Communications on Applied Nonlinear Analysis ISSN: 1074-133X Vol 32 No. 2 (2025) 130 https://internationalpubls.com A Meta-Analysis on the Relationship Between Innovation Capability & Knowledge Sharing and Role of Innovation Capability on Financial Performance of Firms Vishal Kumar1, Iya Churakova2 1National Research University-Higher School of Economics, Saint Petersburg. Email: Vishalkumar041996@gmail.com 2National Research University-Higher School of Economics, Saint Petersburg Email: Iychurakova@hse.ru Article History: Received: 28-07-2024 Revised: 08-09-2024 Accepted: 17-09-2024 Abstract: Discussing the relationship between the many innovation constructs, such as knowledge sharing and innovation capability, and its effect on financial performance, previous investigation has led to inconsistent results, that provide researchers and practitioners potentially inconclusive results in the public domain. The aim of this study is to determine the relation between knowledge sharing and innovation capability and understand the role of innovation capability on the financial performance of organizations. Further, this paper also unfolds the acceptable definition of innovation and its constructs in reference to different perspectives from the recently published literature. In the systematic literature review process, more than 50 investigations were identified, but, finally, 28 were shortlisted with the relevant data to conduct the meta- analysis study. The database of the HSE University library and Google Scholar were used for the collection of studies. The paper used a fixed effect model for the analysis of the relation between the constructs. The comprehensive meta-analysis was used for the analysis. The key findings indicate a positive and significant relation among knowledge sharing and innovation capability. Moreover, in the other finding, the result also concludes the positive role of innovation capability on the financial performance of the firms. The findings of this study can be used by policymakers and management to create policies and allocate finances for innovation projects. Keywords: Innovation, Innovation Capability, Knowledge Sharing, Financial Performance 1. Introduction Innovation was recognized as a fundamental idea for growth during the initial phase of the Industrial Revolution, which produced already unprecedented advancements in global wellness. Evidence from history has demonstrated that innovation is the primary driver of increases in employment, productivity, and market competitiveness. Over the course of the last two decades, an enormous number of innovative and determined entrepreneurs have emerged, and they have had an advantageous effect on the market economy and the development of nations, especially in developing nations. Furthermore, governments around the world, particularly those in developing and impoverished nations, encourage innovative ideas that are turned into tangible commodities and put into action through regional initiatives (Donkor et al., 2018; Burns, P. 2022). They are especially focusing on the SMEs as they are a source of innovative ideas and help the economies grow in income distribution, entrepreneurship environment, and employment generation (Pandya, V. M. 2012). Communications on Applied Nonlinear Analysis ISSN: 1074-133X Vol 32 No. 2 (2025) 131 https://internationalpubls.com The changing role of innovation and knowledge sharing in providing sustainable competitive advantages to firms has taken the central stage for the researchers and industrial practitioners (Bajwa et al., 2015). This study focuses on the innovation capability effect on the financial performance of the firms and the role of knowledge sharing in the development of the innovation capability. Innovation is a fundamental reform that facilitates organizations in adapting to the shifting demands of the business environment and customers in recognition of forthcoming challenges and transforming economic climate. However, in the new global trend’s firms are participating in knowledge sharing, knowledge digitalization, and improving collaborative culture among the firms to embrace the firm’s innovation and financial performance. Thus, it is a very critical activity of the supply chain to search for the for the right partners to integrate and execute innovation activities with the available resources to optimize the outcomes (Xie et al., 2023). With the expanding supply chain and rapid technological advancement in the present information- driven economy era, several domestic and MNCs are involved in the collaboration with the external partners to share the technology and knowledge to accelerate the innovation activities and performance (Xie et al., 2016). The current global climate, environmental changes, geopolitical unrest, trade wars, legislative changes, and technological advancements have disrupted and presented numerous issues for supply chains worldwide (Hille, K. 2020; Bednarski et al., 2024). The maintenance of supply chains and the development of partnerships and collaborations between businesses on a global level to foster innovation activities and culture have been significantly hampered by pandemics, conflicts and wars between major economies in the region, and extreme weather events such as heat waves and floods. Being in this situation also required certain innovative approaches to address the issue, as well as collaboration between the businesses to put together their resources and actually solve the challenge in the most efficient manner possible. Both private and public sectors around the world, such as Global Innovation Funds, invest in innovation initiatives for the reason every breakthrough to innovative products, services, and processes promotes to achieve the UN Sustainable Development Goals such as Affordable and Clean Energy, Industry, Innovation, Infrastructure & Climate Actions, and so forth. According to a report published by Dutta et al. (2023), Global Innovation Index, R&D spending by the top 2500 R&D spenders crossed the margin of 1.3 trillion euros in 2022, marking more than a 425% increase over the last 20 years and a 13% increase over the last year. Moreover, the lower- and middle-income countries like India, Brazil, and Indonesia are also trying to invest in the innovation projects to boost their economic activities and gain the competitive edge. With the R&D intensity, Pharma, ICT services, and automobiles are major sectors participating in the innovation projects and receiving the major investments (Piotr, S. 2009; Dutta et al., 2023). When performing research and development to support innovative ventures and executing their outcomes into commercial circulation for testing and customer accessibility, the financial aspect is crucial. In order to make innovation initiatives both financially and technologically feasible, resources are pooled and products and services are developed collaboratively (Avnimelech & Teubal, 2008). This helps to alleviate the financial burden of necessity and provide technological accessibility. At least two individuals—suppliers, manufacturers, distributors, R&D specialists, executives, and so Communications on Applied Nonlinear Analysis ISSN: 1074-133X Vol 32 No. 2 (2025) 132 https://internationalpubls.com forth—participate in collaborative development. They exchange knowledge, create innovative projects, and then execute them for the benefit of the community. Najafi-Tavani et al. (2018). From the peer reviews, we observed researchers has conducted several research to identify the relation among the collaborative innovation, innovation activities, innovative capacity, innovation capacity, and knowledge sharing within the firms and among the firms (internally and externally) and obtained diverged results (Bogers, M. 2012; Akhavan et al., 2016; Yang et al., 2018; Hong et al., 2019b; Wang & Hu, 2020; Le et al., 2020; Scaliza et al., 2022; Shi et al., 2022; Xie et al., 2023); nevertheless, no consistent outcome has been documented with the information available to the public domain. In the current situation of the market, the life cycle of the products became shorter, and the companies needed more innovative products to be competitive in the current volatile and turbulent market. With the increasing necessity of innovative products and services, the innovation process has become more risky, complex, and capital intensive, making it vulnerable to failure in the market at the implementation stage (Dziallas and Blind, 2019; Ponta et al., 2021). For innovation initiatives to succeed and incorporate new technologies and methods at the appropriate time and location, "collaboration" is another essential word to define and correctly understand. It has been explained in previous studies differently by the different researchers according to the nature of the application and field of studies. According to my understanding, collaboration can be defined as “the sharing of resources, including data and technology, among the partners (inter-organizational and intra-organizational), on the agreed terms and conditions for the mutual benefits for the agreed time period." It is very important for the firms to understand the basic questions for the correct partnership, like with whom, why, and how to be partners. Moreover, another factor in the collaboration that has been ignored by several researchers is “time period” for the collaboration. The needs of the market shift with time, and businesses must work with new partners who have recently developed collections of resources or newly formed reserves. The purpose of this study was to investigate the correlation, outcomes, and degree to which the innovation capability, knowledge sharing, and financial performance of firms have been studied in the previous literature and identify any gaps in the study carried out so that further research can be done. We take a meta-analysis approach to quantitatively review the literature in the past two decades across the globe, which can contribute to finding solutions to the theoretical confusion among the professionals and academic society. 2. Research Objective The main purpose of this study is to examine the relationship between the collaborative and organizational innovation capability and financial performance of the firms, and relation between innovation capability and knowledge sharing in the supply chain, with the help of investigation conducted by several researchers across the different countries. 1. What are the differences in the relation among the collaborative innovation capability and financial performance of the firms? 2. What is the impact of the Knowledge sharing on the innovation capability of the firms in the supply chain? Communications on Applied Nonlinear Analysis ISSN: 1074-133X Vol 32 No. 2 (2025) 133 https://internationalpubls.com 3. Theoretical Background and Hypotheses Development Literature has provided several theoretical models that explain the nature, consequences, and types of relationship between innovation capability, knowledge sharing, and financial performance. Previous studies investigated an assortment of criteria and components that affect an organization's ability of innovation both directly and indirectly, as well as the impact that knowledge sharing contributes and how firms collaborate with one another. Investigation conducted to establish the relation between factors such as knowledge sharing and innovation capability and its impact on the innovation and financial performance of firms, as well as the mediating effect of variables like size of the firms, age, and so forth. Some of the outcomes from different studies conducted have been listed in Table 1. Table 1: Results of studies published in the field of innovation Authors Topic Results / Outcomes Darroch, 2005 Knowledge management and impact on innovation management Knowledge management capability has a positive relation with innovation performance. Innovation has a has a positive impact on the financial performance. Lin, 2007 Knowledge sharing and innovation Capability Knowledge sharing can be influenced by several factors. Knowledge sharing culture has a direct positive impact on the firm’s innovation capability. Saenz et al., 2012 Impact of Different Knowledge Sharing Methods on Innovation Capability Knowledge sharing has a positive and significant impact on the innovation capability of firms. Lee et al., 2012 Relationship between knowledge process capabilities and firms’ performance Collaboration among the firms positively affects the knowledge process capabilities. Yesil et al., 2013 Study the knowledge sharing process and its impact on innovation capability and innovation performance. Knowledge donating and collecting positively influence the innovation capability of firms. The knowledge sharing process has no positive relation with innovation performance. Ritala et al., 2015 Positive and negative effect of knowledge sharing and leakage on firms’ innovation performance External knowledge sharing is positively associated with the relative firm’s level of innovation performance. Communications on Applied Nonlinear Analysis ISSN: 1074-133X Vol 32 No. 2 (2025) 134 https://internationalpubls.com Qammach, 2016 Evaluating the mediating role of knowledge sharing in relation to innovation performance and IT capability The result supported Knowledge sharing is positively related to innovation performance. Chang et al., 2017 Analysis of the effect of organizational culture and knowledge sharing on innovation capability Knowledge sharing has a positive influence on innovation capability. Organizational culture has a positive impact on innovation capability. Sun et al., 2019 Evaluating relation between cooperative culture, knowledge flow, and innovation network governance Performance Collaborative culture has a positive and significant effect on knowledge flow. Collaborative culture has a positive and significant effect on knowledge creation. Siddiqui et al., 2019 Analyzing factors affecting knowledge sharing and innovation capabilities Knowledge sharing significantly affects innovation capabilities. ICT infrastructure and availability significantly influence innovation capabilities. Ferraris et al., 2019 Relation between Global R&D Partnership and Innovation Performance Global R&D partnership has no significant impact on innovation performance. Global R&D partnerships positively affect integrative capacities; however, they directly influence innovation performance. Kurniawan et al., 2020 Relationship between knowledge sharing, absorptive capacity, and innovation capability Innovation capability has a positive and significant effect on innovation quality performance. Liu et al., 2021 Factors that influence collaborative innovation project performance Project knowledge sharing has a positive and significant correlation with the performance of collaborative innovation projects. Azeem et al., 2021 Analyzed competitive advantage with related to organizational culture, knowledge sharing, and organizational innovation Organizational culture positively affects knowledge sharing in organizations. Organizational culture positively affects innovation in organizations. Shi et al., 2022 Analyzing the Direction of Knowledge Sharing to Improve Innovation Performance Knowledge outbound sharing has a positive and significant impact on organizational innovation performance. Knowledge-bound sharing has no negative impact on organizational innovation performance. Communications on Applied Nonlinear Analysis ISSN: 1074-133X Vol 32 No. 2 (2025) 135 https://internationalpubls.com Irawan & Mudrifah, 2022 Analysis of the impact of knowledge sharing and innovation capability on the public sector Tactic knowledge sharing has no effect on the innovation capability. Explicit knowledge sharing has a positive effect on innovation capability. Yuen & Lam, 2024 Knowledge sharing as the catalyst for bolstering innovation capability and performance Organizational culture is positively related to knowledge sharing. Organizational culture is positively related to innovation capacity and performance. Knowledge sharing is positively related to innovation capability and performance. In addition, empirical studies tried to define these constructs and capture the diverse learning process. If we glance all the way at the topic's development over the course of history, we can observe that around 1975, researchers began becoming increasingly interested in it and conducted a number of investigations by researchers in various countries. However, the publication of research articles and studies attempting to investigate the relationship between an organization's capability to innovate, its knowledge sharing, and its impact on the financial performance observed an immense increase during the 1990s. A number of significant economies had trouble getting into the global market in the 1990s, which sparked vigorous efforts to produce innovative products, services, and processes. We may examine the studies carried out from 2010 to 2023 in figures 1 and 2. Figure 1: Frequency of publications with the keywords Knowledge sharing and innovation capability from 2010-2023 Source: Publications - Dimensions Figure 2: Frequency of publications with the keywords Innovation capability and Financial Performance from 2010-2023 Source: Publications - Dimensions The graphs show that, following the pandemic, geopolitical crisis, and several other climatic events, researchers are encouraged to become more inclined to investigate related fields of study. This makes sense given that, during the pandemic, supply chains are likely to be seriously disrupted and businesses are likely to be facing severe financial difficulties, which created many opportunities for innovative products and services. The array of publications has significantly increased since 2016, which further https://app.dimensions.ai/discover/publication?search_mode=content https://app.dimensions.ai/discover/publication?search_mode=content Communications on Applied Nonlinear Analysis ISSN: 1074-133X Vol 32 No. 2 (2025) 136 https://internationalpubls.com implies that professionals and academics have focused on innovation and information sharing as critical issues for an organization's capacity to effectively operate in today's business situation and get a competitive edge over the competitors. The conducted research bases its findings on many different types of theories, including resource and capability, innovation theory, organizational learning, diffusion of innovation, and so on; still, it is vital to offer an explanation for the proposed relationships (Khosravi et al., 2019). 3.1 Conceptualization of Knowledge Sharing: In the current data-driven business environment, it is critical to define knowledge sharing as it is essential for the process of organization innovation and knowledge management. Multiple studies have shown knowledge sharing has a positive impact on team performance, R&D outcomes, accelerates new project development, and optimally utilizes available resources (Mesmer-Magnus and DeChurch, 2009; Akhavan and Hosseini, 2016). Knowledge sharing can be divided on the basis of sphere of flow as international knowledge sharing and external knowledge sharing. Knowledge sharing has been defined by several researchers in the previous studies; according to Hogel et al. (2003), knowledge sharing is defined as a social interaction culture, experiences, involving the exchange of employee Communications on Applied Nonlinear Analysis ISSN: 1074-133X Vol 32 No. 2 (2025) 137 https://internationalpubls.com knowledge and skills through the department or organization. It includes processes related to providing employees access to all relevant information and using the network within or between the organization for the flow of information. Knowledge flow between individuals and organizations serves as one of the numerous traits of knowledge sharing. According to Oyemomi et al. (2016), knowledge sharing is the process of transferring organizational knowledge and experience to business processes through the communication channel between the individuals. We can summarize the definition of knowledge sharing from the previous studies as “knowledge sharing is the exchange of pertinent information between and among the organization in the correct structure, right point in time, and proper location within the supply chain network." As a critical factor in knowledge sharing, information should reach the correct person in the supply chain in readable format. Employers attitude towards the sharing of information among the individuals defined the knowledge- sharing culture of the organization. It is possible to cultivate a culture of knowledge sharing in organizations not just by implementing novel business strategies but also by influencing the attitudes of the workforce and management (Lin and Lee, 2004; Lin, 2007; Ahmed et al., 2016). Continuous knowledge exchange and transfer of information and experience helps the organization as well as individuals to be more creative, innovative, sustainable, transformative, and boost higher performance (Barratt-Pugh et al., 2013). In the process of promoting knowledge sharing culture implementation of the proper channel for the knowledge flow, information leakage and reliability of the information are critical factors and concerned with the intellectual abilities and intellectual capital. 3.2 Conceptualization of Innovation Capability Innovative products and processes always boost the economy by increasing sales, profit, and power, forcing the firms to approach in different directions to gain competitive advantages and be sustainable. Based on the previous research, the innovation capability has multiple aspects and can be determined by top management (Kim et al., 2018), collaborative and external networking (Liu et al., 2013; Kim et al., 2018), individual activities and culture (Tang, 1998; Paalanen et al., 2009; Saunila et al., 2014), and processes and tools for the idea management (Tidd et al., 2005; Smith et al., 2008; Saunila and Ukko, 2012). The R&D team can be characterized as the knowledge-intensive department and considered as the critical firms’ innovation capability; thus, a firm that is able to manage its R&D team more successfully will ultimately be able to transform into an innovative firm and align their strengths according to the market opportunities. Measurement of innovation capability of any company has needed metrics and been defined in multiple studies, which include measures like customer satisfaction, brand platform, return on investment, number of patents, number of patent applications, and so forth (Wallin et al., 2011). A company's capability for innovation is an indispensable asset for an extended period of company sustainability. It gives it a competitive edge in the market when it comes to introducing innovative products and processes, reducing costs associated with technology, and meeting shifting consumer needs. Several studies defined the innovation capability. Romijn and Albaladejo (2002) define innovation capability as the skills and knowledge to absorb and transform the existing technologies or resources into the new technologies with the available resources. According to Chen (2009), companies with the innovation capability lead to superior competences and are defined as firms’ capabilities, which can be applicable to the innovation activities for the development of products and processes; furthermore, in the current study, we can define the innovation Communications on Applied Nonlinear Analysis ISSN: 1074-133X Vol 32 No. 2 (2025) 138 https://internationalpubls.com capability (IC) as the “assets of the firms, including tangible and intangible, which fuel the process of involving the creation of the new ideas and development of the new products and processes according to the needs of the market. It includes the process of creation and implementation of new ideas, which also involves the decision-making process.” 3.3 Relationship between Knowledge Sharing and Innovation Capability Previous research has published and provided theoretical and empirical support for the hypothesis that there is an associated positive relationship between innovative capabilities and knowledge sharing. Moreover, through the integration of shared knowledge with the firm’s capability to innovate, the firms were able to perform better in terms of technical and administrative innovations. Lin (2007) and Yesil et al. (2013) reported willingness to collect and share the knowledge enables the organizations to improve their innovation capability; a similar result was also published by Iqbal et al. (2011); published knowledge sharing helps in avoiding mistakes and encourages the development of the innovation capability. Similarly, Chang et al. (2017) and Aulawi (2018) reported that knowledge sharing is positively related to innovation capability, as knowledge sharing behaviors of organizations higher reflect greater innovation capability. Researchers argued in the previous studies that sharing knowledge can help individuals and teams think critically, acquire knowledge and novel ideas, and ultimately strengthen a company's capacity for innovation (Aulawi et al., 2009). According to Storey & Kelly (2002) and Belso & Diez (2018), considering discrepancies in knowledge are the main obstacle to an organization's ability to innovate, those with greater involvement in networking and knowledge sharing are significantly more likely to experience increases in their innovation capability. Collaborative culture with all levels of hierarchy in the organization and attitude of employees to share the knowledge is seen as a basic condition to promote the knowledge sharing (Sveiby and Simons, 2002). Moreover, Wang and Wang (2012) indicated a level of innovation capability not solely influenced by knowledge sharing but also experience—the firm’s capability to transform and adopt according to change and apply the gained knowledge. However, the innovation capability is complex in firms and influenced by several factors other than knowledge sharing. In general, these arguments lead us to suggest the result: knowledge sharing is likely to have a positive impact on the innovation capability. Therefore, we propose the mentioned hypothesis in this study for re-evolution: H1a: Knowledge sharing positively influence the innovation capability of firms H1b: Knowledge sharing negatively influence the innovation capability of firms 3.4 Relationship between Innovative Capability and Financial Performance Innovation capability and its impact on financial performance are broad and controversial concepts. In the previous majority of investigations, overwhelming support for the positive relation has been found between the innovation capability and financial performance of the firms (Neely, 1998; Le et al., 2020; Fu et al., 2021; Purwati et al., 2021), but some research also showed that innovation capability has no positive and significant effect on the firm’s performance. A number of variables, including market conditions, industry characteristics, organizations' overseas operations, collaboration resources, and so on, might have an influence on the relation between innovation capability and financial performance (Alam et al., 2013). However, the influence of several different innovations on a firm's performance varies, necessitating the use of a multifaceted method to examine and establish the relationship Communications on Applied Nonlinear Analysis ISSN: 1074-133X Vol 32 No. 2 (2025) 139 https://internationalpubls.com between the constructs (Gunday et al., 2011). Businesses must analyze market trends and make strategic investments in the growth of their innovation skills in order to manage their resources effectively and leverage innovation for the benefit of the company's financial performance. Moreover, according to Walker (2004), innovation is vital for enhancing the standing of an organization in competition by delivering an advantage over rivals and enhanced financial performance. Financial performance measurement indexes suggested by several researchers like sales growth rate, customer retention, rate of return on investment, market share rate, comparison success with other companies, growth rate, profitability, and ability to innovate (Haner, 2002; Lee and Choi, 2003; Wang et al., 2008). Previous research on the relation between the innovation capability and performance of the firms considered both the operational and financial dimensions of the performance; however, in the current study we will address the financial performance of the firms (Love & Roper, 2015; Ali et al., 2020). In normal circumstances, in customer-oriented businesses, capturing innovative ideas and innovative opportunities keeps customers engaged and helps them influence new ones with their capacity for innovation, all of which ultimately improve their financial performance (Mukerjee, 2013; Jalilvand, 2017). Therefore, it is hypothesized that firms with higher innovation capability will lead to higher financial performance. H2a: Innovation capability has a positive influence on the financial performance of firms H2b: Innovation capability has negative influence on the financial performance of firms. 4. Methodology The method employed in this study was a systematic review, covering knowledge sharing, innovation capability, and financial performance from 2006 till 2024 (inclusive). The application of meta- analytical methodology to examine the outcomes published from reviewing the studies into the role of knowledge sharing in the innovation capability and innovation capability in the financial performance of the firms can enable us to get an approximate magnitude of the effect of studies on this relation. We may establish an explanation of the significance of the study and the necessity for further investigation to clarify our understanding based on the average correlation degree. This study uses the meta-analysis approach to test the hypotheses and proposed theoretical models to draw a valid conclusion by using the coefficients reported by the previous studies (Sabherwal et al., 2006; Liang et al., 2010). In this meta-analysis research work, we followed the general norms in each of the following phases carried out in the research as mentioned: selection of the literature for the primary studies, selection of the variables, analysis of the obtained data from the previous research papers, analysis of the results, and sketching the conclusion. 4.1 Selection of the Primary Studies In order to select the primary studies relating to the relation between innovation capability, knowledge sharing, and the firm’s financial performance, the below mentioned processes have been adopted: ● The database has been searched to find the relevant bibliography in reference to the problem we defined in the research question section. The databases that have been used for searches were HSE Library (International Periodical Database) and Google Scholar. In the searching process, different Communications on Applied Nonlinear Analysis ISSN: 1074-133X Vol 32 No. 2 (2025) 140 https://internationalpubls.com keywords have been used to find the targeted published research, such as innovation capability, knowledge sharing, financial performance, relation between the construct, and so on. ● The literature search revealed 28 empirical research published during the period 2006 till 2024. ● Primary search provided with the great amount of literature directly and indirectly related to our research problem; however, in order to conduct the meta-analysis, we conducted extensive screening of studies published and identified a certain number of studies that meet a series of our requirements, as studies have to be empirical and have enough data, which can be used for the statistical analysis to evaluate the relationship between the selected parameters. 4.2 Selection of Variables and Definitions In the second phase, we defined the inter-study variability and specified the parameter characteristics based on the studies that had been conducted previously. After the screening process and availability of the related data from the selected studies, we conducted the meta-analysis by using the comprehensive meta-analysis program. The selected 28 studies are listed in the table 2. Table 2: Studies included in the Meta-Analysis Panayides, P. 2006 Kumar & Rose, 2011 Yang, C. C. 2012 Awan & Akram, 2012 Wu & Sivalogathasan, 2013 Selakjani & Kelidbari, 2016 Hamidi & Gharneh, 2017 Tufail et al., 2016 Thahjadi et al., 2018 Ullah, M. I. 2017 Donkor et al., 2018 Ganguly et al., 2019 Singh et al., 2019 Yeh & Ku, 2019 Mugambi & Kinyua, 2020 Nham et al., 2020 Santos et al., 2020 Wang & Hu, 2020 Bahta et al., 2021 Wang et al., 2020 Otache & Usang, 2022 Ganguly et al., 2020 Yang and Zheng, 2022 Afsar & Khan, 2021 Sungthong et al., 2023 Dongling et al., 2022 Kaukab, M. E. 2024 Phong & Thanh, 2023 5. Results and Findings 5.1 Knowledge Sharing and Innovation Capability The analysis is based on the fourteen previous pieces of literature published. The effect size index is the standardized difference in the means (d). In the current study, the fixed and random effect model was employed for the analysis of the studies and data collected. Table 3: Statistical result of Meta-Analysis of Knowledge Sharing and Innovation Capability Communications on Applied Nonlinear Analysis ISSN: 1074-133X Vol 32 No. 2 (2025) 141 https://internationalpubls.com Model Study Number Std. diff in means Standard Error Variance Lower Limit Upper Limit Z- Value p- Value 1 0.160 0.148 0.022 -0.131 0.451 1.077 0.281 2 0.059 0.140 0.020 -0.215 0.334 0.423 0.672 3 0.171 0.109 0.012 -0.042 0.384 1.569 0.117 4 0.173 0.103 0.011 -0.028 0.375 1.684 0.092 5 -0.076 0.144 0.021 -0.357 0.206 -0.526 0.599 6 0.685 0.067 0.004 0.554 0.816 10.227 0.000 7 0.126 0.071 0.005 -0.015 0.266 1.757 0.079 8 -0.585 0.083 0.007 -0.748 -0.422 -7.029 0.000 9 -0.123 0.092 0.009 -0.304 0.058 -1.333 0.182 10 0.169 0.061 0.004 0.049 0.290 2.762 0.006 11 -0.277 0.089 0.008 -0.451 -0.102 -3.103 0.002 12 -0.239 0.092 0.009 -0.420 -0.058 -2.588 0.010 13 0.191 0.096 0.009 0.003 0.379 1.992 0.046 14 0.118 0.073 0.005 -0.025 0.262 1.616 0.106 Fixed Effect 0.078 0.024 0.001 0.032 0.124 3.313 0.001 Random Effect 0.040 0.091 0.008 -0.137 0.218 0.447 0.655 Figure: Impact of Knowledge sharing on Innovation capability: Analysis of Means difference, 95% Cl, and Residual Table 3 showed the result: the common effect size for these studies in the fixed effect model is 0.78 with a 95% confidence interval of 0.032 to 0.124. The effect size in this population could lie within this interval. With the result, we can find that the z-value test the null hypothesis that the common size is 0, and the Z-value in the fixed effect model is 3.313 with the p-value 0.001, which is less than 0.05. Communications on Applied Nonlinear Analysis ISSN: 1074-133X Vol 32 No. 2 (2025) 142 https://internationalpubls.com Thus, by using the alpha value less than 0.05, we can reject the null hypothesis and can conclude that in this population the effect size is not preciously zero. The null hypothesis that every study in the investigation has the same effect size is tested using the Q- statistic. The predicted value of Q would be equal to the degrees of freedom (the total number of studies minus 1) if every study had precisely the same true effect size. With 13 degrees of freedom and p < 0.001, the Q-value is 185.341. We can reject the null hypothesis that the true effect size is the same in each of these studies by using the criteria alpha < 0.100. Based on the result, we can conclude that there is a significant impact of knowledge sharing on innovation capability. 5.2 Innovation Capability and Financial Performance The analysis bases its conclusions on the fourteen published works of previous literature. The standardized difference in the means (d) is the impact size index. The fixed and random effect model was adopted in the current study to analyze the data gathered from the various studies. Table 4: Statistical result of Meta-Analysis of Innovation Capability and Financial Performance Model Study Number Std. diff in means Standard Error Variance Lower Limit Upper Limit Z- Value p- Value 1 -0.110 0.077 0.006 -0.261 0.040 -1.435 0.151 2 0.301 0.071 0.005 0.162 0.440 4.244 0.000 3 0.418 0.116 0.013 0.191 0.644 3.613 0.000 4 0.876 0.119 0.014 0.644 1.109 7.394 0.000 5 0.140 0.163 0.027 -0.181 0.460 0.854 0.393 6 -0.214 0.134 0.018 -0.477 0.048 -1.598 0.110 7 0.228 0.159 0.025 -0.083 0.539 1.438 0.151 8 1.495 0.105 0.011 1.290 1.700 14.298 0.000 9 0.385 0.090 0.008 0.209 0.562 4.277 0.000 10 0.125 0.169 0.029 -0.207 0.456 0.736 0.461 11 3.706 0.426 0.181 2.872 4.540 8.708 0.000 12 -2.617 0.149 0.022 -2.909 -2.326 - 17.607 0.000 13 -0.134 0.116 0.013 -0.361 0.093 -1.157 0.247 14 -0.077 0.077 0.006 -0.228 0.074 -0.997 0.319 Fixed Effect 0.172 0.029 0.001 0.115 0.229 5.938 0.000 Random Effect 0.275 0.214 0.046 -0.144 0.693 1.285 0.199 Communications on Applied Nonlinear Analysis ISSN: 1074-133X Vol 32 No. 2 (2025) 143 https://internationalpubls.com Figure: Impact of Innovation capability on Financial Performance: Analysis of Means difference, 95% Cl, and Residual Table 4, showed the result, the common effect size for these studies in the fixed effect model is 0.172 with the 95 % confidence interval of 0.115 to 0.229. The effect size in this population could lies within this interval. With the result, we can find that the z-value test the null hypothesis that the common size is 0, and the Z-value in the fixed effect model is 5.938 with the p-value which is less than 0.05. Thus, by using the criteria alpha value less than 0.05, we can reject the null hypothesis and can conclude that in this population the effect size is not preciously zero. The null hypothesis that every study in the data analysis has the same effect size is tested using the Q- statistic. The predicted value of Q would be equivalent to the degrees of freedom (the total number of studies minus 1) if every study had the same true effect size. With 13 degrees of freedom and p < 0.001, the Q-value is 669.333. We can reject the null hypothesis, which states that the true effect size is the same in all of these investigations, using an acceptable alpha of 0.100. From the shown result of fixed model effect, we can conclude that there is significant relation between the innovation capability and financial performance. In the current study, we will not consider the random effect model because the collected data is from different geographical areas, types of industries, levels of management, and so forth, thus having the influence of several external and internal factors. Which will influence the final conclusion and findings. 6. Discussion and Conclusion This study was conducted with the literature published in the last two decades to analyze the impact of knowledge sharing on the innovation capability, and the study also investigated the role of innovation capability on the financial performance of the organization. Previous research has demonstrated that there are three potential associations between the innovation capability and the knowledge sharing component, that is, positive, negative, and non-significant. However, in the current findings, we can conclude that there is a direct and significant relation between knowledge sharing and innovation capability. H1a, reflecting the relation among knowledge sharing Communications on Applied Nonlinear Analysis ISSN: 1074-133X Vol 32 No. 2 (2025) 144 https://internationalpubls.com and innovation capability, is supported by the shown result. However, H1b gets rejected as the p-value is less than the criteria alpha 0.05. The other most significant finding from the research is that there is a positive and significant relationship between the innovation capability and financial performance of the organization. Therefore, the finding supports H2a. The relation between the financial performance of the firms and innovation capability is most controversial, as the financial performance has a multilateral relation with innovation capability. Innovation capability has no direct impact on the financial performance, while it impacts the innovation performance and provides support for the economic growth of the organization. However, the financial allocation and viability are major factors for the innovation projects and in their implementation process. Several empirical and theoretical studies support this multilateral relation. However, these current findings show a strong link between innovation capability and financial performance. Moreover, in the theory of innovation, the main focus of the researchers is to identify and measure the factors determining the innovation outcomes and capability of the firms. A consistent conclusion from the preceding studies is obstructed, nevertheless, by the standard assessment of the relationship between the innovation-related constructs and the outcomes based on the theoretical and empirical research, which revealed variation in the result. 7. Theoretical and managerial contributions This meta-analysis research makes several critical contributions for the professional and research society in the fields of innovation and knowledge sharing. Firstly, this study contributes to the literature on knowledge management, firms’ innovativeness, and financial distribution in the business. The main contribution of this study is to provide a holistic view on the relation among knowledge sharing, innovation capability, and financial performance across the selected countries. Secondly, this study attempted to reconcile the contradictory findings from earlier research and extensively publish the findings as an overall result. By reevaluating the definition, types, and method of knowledge sharing and innovation capabilities by incorporating sub-dimensions, this study also contributes to a broader understanding of these theories. For the promotion of innovation activities, managers need to create an ideal environment to encourage the creative minds in their organization and provide the financial and moral support to get the outcomes from such creative talents. This study has two major implications for practitioners and management of the firms. Firstly, this study informs the management of firms of the value of innovation capability in the outcome of financial performance and knowledge sharing as the major influential factor in the development of innovation capability. To encourage knowledge sharing, businesses must create a robust conduit for intra- and interorganizational transfer of knowledge for innovation of products and processes. Firms with an efficient and continuously improvement-capable innovation system have a tactical advantage against their competitors and help in the development of sustainable businesses. Secondly, this study supports companies in making evidence-based decisions about when and how much financial and resource allocation they need to devote to develop their innovation capabilities. Managers need to decide the resource allocation to different stages of innovation from the R&D till the implementation of the innovation outcomes. Occasionally, certain firms allocate a major portion Communications on Applied Nonlinear Analysis ISSN: 1074-133X Vol 32 No. 2 (2025) 145 https://internationalpubls.com of the innovation development but shortfall with the resources for the implementation of the innovation outcomes. Thus, management needs to understand allocation to avoid the risk and mistakes. Based on this study and findings, it can be argued that management should encourage employees and managers to promote knowledge sharing through effective channels and striving towards competitive advantages by developing the innovation capability. 8. Limitations and directions for future research This study investigates the expanding phenomenon of innovative activities, which hasn't been thoroughly investigated and documented with appropriate or broadly applicable outcomes. Initially, this research conducted a thorough assessment of the literature, analyzing relevant research according to the relationship between the constructs. Future research must therefore assess these characteristics' mediating effects as well as their causal relationship. Furthermore, secondly, we combined quantitative performance from several investigations using various theoretical models and research designs in the meta-analysis, which gave us a possibility to report conflicting results. Further research using a single research design and theoretical model is therefore necessary. Thirdly, there are several forms of knowledge sharing and innovation capabilities, and various factors have both direct and indirect effects on them. A future study must take into consideration every aspect that affects the constructs, both directly and indirectly, and incorporate all dimensions of knowledge sharing and innovation capability. Fourth, since the meta-analysis was carried out by selection of studies from a specific region rather than worldwide as well, most of the studies have been conducted within a country, we are unable to generalize the findings. As a result, a worldwide study utilizing cross-border respondents from various nations and significant economies is essential. For the researchers to obtain more universally applicable results, this study necessitated large-scale research around the globe utilizing quantitative tools and more optimized questions. It will give management of the firms’ useful guidelines to further implement innovation activities in their firms. Nonetheless, current meta-analyses add to an existing wealth of research on innovation and knowledge sharing literature. Reference: [1] Ahmed, F., Shahzad, K., Aslam, H., Bajwa, S. U., & Bahoo, R. (2016). The role of collaborative culture in knowledge sharing and creativity among employees. Pakistan Journal of Commerce and Social Sciences (PJCSS), 10(2), 335-358. [2] Akhavan, P., & Mahdi Hosseini, S. (2016). Social capital, knowledge sharing, and innovation capability: an empirical study of R&D teams in Iran. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 28(1), 96-113. [3] Alam, S. S., Arumugam, V., Nor, N. G. M., Kaliappan, P., & Fang, L. S. (2013). Relationships between innovation capabilities, business performance, marketing performance and financial performance: A literature review. Business and Management Horizons, 1(1), 59-73. [4] Ali, H., Hao, Y., & Aijuan, C. (2020). Innovation capabilities and small and medium enterprises' performance: An exploratory study. The Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business, 7(10), 959-968. [5] Aulawi, H. (2018, November). Improving innovation capability trough creativity and knowledge sharing behavior. In IOP conference series: materials science and engineering (Vol. 434, No. 1, p. 012242). IOP Publishing. [6] Aulawi, H., Sudirman, I., Suryadi, K., & Govindaraju, R. (2009). Knowledge sharing behavior, antecedent and their impact on the individual innovation capability. Journal of Applied Sciences Research, 5(12), 2238-2246. [7] Avnimelech, G., & Teubal, M. (2008). From direct support of business sector R&D/innovation to targeting venture capital/private equity: a catching-up innovation and technology policy life cycle perspective. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 17(1-2), 153-172. Communications on Applied Nonlinear Analysis ISSN: 1074-133X Vol 32 No. 2 (2025) 146 https://internationalpubls.com [8] Awan, K. Z., & Akram, M. (2012). The relationship between Islamic work ethics and innovation capability and knowledge sharing plays moderation role. International Journal of Economics and Management Sciences, 1(8), 34- 48. [9] Azeem, M., Ahmed, M., Haider, S., & Sajjad, M. (2021). Expanding competitive advantage through organizational culture, knowledge sharing and organizational innovation. Technology in Society, 66, 101635. [10] Bahta, D., Yun, J., Islam, M. R., & Ashfaq, M. (2021). Corporate social responsibility, innovation capability and firm performance: evidence from SME. Social Responsibility Journal, 17(6), 840-860. [11] Bajwa, S. U., Kitchlew, N., Sair, S. A., & Shahzad, K. (2015). Shifts in Themes of Knowledge Management Field- -Towards Dynamic Fractal Organizations. Science International, 27(1), 523-529. [12] Barratt-Pugh, L., Kennett, P., & Bahn, S. (2013). Managing knowledge: The critical role of culture and ownership as a mediator of systems. International Journal of Knowledge Management (IJKM), 9(2), 20-37. [13] Bednarski, L., Roscoe, S., Blome, C., & Schleper, M. C. (2024). Geopolitical disruptions in global supply chains: a state-of-the-art literature review. Production Planning & Control, 1-27. [14] Belso-Martinez, J. A., & Diez-Vial, I. (2018). Firm’s strategic choices and network knowledge dynamics: how do they affect innovation?. Journal of Knowledge Management, 22(1), 1-20. [15] Bogers, M. (2012). Knowledge sharing in open innovation: An overview of theoretical perspectives on collaborative innovation. Open innovation in firms and public administrations: Technologies for value creation, 1-14. [16] Burns, P. (2022). Entrepreneurship and small business. Bloomsbury Publishing. [17] Chang, W. J., Liao, S. H., & Wu, T. T. (2017). Relationships among organizational culture, knowledge sharing, and innovation capability: a case of the automobile industry in Taiwan. Knowledge Management Research & Practice, 15(3), 471-490. [18] Chen, C. J. (2009). Technology commercialization, incubator and venture capital, and new venture performance. Journal of Business research, 62(1), 93-103. [19] Darroch, J. (2005). Knowledge management, innovation and firm performance. Journal of knowledge management, 9(3), 101-115. [20] Dongling, W., Yuming, Z., Xinmin, L., Chen, J., XiaoYi, Z., & Chang, H. (2022). Can inter-organizational knowledge-sharing improve Enterprise innovation performance? The mediator effect of innovation capability and the moderator effect of network characteristics. Frontiers in Communication, 7, 856301. [21] Donkor, J., Donkor, G. N. A., Kankam-Kwarteng, C., & Aidoo, E. (2018). Innovative capability, strategic goals and financial performance of SMEs in Ghana. Asia Pacific Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, 12(2), 238- 254. [22] Dutta, S., Lanvin, B., Rivera León, L., & Wunsch-Vincent, S. (Eds.). (2023). Global Innovation Index 2023: Innovation in the face of uncertainty. WIPO. [23] Dziallas, M., & Blind, K. (2019). Innovation indicators throughout the innovation process: An extensive literature analysis. Technovation, 80, 3-29. [24] Ferraris, A., Devalle, A., Ciampi, F., & Couturier, J. (2019). Are global R&D partnerships enough to increase a company's innovation performance? The role of search and integrative capacities. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 149, 119750. [25] Fu, Q., Sial, M. S., Arshad, M. Z., Comite, U., Thu, P. A., & Popp, J. (2021). The inter-relationship between innovation capability and SME performance: The moderating role of the external environment. Sustainability, 13(16), 9132. [26] Ganguly, A., Talukdar, A., & Chatterjee, D. (2019). Evaluating the role of social capital, tacit knowledge sharing, knowledge quality and reciprocity in determining innovation capability of an organization. Journal of knowledge management, 23(6), 1105-1135. [27] Ganguly, A., Talukdar, A., & Chatterjee, D. (2020). Social capital, knowledge quality, knowledge sharing, and innovation capability: An empirical study of the Indian pharmaceutical sector. Knowledge and process management, 27(1), 25-42. [28] Gunday, G., Ulusoy, G., Kilic, K., & Alpkan, L. (2011). Effects of innovation types on firm performance. International Journal of production economics, 133(2), 662-676. [29] Hamidi, F., & Gharneh, N. S. (2017). Impact of co-creation on innovation capability and firm performance: a structural equation modeling. AD-minister, (30), 73-90. [30] Haner, U. E. (2002). Innovation quality—a conceptual framework. International Journal of Production Economics, 80(1), 31-37. [31] Hille, K. (2020). The great uncoupling: One supply chain for China, one for everywhere else. Financial Times, 6. Communications on Applied Nonlinear Analysis ISSN: 1074-133X Vol 32 No. 2 (2025) 147 https://internationalpubls.com [32] Hoegl, M., Parboteeah, K. P., & Munson, C. L. (2003). Team‐level antecedents of individuals' knowledge networks. Decision Sciences, 34(4), 741-770. [33] Hong, J., Zheng, R., Deng, H., & Zhou, Y. (2019). Green supply chain collaborative innovation, absorptive capacity and innovation performance: Evidence from China. Journal of Cleaner Production, 241, 118377. [34] Hurley, R. F., & Hult, G. T. M. (1998). Innovation, market orientation, and organizational learning: an integration and empirical examination. Journal of marketing, 62(3), 42-54. [35] Iqbal, M. J., Rasli, A., Heng, L. H., Ali, M. B. B., Hassan, I., & Jolaee, A. (2011). Academic staff knowledge sharing intentions and university innovation capability. African Journal of Business Management, 5(27), 11051. [36] Irawan, D., & Mudrifah, M. (2022). KNOWLEDGE SHARING, INNOVATION CAPABILITY AND PUBLIC SECTOR PERFOMANCE IN INDONESIA. Business and Finance Journal, 7(1), 25-34. [37] Jalilvand, M. R. (2017). The effect of innovativeness and customer-oriented systems on performance in the hotel industry of Iran. Journal of Science and Technology Policy Management, 8(1), 43-61. [38] Kaukab, M. E. (2024). MEASuRING INNOVATION CAPABILITY AND ITS EFFECTS ON FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE uSING COMPANIES’ANNuAL REPORTS. [39] Khan, M. K., & Afsar, B. (2021). Determinants of innovation capability: Knowledge sharing perspective in the context of small and medium enterprises. Journal of Managerial Sciences, 15(3), 56-74. [40] Kharabsheh, R., Magableh, I., & Zuriqat, K. (2012, September). Factors Affecting Knowledge Sharing (KS) in Jordanian Pharmaceutical Companies. In European Conference on Knowledge Management (p. 584). Academic Conferences International Limited. [41] Khosravi, P., Newton, C., & Rezvani, A. (2019). Management innovation: A systematic review and meta-analysis of past decades of research. European Management Journal, 37(6), 694-707. [42] Kumar, N., & Che Rose, R. (2012). The impact of knowledge sharing and Islamic work ethic on innovation capability. Cross Cultural Management: An International Journal, 19(2), 142-165. [43] Kurniawan, P., Hartati, W., Qodriah, S., & Badawi, B. (2020). From knowledge sharing to quality performance: The role of absorptive capacity, ambidexterity and innovation capability in creative industry. Management science letters, 10(2), 433-442. [44] Le, H. M., Nguyen, T. T., & Hoang, T. C. (2020). Organizational culture, management accounting information, innovation capability and firm performance. Cogent Business & Management, 7(1), 1857594. [45] Le, P. B., Lei, H., Le, T. T., Gong, J., & Ha, A. T. (2020). Developing a collaborative culture for radical and incremental innovation: the mediating roles of tacit and explicit knowledge sharing. Chinese Management Studies, 14(4), 957-975. [46] Lee, H., & Choi, B. (2003). Knowledge management enablers, processes, and organizational performance: An integrative view and empirical examination. Journal of management information systems, 20(1), 179-228. [47] Lee, S., Gon Kim, B., & Kim, H. (2012). An integrated view of knowledge management for performance. Journal of Knowledge management, 16(2), 183-203. [48] Liang, T. P., You, J. J., & Liu, C. C. (2010). A resource‐based perspective on information technology and firm performance: a meta analysis. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 110(8), 1138-1158. [49] Lin, H. F. (2007). Knowledge sharing and firm innovation capability: an empirical study. International Journal of manpower, 28(3/4), 315-332. [50] Lin, H. F., & Lee, G. G. (2004). Perceptions of senior managers toward knowledge‐sharing behaviour. Management decision, 42(1), 108-125. [51] Liu, H., Liu, Z., Lai, Y., & Li, L. (2021). Factors influencing collaborative innovation project performance: the case of china. Sustainability, 13(13), 7380. [52] Liu, X., Shou, Y., & Xie, Y. (2013). The role of intermediary organizations in enhancing the innovation capability of MSMEs: evidence from a Chinese case. Asian Journal of Technology Innovation, 21(sup2), 50-61. [53] Love, J. H., & Roper, S. (2015). SME innovation, exporting and growth: A review of existing evidence. International small business journal, 33(1), 28-48. [54] Mesmer-Magnus, J. R., & DeChurch, L. A. (2009). Information sharing and team performance: a meta- analysis. Journal of applied psychology, 94(2), 535. [55] Mir, M., Casadesús, M., & Petnji, L. H. (2016). The impact of standardized innovation management systems on innovation capability and business performance: An empirical study. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 41, 26-44. Communications on Applied Nonlinear Analysis ISSN: 1074-133X Vol 32 No. 2 (2025) 148 https://internationalpubls.com [56] Mugambi, L. M., & Kinyua, G. M. (2020). Role of Innovation Capability on firm performance in the context of Commercial Banks in Nairobi City County, Kenya. International Journal of Current Aspects in Finance, Banking and Accounting, 2(3), 14-23. [57] Mukerjee, K. (2013). Customer‐oriented organizations: A framework for innovation. Journal of Business Strategy, 34(3), 49-56. [58] Najafi-Tavani, S., Najafi-Tavani, Z., Naudé, P., Oghazi, P., & Zeynaloo, E. (2018). How collaborative innovation networks affect new product performance: Product innovation capability, process innovation capability, and absorptive capacity. Industrial marketing management, 73, 193-205. [59] Neely, A. (1998). Measuring business performance. [60] Nham, T. P., Nguyen, T. M., Tran, N. H., & Nguyen, H. A. (2020). Knowledge sharing and innovation capability at both individual and organizational levels: An empirical study from Vietnam’s telecommunication companies. Management & Marketing, 15(2), 275-301. [61] Olan, F., Liu, S., Neaga, I., & Alkhuraiji, A. (2016). How knowledge sharing and business process contribute to organizational performance: Using the fsQCA approach. Journal of Business Research, 69(11), 5222-5227. [62] Otache, I., & Usang, O. U. E. (2022). Innovation capability and SME performance in times of economic crisis: does government support moderate?. African Journal of Economic and Management Studies, 13(1), 76-88. [63] Oyemomi, O., Liu, S., Neaga, I., Alkhuraiji, A. (2016). How knowledge sharing and business process contribute to organisational performance: Using the fsQCA approach. Journal of Business Research, 69, 5222-5227. [64] Paalanen, A., Kujansivu, P., & Parjanen, S. (2009). Measuring the effects of an innovation-focused intervention. In Proceedings of The XX ISPIM Conference, The Future of Innovation, 21-24 June, 2009, Vienna, Austria (p. 13). [65] Panayides, P. (2006). Enhancing innovation capability through relationship management and implications for performance. European Journal of Innovation Management, 9(4), 466-483. [66] Pandya, V. M. (2012, September). Comparative analysis of development of SMEs in developed and developing countries. In The 2012 International Conference on Business and Management (Vol. 6, No. 7, pp. 1-20). [67] Phong, L. B., & Thanh, L. T. (2023). Transformational leadership and innovation capability: roles of knowledge- centered culture and knowledge sharing. The Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business, 10(1), 111-121. [68] Piotr, S. (2009). Innovation in the software sector. OECD Publishing. [69] Ponta, L., Puliga, G., & Manzini, R. (2021). A measure of innovation performance: the Innovation Patent Index. Management Decision, 59(13), 73-98. [70] Purwati, A., Budiyanto, B., Suhermin, S., & Hamzah, M. (2021). The effect of innovation capability on business performance: The role of social capital and entrepreneurial leadership on SMEs in Indonesia. Accounting, 7(2), 323- 330. [71] Qammach, N. I. J. (2016). The mediating role of knowledge sharing on relationship between IT capability and IT support as predictors of innovation Performance: An Empirical Study on Mobile Companies in Iraq. Procedia Economics and Finance, 39, 562-570. [72] Rangus, K., Drnovšek, M., Di Minin, A., & Spithoven, A. (2017). The role of open innovation and absorptive capacity in innovation performance: Empirical evidence from Slovenia. Journal of East European Management Studies, 39-62. [73] Ritala, P., Olander, H., Michailova, S., & Husted, K. (2015). Knowledge sharing, knowledge leaking and relative innovation performance: An empirical study. Technovation, 35, 22-31. [74] Romijn, H., & Albaladejo, M. (2002). Determinants of innovation capability in small electronics and software firms in southeast England. Research policy, 31(7), 1053-1067. [75] Sabherwal, R., Jeyaraj, A., & Chowa, C. (2006). Information system success: Individual and organizational determinants. Management science, 52(12), 1849-1864. [76] Saenz, J., Aramburu, N., & Blanco, C. E. (2012). Knowledge sharing and innovation in Spanish and Colombian high‐tech firms. Journal of Knowledge Management, 16(6), 919-933. [77] Santos, M. J. D., Perin, M. G., Simões, C., & Sampaio, C. H. (2020). Customer orientation and financial performance relationship: the mediating role of innovative capability. Gestão & Produção, 27(4), e4706. [78] Saunila, M., & Ukko, J. (2012). A conceptual framework for the measurement of innovation capability and its effects. Baltic Journal of Management, 7(4), 355-375. [79] Saunila, M., Ukko, J., & Rantanen, H. (2014). Does Innovation Capability Really Matter for the Profitability of SMEs?. Knowledge and Process Management, 21(2), 134-142. Communications on Applied Nonlinear Analysis ISSN: 1074-133X Vol 32 No. 2 (2025) 149 https://internationalpubls.com [80] Scaliza, J. A. A., Jugend, D., Jabbour, C. J. C., Latan, H., Armellini, F., Twigg, D., & Andrade, D. F. (2022). Relationships among organizational culture, open innovation, innovative ecosystems, and performance of firms: Evidence from an emerging economy context. Journal of Business Research, 140, 264-279. [81] Selakjani, S. G., & Kelidbari, H. R. (2016). The impact of knowledge sharing capability on innovation capability with the mediating role of Islamic work ethic among employees of electricity distribution company of Guilan province. The Turkish Online Journal of Design, Art and Communication, 6, 2145-2154. [82] Shi, Q., Wang, Q., & Guo, Z. (2022). Knowledge sharing in the construction supply chain: Collaborative innovation activities and BIM application on innovation performance. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 29(9), 3439-3459. [83] Siddiqui, S. H., Rasheed, R., Nawaz, S., & Abbas, M. (2019). Knowledge sharing and innovation capabilities: The moderating role of organizational learning. Pakistan Journal of Commerce and Social Sciences (PJCSS), 13(2), 455-486. [84] Singh, S. K., Del Giudice, M., Tarba, S. Y., & De Bernardi, P. (2019). Top management team shared leadership, market-oriented culture, innovation capability, and firm performance. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 69(6), 2544-2554. [85] Sivalogathasan, V. (2013). Innovation capability for better performance: Intellectual capital and organization performance of the apparel industry in Sri Lanka. [86] Smith, M., Busi, M., Ball, P., & Van Der Meer, R. (2008). Factors influencing an organisation's ability to manage innovation: a structured literature review and conceptual model. International Journal of innovation management, 12(04), 655-676. [87] Storey, C., & Kelly, D. (2002). Innovation in services: the need for knowledge management. Australasian Marketing Journal, 10(1), 59-70. [88] Sun, Y., Wang, T., & Gu, X. (2019). A sustainable development perspective on cooperative culture, knowledge flow, and innovation network governance performance. Sustainability, 11(21), 6126. [89] Sungthong, S., Aujirapongpan, S., & Meesook, K. (2023). Exploring the Relationship Between Entrepreneurial Orientation, Innovation and Financial Performance: The Mediating Role of Absorptive Capacity and Technological Innovation Capability. ABAC Journal, 43(4), 258-275. [90] Sveiby, K. E., & Simons, R. (2002). Collaborative climate and effectiveness of knowledge work–an empirical study. Journal of knowledge Management, 6(5), 420-433. [91] Tang, H. K. (1998). An integrative model of innovation in organizations. Technovation, 18(5), 297-309. [92] Tidd, J., Bessant, J. R. & Pavitt, K. 2005. Managing innovation : integrating technological, market and organization change, Chichester, John Wiley & Sons. [93] Tjahjadi, B., & Soewarno, N. (2018). Mediating roles of innovation capability and customer performance in seniority management–financial performance relationship: experience of SOEs in Indonesia. KnE Social Sciences. [94] Tufail, M. S., ul Hassan, M., Ismail, H., & Zahra, S. (2016). The impact of work social support on firm innovation capability: The meditational role of knowledge sharing process and job satisfaction and moderating role of organizational trust. Pakistan Journal of Social Sciences, 36(2), 1215-1228. [95] Ullah, M. I. (2017). Individual, organizational, technological and industry factors' effects on innovation capability of dairy SMEs in Pakistan: knowledge sharing as mediated. Universiti Utara Malaysia. [96] Walker, R. M. (2004). Innovation and organisational performance: Evidence and a research agenda. Advanced Institute of Management Research Paper, (002). [97] Wallin, J., Larsson, A., Isaksson, O., & Larsson, T. (2011). Measuring innovation capability–assessing collaborative performance in product-service system innovation. In Functional Thinking for Value Creation: Proceedings of the 3rd CIRP International Conference on Industrial Product Service Systems, Technische Universität Braunschweig, Braunschweig, Germany, May 5th-6th, 2011 (pp. 207-212). Springer Berlin Heidelberg. [98] Wang, C. H., Lu, I. Y., & Chen, C. B. (2008). Evaluating firm technological innovation capability under uncertainty. Technovation, 28(6), 349-363. [99] Wang, C., & Hu, Q. (2020). Knowledge sharing in supply chain networks: Effects of collaborative innovation activities and capability on innovation performance. Technovation, 94, 102010. [100] Wang, L., Li, S., & You, Z. (2020). The effects of knowledge transfer on innovation capability: A moderated mediation model of absorptive capability and network reliance. The Journal of High Technology Management Research, 31(1), 100372. [101] Wang, Z., & Wang, N. (2012). Knowledge sharing, innovation and firm performance. Expert systems with applications, 39(10), 8899-8908. Communications on Applied Nonlinear Analysis ISSN: 1074-133X Vol 32 No. 2 (2025) 150 https://internationalpubls.com [102] Xie, X., Fang, L., & Zeng, S. (2016). Collaborative innovation network and knowledge transfer performance: A QCA approach. Journal of business research, 69(11), 5210-5215. [103] Xie, X., Liu, X., & Chen, J. (2023). A meta-analysis of the relationship between collaborative innovation and innovation performance: The role of formal and informal institutions. Technovation, 124, 102740. [104] Yang, C. C. (2012). Assessing the moderating effect of innovation capability on the relationship between logistics service capability and firm performance for ocean freight forwarders. International Journal of Logistics Research and Applications, 15(1), 53-69. [105] Yang, X., Wu, D., & Zheng, Z. (2022). Research on the Relationship between Construction 4.0 and Construction Firm’s Performance: Based on the Mediating Role of Technological Innovation Capability. Mathematical Problems in Engineering, 2022(1), 8523480. [106] Yang, Z., Nguyen, V. T., & Le, P. B. (2018). Knowledge sharing serves as a mediator between collaborative culture and innovation capability: an empirical research. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 33(7), 958-969. [107] Yeh, C. C., & Ku, E. C. (2019). Process innovation capability and subsequent collaborative team performance in travel planning: a knowledge exchange platform perspective. Current Issues in Tourism, 22(1), 107-126. [108] Yeşil, S., Büyükbeşe, T., & Koska, A. (2013). Exploring the link between knowledge sharing enablers, innovation capability and innovation performance. International Journal of Innovation Management, 17(04), 1350018. [109] Yeşil, S., Koska, A., & Büyükbeşe, T. (2013). Knowledge sharing process, innovation capability and innovation performance: An empirical study. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 75, 217-225. [110] Yuen, S. S., & Lam, H. Y. (2024). Enhancing Competitiveness through Strategic Knowledge Sharing as a Driver of Innovation Capability and Performance. Sustainability, 16(6), 2460.