories: Social Learning Theory (SLT) and Social Exchange Theory (SET). Moreover, it contributes to the empirical validation of the relationship between LFIF and its determinants. Based on a sample of 436 manufacturing SMEs in Canada and a triangulation of analysis methods (structural equation modelling, SEM, and configurational: fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis, fsQCA), we show that LFIF is explained by organisational (problem-solving and blaming approaches and psychological safety), interactional (trust among employees), and individual factors (personal mastery). Moreover, while the SEM results confirm synergies between LFIF drivers, the fsQCA results shed light on three pathways of conditions for LFIF. We derive some implications for managers and suggest directions for future research on the links between psychological safety, trust, and problem-solving approaches.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
