Innovation strategy should match the firm’s life-cycle stage. A study of 189 U.S. and Italian managers reveals that growth-stage and maturity-stage firms emphasize fundamentally different resource actions to drive innovation.
What drives innovation in a young, fast-growing company is not what works for an established, mature one. This seems obvious in principle, but most innovation advice treats the question as stage-independent—as if the same resource strategies apply regardless of where a firm stands in its development. This study challenges that assumption by combining resource orchestration theory with contingency theory to show how top managers at different life-cycle stages emphasize different resource actions to produce innovation.
The researchers used a policy capturing method with 189 senior managers from U.S. and Italian companies. Each manager evaluated 30 hypothetical scenarios in which resource actions varied: acquiring new resources, accumulating them internally, divesting underperforming ones, stabilizing existing capabilities, enriching them through recombination, and pioneering entirely new capabilities. The method isolates how much weight managers place on each action for innovation, conditional on whether they are leading a growth-stage or maturity-stage firm.
Managers in growth-stage firms placed the greatest weight on acquiring and accumulating resources—securing partnerships, building internal capabilities, and investing in market knowledge. These firms lack the infrastructure and legitimacy of older organizations, making resource-building essential. They also emphasized enriching and pioneering capabilities: creating new ways of operating, seizing market gaps, and experimenting freely. Growth-stage innovation is expansive and exploratory, driven by the need to establish a position before competitors close the window.
For managers in mature firms, the emphasis shifted toward stabilizing current capabilities and making incremental improvements. These firms benefit from established structures, customer relationships, and operational routines. The risk is rigidity—becoming so committed to existing processes that adaptation stalls. Continuous small improvements allow mature firms to remain competitive without disrupting the core. One unexpected finding: contrary to the hypothesis, mature-stage managers did not prioritize divesting underperforming resources to fuel innovation. This suggests either a cultural resistance to letting go or an underappreciation of divestment as a strategic tool.
Across both growth and maturity stages, shedding underperforming resources was found to be beneficial for innovation but was consistently underemphasized by managers. The implication is that firms leave innovation capacity on the table by holding onto assets, divisions, or practices that no longer contribute. Letting go is a resource strategy too—and potentially the one with the highest untapped potential.
Growth firms should invest in resource acquisition, experimentation, and capability pioneering. Mature firms should focus on stabilizing and enriching what they already have while staying alert to the need for selective divestment. Importing the wrong playbook—applying mature-firm discipline to a growth venture, or growth-firm experimentation to a stable enterprise—creates misalignment that suppresses innovation rather than enabling it.
Shedding underperforming units, outdated product lines, or legacy processes is not a sign of failure. It frees resources—financial, managerial, and attentional—that can be redirected toward innovation. Firms at all stages should periodically evaluate what they are holding onto and whether it still earns its place in the portfolio.
This study provides empirical evidence for what many practitioners sense intuitively: innovation strategy cannot be one-size-fits-all. The contribution of resource orchestration theory is to specify exactly how the emphasis should shift—from acquiring and pioneering in growth stages to stabilizing and enriching in maturity. For firms that span multiple generations or manage portfolios of businesses at different stages, the framework offers a diagnostic tool for aligning resource actions with strategic context.

CeFEO counts more than 50 scholars and 30 affiliated researchers. Several studies and reports have consistently identified CeFEO as a leading research environment worldwide in the area of ownership and family business studies.
This research project, has been co-authored by the following CeFEO Members.
Spotlight highlights research-based findings only. If you’re interested in exploring this project further or delving into the theoretical and methodological details, we encourage you to contact the authors or read the full article for a comprehensive understanding.

Carnes, C. M., Chirico, F., Hitt, M. A., Huh, D. W., & Pisano, V. (2017). Resource orchestration for innovation: Structuring and bundling resources in growth- and maturity-stage firms. Long Range Planning, 50(4), 472–486.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2016.07.003

Spotlight is an innovative online family business magazine designed to bridge the gap between cutting-edge research and the real-world needs of practitioners, owners, and policymakers. Drawing on the latest findings from the Centre for Family Entrepreneurship and Ownership (CeFEO) at Jönköping International Business School, Spotlight delivers insightful, accessible summaries of key research topics. Our mission is to keep the family business community informed and empowered by offering actionable insights, expert analyses, and forward-thinking strategies that enhance business leadership and ownership practices for long-term success.
Spotlight is generously supported by the WIFU Foundation, which promotes research, education, and dialogue in the field of family business. This partnership enables us to continue bridging academic insights and real-world practice for the advancement of responsible family entrepreneurship and ownership.

CeFEO counts more than 50 scholars and 30 affiliated researchers. Several studies and reports have consistently identified CeFEO as a leading research environment worldwide in the area of ownership and family business studies. This research project, has been co-authored by the following CeFEO Members.
Spotlight highlights research-based findings only. If you’re interested in exploring this project further or delving into the theoretical and methodological details, we encourage you to contact the authors or read the full article for a comprehensive understanding.

Carnes, C. M., Chirico, F., Hitt, M. A., Huh, D. W., & Pisano, V. (2017). Resource orchestration for innovation: Structuring and bundling resources in growth- and maturity-stage firms. Long Range Planning, 50(4), 472–486.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2016.07.003

Spotlight is an innovative, AI-powered, online family business magazine designed to bridge the gap between cutting-edge research and the real-world needs of practitioners, owners, and policymakers. Drawing on the latest findings from the Centre for Family Entrepreneurship and Ownership (CeFEO) at Jönköping International Business School, Spotlight delivers insightful, accessible summaries of key research topics. Our mission is to keep the family business community informed and empowered by offering actionable insights, expert analyses, and forward-thinking strategies that enhance business leadership and ownership practices for long-term success.
Spotlight is generously supported by the WIFU Foundation, which promotes research, education, and dialogue in the field of family business. This partnership enables us to continue bridging academic insights and real-world practice for the advancement of responsible family entrepreneurship and ownership.