A Closer Look at Cross‐Functional Collaboration and Product Innovativeness: Contingency Effects of Structural and Relational Context

This study applies a contingency perspective to examine how the intra‐organizational context influences the relationship between cross‐functional collaboration and product innovativeness. It focuses on the role of (1) formal, structural factors directly controllable by top management decisions and (2) more intangible, relational factors as potential enhancements of the firm's ability to convert cross‐functional collaboration into product innovativeness. A study of 232 firms confirms the hypotheses, finding that the relationship between cross‐functional collaboration and product innovativeness is stronger for higher levels of decision autonomy and shared responsibility (structural context) and social interaction, trust, and goal congruence (relational context). In addition, a post‐hoc analysis using a configurational approach to organizational contingencies reveals that organizations' relational context is more potent than their structural context for converting cross‐functional collaboration into product innovativeness. The study's implications and future research directions are discussed.     

Getting More from Cross‐Functional Fairness and Product Innovativeness: Contingency Effects of Internal Resource and Conflict Management

This research investigates how organizations' internal resource and conflict management influence the relationship between cross‐functional fairness and product innovativeness. It considers two contextual dimensions of both internal resource management (job rotation and internal rivalry) and conflict‐handling mechanisms (integrating and avoiding) as key components of the firm's ability to convert fair interactions, across departments, into product innovativeness. The tests of the study's hypotheses, based on a sample of more than 200 Canadian‐based firms, confirm that the cross‐functional fairness–product innovativeness relationship is amplified at higher levels of job rotation and integrative conflict handling but suppressed at higher levels of internal rivalry and avoidance of conflict handling. The authors discuss the study's implications and future research directions.     

The Role of Marketing Resources in Radical Innovation Activity: Antecedents and Payoffs

While radical product innovations represent significant engines of firm growth, questions remain over whether marketing helps or hurts (1) a firm's radical product innovation activity and (2) its rewards from radical product innovation activity. By attaching an attention‐based view of the firm to a market‐based assets view of marketing, this paper examines the role of three marketing resources—market knowledge, reputation, and relational resources—on radical innovation activity. Our conceptual framework posits differentiated effects among marketing resources as antecedents of radical innovation activity and as moderators of its impact on firms' financial performance. Using a survey of a broad set of high‐tech business‐to‐business (B2B) firms to test hypotheses, it is found that firms with strong relational resources enjoy a higher propensity for, and stronger financial rewards from, radical innovation activity. Reputational resources come with a trade‐off as they hurt the incidence of radical innovation but enhance its financial rewards. However, market knowledge resources appear to hurt both radical innovation activity and its financial rewards. Our results point to the multifaceted role of marketing in radical innovation activity, which is unlikely to come with a single benefit or liability as prior work often posits. Rather, our research heightens the alertness of managers to assess their firms' marketing strength as a bundle of stocks of several marketing resources. Managers must understand the distinct benefits and drawbacks of each resource in developing and launching radical innovations. Our research underscores the differentiated value of marketing in radical innovation activity in B2B high‐tech contrary to the entrenched idea of a limited or even stifling role of marketing in this context.     

Governing collaborative activity: interdependence and the impact of coordination and exploration

We examine the performance implications of selecting alternate modes of governance in interorganizational alliance relationships. While managers can choose from a range of modes to govern alliances, prior empirical evidence offers limited guidance on the performance impact of this choice. We use an agent‐based simulation of interfirm decision making to complement empirical studies in this area. Our results point to a complex interplay between interdependencies, governance structures, and firms' search capabilities. Different patterns of interdependence create varying needs with respect to coordination and exploration, while at the same time different governance modes, coupled with organizational search capabilities, supply varying degrees of these factors. Firm performance in an alliance relationship improves when the needs and supplies of coordination and exploration are matched. We find situations in which stronger organizational search capabilities can backfire, leading to lower exploration within the alliance relationship, and hence to lower firm performance. Moreover, we show that for higher levels of interdependence, coordination can become more critical for firm performance than exploration: unless it is tied to coordination, exploration can be ineffective in alliance settings. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The Formation of Fairness Perceptions in the Cooperation between Entrepreneurs and Universities

For entrepreneurs who intend to exploit university‐owned technologies, a cooperative relationship with the university is critical. This study aims to better understand this entrepreneur–university cooperation. A key factor influencing the quality of this cooperation is the fairness perception of the entrepreneur. However, little is known about how these fairness perceptions are formed in this context. Therefore, to increase insight in entrepreneur–university cooperation, this study explores the formation of fairness perceptions by entrepreneurs who cooperate with universities (in so‐called university spin‐offs). This study assesses how the rules these entrepreneurs employ to form fairness perceptions differ from fairness rules that have been established in previous studies on organizational justice. The results show that, in addition to established fairness rules, there are also fairness rules that are more specific to this entrepreneurial setting. These specific rules complement the established fairness rules to provide a more comprehensive understanding of the formation of fairness perceptions by entrepreneurs cooperating with a university. Moreover, this study explores to what extent different entrepreneurs form fairness perceptions differently and finds that both experience and relational capital of the entrepreneurs within the university are two key sources of heterogeneity. Overall, this study contributes to the literature by conceptualizing how entrepreneurs form fairness perceptions in cooperating with universities and how this extends established wisdom in organizational justice theory. Moreover, the rules identified in this study provide clues for entrepreneurs who wish to improve their collaboration with universities, and may also apply to the relationships between entrepreneurs and large corporations and between entrepreneurs and venture capitalists.     

How does green innovation affect supplier-customer relationships? A study on customer and relationship contingencies

As the demand for eco-friendly products arises, many suppliers have devoted significant effort to green innovation. Prior studies have investigated how green innovation influences product and firm performance; however, its influence on the relationship between suppliers and organizational buyers (customers) is still unknown. Organizational buyers' receptivity to green products is uncertain as they must adjust their current systems to accommodate the new products. As such, understanding how supplier green innovation effort affects the supplier-customer relationship is essential for green innovation success. Using data collected from 196 B2B customers, we find that the relationship between supplier green innovation effort and relational performance depends on several customer- and relationship-level contingencies. Specifically, green innovation benefits a relationship more if customer participation and relational embeddedness are high, or if customer risk aversion and customer-perceived product criticality are low. This research provides valuable guidance for the effective implementation of green innovation.     

When Does Customer Orientation Hinder (Help) Radical Product Innovation? The Role of Organizational Rewards

Prior marketing literature offers a compelling theoretical rationale in support of two contradictory propositions, namely, that customer orientation is negatively related to (i.e., hinders) radical product innovation and that customer orientation is positively related to (i.e., helps) radical product innovation. In this research, the contextual conditions that determine the validity of these contradictory propositions are identified. Drawing from the literature on organizational rewards, two types of organizational rewards—outcome based and strategy based—are identified as being the key contextual conditions. It is hypothesized that when outcome‐based rewards are in effect, customer orientation is negatively related to radical positive innovation and, that when strategy‐based rewards are in effect, customer orientation is positively related to radical product innovation. Results from a survey of 156 manufacturing firms, and from a survey of 97 of their customers, provide support for these hypotheses. While prior research has attempted to explain the contradictory nature of the relationship between customer orientation and radical product innovation using typology‐based and mediator‐based approaches, the contextual condition‐based approach has not been well developed. This gap is addressed by the present research. From a practitioner perspective, the research is important because it identifies a concrete mechanism that new product development managers can deploy, in tandem with customer orientation, if they intend to generate radical product innovations. Given the potential gains that flow from radical product innovation, the research findings are expected to be of considerable interest to managers of new product development projects.     

Passion for Work,Nonwork‐Related Excitement,and Innovation Managers’ Decision to Exploit New Product Opportunities

This article investigates the role of affect in innovation managers’ decision to exploit new product opportunities—a decision central to the innovation process. The model proposes that different types of passion can trigger managers’ exploitation decisions but that this effect is contingent on experiencing excitement from events outside their work environment. A field experiment with 90 owner–managers of young firms located in an innovation context (business incubators) shows that passion for work and nonwork‐related excitement levels interdependently impact innovation managers’ decision to exploit new product opportunities. Specifically, harmonious passion has a general positive effect on managers’ propensity to exploit. In contrast, the effect of obsessive passion is more complex and contingent on the additional excitement managers experience such that the positive relationship between obsessive passion and the decision to exploit is more positive with higher levels of excitement. These findings extend the product innovation management literature by acknowledging that decision‐makers’ affective experiences influence innovation decisions and provide a first step toward understanding the role of affect and passion in the product innovation context. Second, the finding that obsessive passion and nonwork‐related excitement interact in explaining opportunity exploitation decisions highlights the need to incorporate contingency relationships in models of innovation decision‐making. Third, in drawing on a field experiment and the experimental manipulation of managerial affect during the decision‐making task, this article answers a recent call in the project management literature to pursue less common methodological approaches and develop “broader theoretical schema” in order to enhance our understanding of innovation management. Finally, this study also has implications for practitioners because it can help innovation managers understand their own decision policies. To the extent that innovation managers are able to regulate their affective experiences, this improved understanding might prevent them from premature and faulty decision‐making.     

Developing organizational agility in product innovation: the roles of IT capability,KM capability,and innovative climate

This study investigates how to leverage information technology (IT) capability to build organizational agility in the context of product innovation. A moderated mediating model is proposed from the capability‐building processes perspective. The data collected from 194 senior executives of firms in China show that knowledge management capability partially mediates the relationship between IT capability and organizational agility. Innovative climate also positively moderates the indirect relationship between IT capability and organizational agility in the context of product innovation. Discussion, implications, and direction for future research are offered at the end of this paper.     

Should Firms Consider Employee Input in Reward System Design? The Effect of Participation on Market Orientation and New Product Performance

Will increasing employee participation in reward decisions increase new product performance by first increasing a firm's level of market orientation? Literature offers limited insight to the effects of listening to employees regarding reward system design and whether this may influence market orientation implementation and new product performance. This paper provides research to fill the gap by examining the relationship between participation‐based reward systems, market orientation, and new product performance. Based on expectancy theory, a conceptual model was developed suggesting that participation‐based rewards will increase market orientation by considering employees' desires regarding performance rewards. To test the model, a mixed method was used to collect data. First, in‐depth interviews were conducted with managers from 11 different firms to verify the proposed model. Then a multi‐industry sample of managers from 290 firms was surveyed to maximize generalizability of the results. Data were analyzed using structural equation modeling techniques to simultaneously fit the measurement and structural models. The findings show that market orientation significantly impacts objective new product performance and mediates the relationship between participation‐based rewards and objective new product performance. Participation‐based rewards positively affect market orientation but surprisingly affect new product performance negatively, while positively moderating the relationship between market orientation and new product performance. The results suggest that managers should include employee input in designing reward systems. However, managers should also be careful of how much input they allow employees in determining their rewards and goals as more input will improve market orientation or responding to information collected by, and disseminated throughout the firm, and that, in turn, will improve some types of new product performance. However, the direct effect of employee input can decrease new product performance suggesting that there may be a trade‐off between various success measures of new products developed and introduced by the firm.     

Do Formal Management Practices Impact the Emergence of Bootlegging Behavior?

Innovation in an organization often relies on initiatives by employees who take action to develop their ideas and obtain buy‐in by organizational decision‐makers. To achieve this, employees sometimes apply unorthodox approaches, ignoring formal structures to further elaborate their ideas' potential and promote their implementation. They work without formal legitimacy and gather their own resources until sufficient clarity allows for informed decisions. Finally, they bypass formal communication channels to convince top management of the merits of their ideas. Despite the significance of such bootlegging behavior, research has barely addressed the antecedents of this deviance. Drawing on strain theory and social cognitive theory, we study whether the emergence of bootlegging behavior is influenced by formal management practices, in particular, strategic autonomy, front‐end formality, rewards, and sanctions. Additionally, we investigate the role of employees' self‐efficacy related to innovation tasks at the entrepreneurial stage to explain the emergence of bootlegging. We tested the proposed relationships with empirical field survey data using structural equation modeling. In summary, this paper concludes that intrapreneurial self‐efficacy, strategic autonomy, and rewards for innovation accomplishments foster bootlegging. Front‐end formality has a positive effect on bootlegging by increasing intrapreneurial self‐efficacy, but it reduces the likelihood that employees will ignore formal structures when promoting their ideas and gathering their own resources to support their bootlegging efforts.     

Career orientations of R&D professionals in Korea

This study empirically examined the relationships between career orientations of R&D professionals in Korea and other personal characteristics such as demographic factors, work-related outcomes, and reward preferences. The results, based on the survey about 1,240 technical people in 15 R&D organizations, revealed five distinctive and independent career orientations: technical, manager, project, technical transfer, and entrepreneurial orientations. The career orientations of R&D professionals are found to be different between private and public sectors and to be associated with their education level and organizational tenure. It is also observed that R&D professionals with different career orientations exhibit different work-related outcomes and reward preferences. For instance, technical-oriented professionals tend to be more educated, to exhibit better job attitudes and technical performances, and to favor professional rewards. While those with manager and transfer orientations are longer-tenured, have more positive job attitudes but lower technical performances, and prefer social status and prestige and career rewards in their organization. Both project- and entrepreneur-oriented professionals exhibit a less positive attitude toward their organizations, but seek different reward schemes: the former pursues challenging R&D projects with autonomy and the latter favors financial returns. Finally, the implications of these findings for managing careers of R&D professionals are discussed.     

What Makes Workers Happy? Anticipated Rewards and Job Satisfaction

Using data collected from over 9400 employees in Armenia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia, and Serbia, across a wide variety of workplaces and sectors, we identify the extrinsic and intrinsic rewards that workers desire and expectations of receiving these rewards. We use ordered probit regression analysis to evaluate the association between anticipated rewards and job satisfaction, hypothesizing that reward desirability matters most for extrinsic rewards linked to numeric values. Data strongly support our hypothesis in the case of expected job security; limited support is found in the case of expected promotion. For non‐numeric extrinsic and intrinsic rewards, a strong positive link between job satisfaction and the reward variables often is observed, even if the expected reward is not highly desired. While own earnings typically are positively linked to job satisfaction, peers' earnings may be positively (Kazakhstan, Armenia, Russia) or negatively (Krygyzstan, Serbia) linked to job satisfaction, but not always statistically significant.     

Key supplier relationships and product introduction success: The moderating roles of self-enforcement and interdependence between buyer and supplier

This study investigates the extent to which strong relationships between a firm and its key suppliers promote effective new product introduction. Building on the relationship marketing literature, we identify self-enforcement and interdependence as two contingent relational variables that influence the strength of the buyer–supplier relationship. We use data from a survey of 2331 manufacturing firms in China to test the hypotheses. The results show that strong relationships with key suppliers correlate with product introduction success and that this positive effect is contingent on the two relational variables identified. Self-enforcement strengthens the utility of strong supplier relationships for these Chinese manufacturers, and buyer–supplier interdependence enhances this relationship.     

The Effect of Interactional Fairness on the Performance of Cross‐Functional Product Development Teams: A Multilevel Mediated Model*

Cross‐functional product development teams (CFPDTs) are receiving increasing attention as a fundamental mechanism for achieving greater interfunctional integration in the product development process. However, little is known about how team members' interactional fairness perception—fairness perception based on the quality of interpersonal treatment received from the project manager during the new product development process—affects cross‐functional communication and the performance of CFPDTs. This study examines the effects of interactional fairness on both team members' performance and team performance as a whole. It was predicted that interactional fairness in CFPDTs would significantly affect team members' task performance, both task‐ and person‐focused interpersonal citizenship behaviors, as well as team performance. Additionally, commitment would partially mediate the effects of interactional fairness on these performance outcomes. Analyzing survey responses from two student samples of CFPDTs with hierarchical linear modeling techniques, it was demonstrated that team members' task performance, interpersonal citizenship behavior, and team performance are enhanced when team members are dedicated to both the team and the project, and such dedication is fostered when project managers are fair to team members in an interpersonal way.     

Does complexity deter customer‐focus?

Economic models suggest that firms use a simple cost‐benefit calculation to evaluate customer requests for new product features, but an extensive organizational literature shows the decision to implement innovation is more nuanced. We address this theoretical tension by studying how firms respond to customer requests for incremental product innovations, and how these responses change when the requested innovation is complex. Using large sample empirical analyses combined with detailed qualitative data drawn from interviews, we find considerable variance in the relationship between customer demands, complexity, and investments in incremental innovations. The qualitative study revealed the importance of organization structures, competitive pressures, and incentives for resource allocation processes. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

What Makes a Family Firm Innovative? CEO Risk‐Taking Propensity and the Organizational Context of Family Firms

Investigating the new product portfolio innovativeness of family firms connects two important topics that have recently received considerable attention in innovation and family firm research. First, new product portfolio innovativeness has been identified as a critical determinant of firm performance. Second, research on family firms has focused on the questions of if and why family firms are more or less innovative than other organizational forms. Research investigating the innovativeness of family firms has often applied a risk‐oriented perspective by identifying socioemotional wealth (SEW) as the main reference that determines firm behavior. Thus, prior research has mainly focused on the organizational context to predict innovation‐related family firm behavior and neglected the impact of preferences and the behavior of the chief executive officer (CEO), which have both been shown to affect firm outcomes. Hence, this study aims to extend the previous research by introducing the CEO's disposition to organizational context variables to explain the new product portfolio innovativeness of small and medium‐sized family firms. Specifically, this study explores how the organizational context (i.e., ownership by top management team [TMT] family members and generation in charge of the family firm) of family firms interacts with CEO risk‐taking propensity to affect new product portfolio innovativeness. Using a sample of 114 German CEOs of small and medium‐sized family firms operating in manufacturing industries, the results show that CEO risk‐taking propensity has a positive effect on new product portfolio innovativeness. Moreover, the analyses show that the organizational context of family firms impacts the relationship between CEO risk‐taking propensity and new product portfolio innovativeness. Specifically, the relationship between CEO risk‐taking propensity and new product portfolio innovativeness is weaker if levels of ownership by TMT family members are high (high SEW). Additionally, the effect of CEO risk‐taking propensity on new product portfolio innovativeness is stronger in family firms at earlier generational stages (high SEW). This result suggests that if SEW is a strong reference, family firm‐specific characteristics can affect individual dispositions and, in turn, the behaviors of executives. Therefore, this study helps extend the knowledge on the determinants of new product portfolio innovativeness of family firms by considering an individual CEO preference and the organizational context variables of family firms simultaneously.     

A Cross‐National Comparative Study of Senior Management Policy,Marketing–Manufacturing Involvement,and Innovation Performance

The marketing–manufacturing interface is important to the success of product development. This research investigates the effect of senior management policies on the effectiveness of the marketing–manufacturing interface. Based on existing literature, a conceptual framework is developed that relates senior management policies, marketing–manufacturing involvement, and new product performance. The proposed framework is contingent on the national culture of the country in which product development occurs. Structural equation modeling is used to test the framework with data from a sample of 146 U.S. marketing managers and 185 Japanese marketing managers. The results suggest that a number of senior management policies are effective in promoting joint involvement between the marketing and manufacturing functions during the innovation process. While the use of formal cross‐functional integration policies was found to promote marketing–manufacturing involvement both in the United States and Japan, team leader autonomy, team rewards, and job rotation were found to promote marketing involvement in the United States but not in Japan. On the other hand, promoting marketing–manufacturing involvement via goal clarity and promotion of teamwork proved to be effective in Japan. The results have a number of implications for product development practice. Foremost among these is the finding that, despite the fundamental ideological differences separating the marketing and manufacturing functions, senior management policies can enhance the level of marketing–manufacturing involvement, and consequently can improve the likelihood of new product success. The second implication is that the effectiveness of specific senior management policies depends on national culture. Thus, managers wishing to improve the marketing–manufacturing interface should select the policies that match the culture in which the product development project is located.     

Vertical innovation partnerships and relational performance: The mediating role of trust,interdependence, and familiarity

Which relational atmosphere would allow clients and suppliers to fully benefit from their innovation partnerships? Adopting an interactionist approach, we hypothesized that elements of a partnership atmosphere mediate the relationship between partnership type and relational performance. Based on taxonomic analysis of 160 cross-industry vertical innovation partnerships (VIPs) with differing contractual, relational, and organizational arrangements, we identified four VIP types: free, project-based, elaborated, and exclusive. Our results did not support a direct effect from VIP types on performance. However, we found that a trustful atmosphere enables achieving and exceeding expected benefits in both project-based and exclusive VIPs, whereas a familiar atmosphere enables achieving and exceeding expected benefits only for exclusive VIPs, and interdependence allows exceeding benefits only for project-based VIPs.     

Legitimacy‐Seeking Mechanisms in Product Innovation: A Qualitative Study*

Product innovation research adopts a rational choice perspective to examine resource allocation decisions for product innovation. This research emphasizes strategic alignment between the innovation and the organization as the key factor shaping these decisions. In contrast, organizational research suggests that to access resources, product innovations have to be perceived as legitimate by corporate sponsors. Legitimacy is rooted in alignment with the prevalent corporate norms, beliefs, and cultural model. Adopting an institutional perspective and relying on an in‐depth case study of three product innovations, this study explores legitimacy‐seeking behavior in product innovation. The findings indicate that the rational perspective emphasized in most product innovation research is complemented by efforts to seek both moral and cognitive legitimacy to resource product innovation. The study clarifies the critical role that the organizational context plays in triggering legitimacy‐seeking behavior. The analysis unpacks legitimacy‐seeking behavior, revealing patterns of legitimating mechanisms (lobbying, relationship building, and gathering feedback) that are deployed as part of legitimacy strategies (conforming, selecting, and manipulating) to achieve a range of legitimacy outcomes (pragmatic, moral, and cognitive). The analysis reveals the existence of a hierarchy of legitimacy outcomes as actors prioritize one type of legitimacy versus another. The study also finds interdependencies between mechanisms and strategies to reinforce particular outcomes as legitimacy‐seeking behavior evolves over time.