Kogan, L., Papanikolaou, D., Seru, A., & Stoffman, N. (2017). Technological innovation, resource allocation, and growth. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 132(2), 665-712.

Kyläheiko, K., Jantunen, A., Puumalainen, K., Saarenketo, S., & Tuppura, A. (2011). Innovation and internationalization as growth strategies: The role of technological capabilities and appropriability. International Business Review, 20(5), 508-520.

Lee, J. Y., Swink, M., & Pandejpong, T. (2017). Team diversity and manufacturing process innovation performance: the moderating role of technology maturity. International Journal of Production Research, 55(17), 4912-4930.

Matthews, J. R. (2015). Assessing organizational effectiveness: the role of performance measures. The Library Quarterly.

Mintzberg, H. (1993). Structure in fives: Designing effective organizations. Prentice-Hall, Inc.

Mohr, L. B. (1969). Determinants of innovation in organizations. American political science review, 63(1), 111-126.

Moon, H., Miller, D. R., & Kim, S. H. (2013). Product design innovation and customer value: Cross‐cultural research in the United States and Korea. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 30(1), 31-43.

Nieves, J., & Quintana, A. (2016). Human resource practices and innovation in the hotel industry: The mediating role of human capital. Tourism and Hospitality Research, 1467358415624137.

Onkelinx, J., Manolova, T. S., & Edelman, L. F. (2016). Human capital and SME internationalization: Empirical evidence from Belgium. International Small Business Journal, 34(6), 818-837.

Pullman, M., & Rainey, K. (2016). Minimizing Food Waste at Google: Creating Production Innovation and Purchasing Practices. In Organizing Supply Chain Processes for Sustainable Innovation in the Agri-Food Industry (pp. 127-152). Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

1. 1. Innovation ↑

1. 1. Schumpeter, J. ↑

1. 1. Robbins, S. P. ↑

1. 1. Hult, et al. ↑

1. 1. Guilford, J. P. ↑

1. 1. Le Bas et al. ↑

1. 1. Mohr, L. B. ↑

1. 1. Rosenfeld, R., & Servo, J. C. ↑

1. 1. Fu, et al. ↑

1. 1. Canen, A. G., & Canen, A. ↑

1. 1. Weir, S., & Knight, J. ↑

1. 1. Ruiz-Moreno et al. ↑

1. 1. Pullman, M., & Rainey, K. ↑

1. 1. Lee, et al. ↑

1. 1. Kogan, et al. ↑

1. 1. Adams et al. ↑

1. 1. Hüsig, S. ↑

1. 1. Veall, M. R. ↑

1. 1. Moon, et al. ↑

1. 1. Carlborg et al. ↑

1. 1. Rothwell, R. ↑

1. 1. حلقه نوآوری اشاره به چهارچوبی دارد که طی آن مراحل و ذینفعان مرتبط با توسعه یک نوآوری طبقه بندی می شود. ↑

   

1. 1. Garcia, et al. ↑

1. 1. Drucker, P. ↑

1. 1. Internationalization ↑

1. 1. Hessels, & Parker ↑

1. 1. Johanson, J., & Vahlne, J. E. ↑

1. 1. Andersen, O. ↑

1. 1. Rogers ↑

1. 1. Bilkey ↑

1. 1. Reid ↑

1. 1. Cavusgil ↑

1. 1. Welch, et al. ↑

1. 1. Jeffries, F. L., & Reed, R. ↑

1. 1. Onkelinx, et al. ↑

1. 1. Barney ↑

1. 1. Castano, et al. ↑

1. 1. Mintzberg ↑

1. 1. Zucchella & Siano ↑

1. 1. Shu, et al. ↑

1. 1. Garcia, R., & Calantone, R. ↑

1. 1. Hoonsopon, D., & Ruenrom, G. ↑

1. 1. Alegre, et al. ↑

1. 1. Delery, J., & Gupta, N. ↑

1. 1. Katou, A. A., & Budhwar, P. ↑

1. 1. Nieves, J., & Quintana, A. ↑

1. 1. Alhassan, A. L., & Asare, N. ↑

1. 1. Awan, A., & Tahir, M. ↑

1. 1. Matthews, J. R. ↑

1. 1. Ali, A., & Patnaik, B. ↑

1. 1. Drucker ↑

1. 1. Shearmur, et al. ↑

1. 1. Hsu, et al. ↑

1. 1. Sui & Baum ↑

1. 1. Kyläheiko, et al. ↑

1. 1. Likert ^۱ ↑

1. 1. Validity ↑

1. 1. Reliability ↑

1. 1. کرونباخ (۱۹۵۱) ضریب پایایی ۴۵/۰را کم، ۷۵/۰ را متوسط و قابل قبول و ضریب ۹۵/۰ ا زیاد پیشنهاد کرده­است. در بسیاری از منابع نیز مقادیر به دست آمده بالای ۷/۰ در این آزمون مطلوب تلقی می­ شود. بدیهی اس در صورت پایین بودن مقدار آلفا، باید بررسی شود که با حذف کدام پرسش­های پرسشنامه ‌می‌توان مقدار آن را افزایش داد. ↑

1. 1. Structural Equation Modeling ↑