Abstract
Institutional pressures are widely held to shape organizational behaviour, yet their effects on innovation outcomes remain inconsistently established in the empirical literature. This study examines how coercive, normative and mimetic pressures influence innovation outcomes through the mediating role of innovation capability in South Korean firms. Drawing on Institutional Theory, a structural model was developed and tested using a quantitative crosssectional design and partial least squares structural equation modeling. Data were obtained through a questionnaire survey of 145 respondents holding managerial or operational roles in 17 South Korean firms operating in software development, electronics manufacturing and digital infrastructure; eight of these firms appear on the Clarivate Top 100 Global Innovators 2026 list and the remaining nine are leading firms in the same sectors. The measurement model showed adequate convergent validity and internal consistency, with average variance extracted between 0.61 and 0.70 and composite reliability between 0.85 and 0.92. All three institutional pressures were found to exert positive and significant effects on innovation capability, with coercive pressure the strongest (β = 0.42), followed by normative pressure (β = 0.38) and mimetic pressure (β = 0.31). Innovation capability exerted a substantial positive effect on innovation outcomes (β = 0.47) and bootstrapped mediation analysis confirmed significant indirect effects for all three pressures. The model showed satisfactory explanatory power and fit (R² = 0.64 for innovation capability; SRMR = 0.038). The findings indicate that institutional demands do not translate automatically into innovation success; their effect depends on internal preparedness, which managers and policymakers should therefore treat as a strategic priority.
Keywords: Coercive Pressure, Innovation Capability, Innovation Outcomes, Institutional Theory, Mimetic Pressure, Normative Pressure.