The impact of R&D‐specific factors on the attractiveness of small‐ and medium‐sized enterprises as partners vis‐à‐vis alliance formation in large emerging economies

This study examines the impact of research and development (R&D)‐specific factors in determining the likelihood of small‐ and medium‐sized enterprises (SMEs) from developed countries to be attractive partners vis‐à‐vis forming alliances with SMEs from large emerging economies (LEEs). This study is founded on the knowledge‐accessing theory of alliance formation, which emphasises the higher efficiency gains of knowledge application as opposed to knowledge generation. We extend this theory to SMEs on the basis that smaller firms, because of their resources constraints and drive to survive, are likely to use alliances to access external knowledge bases leading to new product development (NPD) opportunities because of the low feasibility of acquiring knowledge. As a mix of complex knowledge is necessary to develop most modern products and services, SMEs are also likely to adopt a more flexible operational approach and to accept compromises to forge knowledge‐accessing alliances. We illustrate this theoretical development using primary data collected from British and German biotechnology SMEs, declaring the intention prospectively to form alliances with their counterparts in Brazil. Binary logistic regression was used to identify the factors influencing the likelihood of a firm as an attractive alliance partner. Our results indicate that R&D‐specific factors influence the likelihood of firms to be attractive alliance partners. In particular, firms showing an in‐house innovation history focused on one or few products are more likely to be attractive alliance partners with LEE firms than those that do not. Another R&D‐specific predictor that enhances the chances of alliance partner attractiveness with LEE firms is the firm's focused searching and identifying capability relative to technology or equipment that demonstrates good prospects to improve the firm's line of products. A third predictor refers to the firm's awareness regarding non‐cost obstacles for its own technological development. Implications for policy makers and practitioners are also discussed.     

Factors for improving the level of knowledge generation in new product development

Globalization and other rapid changes in markets and technologies increasingly require companies to generate new knowledge in order to remain competitive. In order to innovate successfully, firms must generate knowledge faster than their rivals. This study develops and tests a conceptual model that focuses on how managerial controllable variables influence the level of knowledge generation in new product development. Based on literature and 'theory-in-use' field research in seven knowledge-intensive organizations, the authors developed research hypotheses and tested the hypotheses using data collected from 277 firms in high technology industries. The findings suggest that information technologies, organizational crisis, individual commitment, the R&D budget, and job rotation increase levels of knowledge generation, whereas lead user and supplier networks are negatively associated with the level of knowledge generation in new product development, and the influence of co-location of R&D staff is not significant.     

A Closer Look at Cross‐functional R&D Cooperation for Innovativeness: Innovation‐oriented Leadership and Human Resource Practices as Driving Forces

Because cross‐functional research and development (R&D) cooperation appears to drive innovation, many firms have invested considerably in it. However, despite substantial efforts to improve information and communication infrastructures or to bring departments in closer proximity with one another, structural investments often fail to produce the desired positive impact on cross‐functional R&D cooperation. This failure may arise because firms undertaking these structural investments do not manage their employees adequately. Extant research acknowledges the importance of motivating and enabling members of the R&D function to cooperate with other functions. Yet empirical studies investigating the relative importance of leadership and different human resource (HR) practices for enhancing cross‐functional R&D cooperation are scarce. Drawing on the resource‐based view and organizational support theory, this study investigates how innovation‐oriented leadership and HR practices might support members of the R&D function and encourage cross‐functional R&D cooperation, which enhances product program innovativeness. Specifically, members of the R&D function who are supported in their innovation efforts through innovation‐oriented leadership and HR practices should reciprocate for the support they receive by intensifying their cross‐functional cooperation to achieve greater product program innovativeness. Relying on multi‐informant data from 125 firms with assessments from marketing and R&D managers, this study shows that innovation‐oriented leadership and HR practices have different effects on cross‐functional R&D cooperation. A structural equation modeling‐based analysis of the hypothesized relationships reveals that innovation‐oriented leadership, rewards, and training and development have considerable positive effects. In contrast, recruitment does not drive cross‐functional R&D cooperation. Because firms usually operate in dynamic markets, and increasingly acquire relevant information from customers when generating innovations, this study also considers market‐related dynamism and customer integration as important contingency factors. For firms facing market‐related dynamism and those relying on customer integration, leadership and training and development are particularly effective for enhancing cross‐functional R&D cooperation. By integrating two theoretical perspectives, this study not only advances knowledge on the antecedents of cross‐functional R&D cooperation, but also helps explain differences in their relative effectiveness. Furthermore, it both adds to the discussion of whether monetary rewards are appropriate means to foster innovation and challenges existing assumptions about the role of recruiting for innovation.     

A contemporary justice perspective on dual ladders for R&D professionals

Research and development (R&D) professionals play a key role in companies' innovation performance. Whereas prior research has indicated the potential benefits of dual ladder career systems to retain and motivate R&D professionals, there is a lack of knowledge regarding the design properties of dual ladders that facilitate such positive effects. The purpose of this study is to address this research gap by exploring how organizations can design dual ladders to enhance R&D professionals' organizational commitment and career satisfaction. Drawing on contemporary justice theory, we point to two factors integral for the successful application of dual ladders: the perceived equality of the technical ladder and the transparency of the dual ladder. These factors are related to R&D professionals' organizational commitment and career satisfaction. Furthermore, this study investigates whether these relationships are moderated by R&D professionals' age and self‐directedness in career management as well as firm size. The hypotheses are tested in a cross‐level study with 9 heads of R&D departments, 32 human resource managers, and 382 R&D professionals from 32 organizations. Based on the analyses, this study finds positive relationships between the perceived equality and the transparency of the dual ladder with R&D professionals' organizational commitment and career satisfaction. In addition, the findings show that the effects of the perceived equality of the technical ladder on R&D professionals' career satisfaction are weaker at high levels of self‐directed career management. The study contributes by developing theory on the consequences of dual ladders' design properties and moderating influences thereon. Thus, this research has implications for the literature on innovation management by expanding the knowledge on the interplay between career management and the human side of innovation.     

“Squeezing R&D”: A Study of Organizational Slack and Knowledge Creation in NPD,Using the SECI Model

During new product development (NPD), functional areas such as marketing, R&D, and manufacturing work together to understand customer needs, create product concepts, and solve technical issues. NPD is dependent on the creation of new knowledge and the interplay between tacit knowledge (knowledge that is difficult to articulate and codify) and explicit knowledge (knowledge that can be codified and documented). Knowledge creation requires time and resources, and the dichotomy facing senior management is how much spare capacity in NPD teams—so‐called organizational slack—is appropriate. Too much organizational slack and precious development resources will be wasted; but when slack is eliminated, there is a danger that knowledge creation will be severely hindered. There have been very few studies of organizational slack at the project level, and so the aim of our research was to examine the impact of changes in organizational slack on knowledge creation in NPD projects. Six projects were studied at two companies, over a two‐year period. Multiple sources of data were used to determine how changes in organizational slack impacted knowledge creation, which was operationalized using Nonaka's socialization, externalization, combination, and internalization (SECI) model. It was found that the creation of knowledge in NPD projects is susceptible to changes in organizational slack. A significant finding was that every time there were changes in organizational slack, there was always some impact on knowledge creation. Increased slack enabled knowledge creation; but, importantly, the impacts of decreasing organizational slack were often very negative and disrupted the work of NPD teams, particularly at the end of projects. Managers who feel that “squeezing R&D” is important should think again—their action might disrupt knowledge creation and compromise innovation.     

The strategic dilemmas of innovative enterprises: proposals for high‐technology sectors

High levels of research and development (R&D) expenditure, pressure for innovation and the creation of new knowledge are features that distinguish high‐technology (high‐tech) enterprises from other, less technologically advanced, firms. Confronted with multiple contemporary approaches to strategy and turbulence in their environment, these enterprises make strategic choices continuously and dynamically. This paper proposes a model and matrix for the classification of high‐tech enterprises’ development strategies (with regard to their specific features), which are then verified. Qualitative research was conducted in 61 medium and large high‐tech companies based in Poland that operate either in Poland or in the global marketplace. The results show that high‐tech firms have the fundamental goal of developing R&D activity as a resource (and its redundancy) rather than product/market goals. The studied firms strive above all for leadership in innovation, creating new technologies based on their own R&D resources, while also using outside sources and mostly applying the personalisation approach in knowledge management. However, they choose different paths for product and market development, depending on the opportunities presented by the environment, and the firm's ability to identify and take advantage of these.     

Proactive/Responsive Market Orientation and Marketing—Research and Development Integration

The level of integration between the marketing and research and development (R&D) functions may be gauged by degree of communication, information sharing, and collaboration between the functions during the new product development process. This article examines how a firm's strategic choice regarding market orientation may influence the relationship between marketing and R&D personnel, and how this relationship may affect organizational success. Under examination are both the responsive form of market orientation, in which a firm focuses on immediate customer needs and tends to be market driven, and the proactive form, in which the firm focuses on future market needs and tends to be invention driven. It is theorized that responsive market orientation will be more positively related to marketing‐R&D integration due to the market‐driven nature of the orientation. Conversely, it is theorized proactive market orientation will be more positively related to organizational success than responsive market orientation due to the innovation‐driven nature of the orientation. The study was implemented via a Web‐based survey and data analysis was performed using structural equation modeling techniques. The results of this study provide empirical evidence that both proactive and responsive market orientation exhibit a positive relationship with marketing–R&D integration, indicating that both forms of market orientation may lead to closer collaboration between the marketing and R&D functions. Despite the assumption that a proactive orientation is driven by innovation and technology in which R&D may play a more significant role, there is evidence that a high degree of synergy is developed between the groups when the focus is on future market needs. A market‐driven responsive orientation by necessity requires high integration between departments to commercialize products in a timely manner to meet current market needs. Proactive market orientation exhibits a positive relationship with market performance, whereas responsive market orientation does not. The result may show evidence of the “new product paradox," whereby developing products to address immediate market needs may result in lower market performance because the new products may be replacements for obsolete offerings or are actually cannibalizing sales of existing products.     

The role of reference point in CEO restricted stock and its impact on R&D intensity in high‐technology firms

Prior work based on agency theory and behavioral agency model has focused on how absolute pay values affect firm outcomes. Departing from this traditional approach, we draw from behavioral decision theory to explain how relative pay levels influence firm risk taking. We investigate how CEO restricted stock value relative to reference point influences R&D intensity in high‐technology firms. We propose that negative deviation increases are related to R&D increases and positive deviation increases lead to R&D decreases, while negative deviation has greater effect than positive deviation. We establish theoretical boundary conditions by considering CEO duality and board vigilance as moderators. Drawing from agency theory, we predict the main effects will be enhanced under duality and weakened under high board vigilance. Our hypotheses are largely supported. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Market Orientation and R&D Effectiveness in High‐Technology Firms: An Empirical Investigation in the Biotechnology Industry*

There seems to be lack of consensus among informed scholars about the importance a of market orientation for high‐technology firms. This paper gives a comprehensive review of existing empirical studies on the relationship between market orientation and innovation performance and pinpoints two limitations in this research stream that might be at the origin of such controversy. First, extant research often overlooked key innovation outcomes for high‐technology firms, such as those related to research and development (R&D) performance. Second, organizational conditions that can ensure an optimal integration of market knowledge in the innovation process have been less analyzed in the case of these firms. Against this background, the present study contributes to the literature by providing a test of the effect of market orientation on R&D effectiveness and the moderating role of knowledge integration in this relationship, using a sample of Italian biotechnology firms. The study's objectives are addressed in two steps. The first one consists of an in‐depth qualitative study based on semistructured interviews in five biotechnology firms. The second step consists of a follow‐up survey of 50 biotechnology firms. Results from hierarchical multiple regression analysis show that the different dimensions of a market orientation have diverse effects on R&D effectiveness of high‐technology firms: whereas interfunctional coordination has a positive main effect, the effect of customer orientation is moderated by knowledge integration, and competitor orientation has no effect on R&D effectiveness. Post hoc analyses also show two additional results involving a broader set of dependent variables. First, R&D effectiveness mediates the effects of customer orientation and interfunctional coordination on organizational performance. Second, market orientation does not appear to significantly affect R&D efficiency. The present study contributes to current literature in two main respects. First, it adds to previous work on market orientation and innovation by proposing a new dependent variable—R&D effectiveness—which offers a better perspective to understand the impact of market orientation on innovation performance in high‐technology contexts. Second, while part of the current debate on the role of market orientation in high‐tech markets seems to be polarized by positions that sustain its potential drawbacks or, on the contrary, its advantages, this study's findings on the moderating role of knowledge integration shed light on important contingency factors, such as organizational capabilities. The authors discuss the study's limitations and provide directions for future research.     

Organizing for Inbound Open Innovation: How External Consultants and a Dedicated R&D Unit Influence Product Innovation Performance

Firms increasingly acquire technological knowledge from external sources to improve their innovation performance. This strategic approach is known as inbound open innovation. The existing empirical evidence regarding the impact of inbound open innovation on performance, however, is ambiguous. The equivocal results are due to moderating factors that influence a firm's ability to acquire technological knowledge from external sources and to transform it into innovation outputs. This paper focuses on a relevant yet overlooked category of moderating factors: organization of research and development (R&D). It explores two organizational mechanisms: one informal and external‐oriented (involvement of external consultants in R&D activities) and one formalized and internal‐oriented (existence of a dedicated R&D unit), in the acquisition of technological knowledge through R&D outsourcing, a particular contractual form for inbound open innovation. Drawing on a capabilities perspective and using a longitudinal dataset of 841 Spanish manufacturing firms observed over the period 1999–2007, this paper provides a fine‐grained analysis of the moderating effects of the two organizational mechanisms. The involvement of external consultants in R&D activities strengthens the impact of inbound open innovation on innovation performance by increasing marginal benefits of acquiring external technological knowledge through R&D outsourcing. Moreover, it reduces the level of inbound open innovation to which the highest innovation performance corresponds. Instead, the existence of a dedicated R&D unit makes the firm less sensitive to changes in the level of inbound open innovation, by reducing marginal benefits of acquiring external technological knowledge through R&D outsourcing, and increases the level of inbound open innovation to which the highest innovation performance corresponds. The results regarding the role of informal and formalized R&D organizational mechanisms contribute to research on open innovation and absorptive capacity, and also inform managers as to what organizational mechanism is recommended to acquire external technological knowledge, depending on the objectives that the firm pursues.     

Social Capital as a Microlevel Origin of Organizational Capabilities

The microlevel concept of social capital has received significant attention in management and sociological research but has not yet been empirically associated with the development of organizational capabilities. The major purpose of this paper is to investigate the relationship of social capital with marketing and research and development (R&D) capability and to explore how the environmental context moderates the social capital–organizational capability link. It is suggested that top management's social capital provides a firm with important information and control benefits that facilitate effective access to the knowledge and resources necessary for building superior organizational capabilities. In addition, we identify the role of two important environmental factors influencing the social capital–organizational capability link: technological turbulence and competitive intensity. The strength of the relationship between social capital and organizational capabilities is proposed to vary depending on the level of these two environmental characteristics. This study conceptualizes and operationalizes social capital as a multidimensional construct reflected by the structural dimension of tie strength, the relational dimension of trust, and the cognitive dimension of solidarity. Survey and archival data on 280 firms from various industries are analyzed using structural equation modeling. Empirical support for the proposed three‐dimensional structure of social capital is found. Results further indicate that social capital is a significant antecedent to both marketing and R&D capability, which in turn significantly affect firm performance. While a positive relationship between social capital and organizational capabilities is supported in general, the strength of this relationship depends on the environmental context the firm is embedded in. The positive effect of social capital on marketing capability increases in environments with high technological turbulence and competitive intensity; the opposite holds for R&D capability. This research contributes to the resource‐based view by introducing social capital as an important microlevel factor promoting the development of organizational capabilities. By identifying and evaluating two important environmental contingencies, our study also decreases some of the ambiguity surrounding the effectiveness of antecedents to organizational capabilities. The findings further help practitioners decide under what circumstances investing in top‐managers' social capital provides an effective means for achieving superior performance through enhanced organizational capabilities. This should have an important bearing on issues such as management training and incentives as well as on hiring policies.     

How to learn in R&D partnerships?

In this article a set of determinants of organisational learning and result appropriation are identified and then tested on a sample of Research and Development (R&D) consortia. The literature review and an exploratory case study highlight the main factors which favour learning and the appropriation of knowledge. The case study observes the organisational learning processes at work in three R&D partnerships entered into by a European high technology firm.
Six hypotheses are formulated. They pertain to the link between the firm's learning and exploitation capabilities. The hypotheses relate to (1) trust between partners, (2) R&D integration in the firm, (3) the access to adequate complementary assets, (4) the member's involvement and motivation in the cooperative process, (5) its own experience in R&D, and (6) the number of partners in the consortium. These hypotheses are tested on a sample of 317 R&D consortia in the European EUREKA initiative.
The results show that a firm's internal organisation and the level of trust between partners influence learning and result appropriation. However, the determinants vary according to the kind of outcome (tangible knowledge, new products/processes, improved products/processes, intangible knowledge). With the knowledge that alliances are increasingly becoming a necessity for firms involved in technology, a better understanding of how to benefit from R&D partnerships can only improve firms' competitiveness in the future.     

Antecedents and Contingent Effects of Organizational Adaptive Capability on Firm Product Innovativeness

Organizational adaptive capability is a broad term and was studied from different perspectives, such as market, technology, and management system, in the management literature. However, the simultaneous effects of these different perspectives and their related adaptive capability constructs on a firm's product innovativeness have yet to be addressed. Additionally, an empirical study of the influence of informal structural dimensions, such as loose coupling, multiplexity, and redundancy, on the organizational adaptive capability, as antecedents, is also missing in the technology and innovation management (TIM) literature. By studying 153 firms, we found that (1) market‐, technology‐, and management system‐related adaptive capability constructs simultaneously and positively impact firm product innovativeness; (2) under the loose coupling construct, autonomous behaviors of departments positively impact technology and management system adaptive capability, loose management style influences market and management system adaptive capability, and uneven/slow information travel in organizations negatively affects technology and management system adaptive capability; (3) multiplexity positively influences all organizational adaptive capability constructs; and (4) under the redundancy construct, information distribution redundancy has an “∩” shape relationship with technology adaptive capability. We also demonstrated that the impact of informal structural constructs on adaptive capability is contingent upon environmental turbulence, e.g., rapid or unanticipated changes in market and technology. We found that the influence of loose management style on technology adaptive capability decreases with increased rate of market turbulence, and the effect of resource slack, as a part of the redundancy construct, on technology adaptive capability changes quadratically, an “∩” shaped curve, with an increased rate of market turbulence. We further found that the effect of the autonomous behaviors of departments on market adaptive capability increases with an increased level of technology turbulence. The role of resource slack on the market adaptive capability was also found to change quadratically, an “∩” shaped curve, with an increased rate of technology turbulence. Interestingly, the impact of the information distribution redundancy on market adaptive capability changes nonlinearly, a “U” shaped curve, with an increased rate of technology turbulence. Further, we showed that the influence of organizational technology adaptive capability on product innovativeness increases with increased level of technology turbulence. This study concludes with several theoretical and managerial implications.     

The Vital Role of Problem‐Solving Competence in New Product Success*

Problem solving, a process of seeking, defining, evaluating, and implementing the solutions, is considered a converter that can translate organizational inputs into valuable product and service outputs. A key challenge for the product innovation community is to answer questions about how knowledge competence and problem‐solving competence develop and sustain competitive advantage. The objective of this study is to theoretically examine and empirically test an existing assumption that problem‐solving competence is an important variable connecting market knowledge competence with new product performance. New product projects from 396 firms in the high‐technology zones in China were used to test the study's theoretical model. The results first indicate that problem‐solving speed and creativity matter in new product innovation performance by playing mediator roles between market knowledge competence and positional advantage, which in turn sustains superior performance. This new insight suggest that mere generation of market knowledge and having a marketing–research and development (R&D) interface will not affect new product performance unless project members have the ability to use the information and to interact to identify and solve complex problems speedily and creatively. Second, these results suggest that different market knowledge competences (customers, competitors, and interactions between marketing and R&D) have distinct impacts on problem‐solving speed and creativity (positive, negative, or none), which underscore the need to embrace a more fine‐grained notion of market knowledge competence. The results also reveal that the relative importance of some of these relationships depends on the perceived level of turbulence in the environment. First, competitor knowledge competence decreases problem‐solving speed when perceived environmental turbulence is low but enhances problem‐solving speed when perceived turbulence is high. Second, competitor knowledge competence has a positive relationship with new product performance when the environmental turbulence is high but no relationship when the environmental turbulence is low. Third, the positive relationship between problem‐solving speed and product advantage is stronger when the perceived environmental turbulence is high than when it is low, which implies that problem solving is more important for creating product advantage when environmental turbulence is high and change is fast and unpredictable. Fourth, the negative relationship between problem‐solving speed and new product performance is stronger when the perceived environmental turbulence is high than when it is low, which means that problem‐solving speed is more harmful for new product performance when change is fast and unpredictable. And fifth, the positive relationship between product quality and new product performance is stronger when perceived environmental turbulence is low than when it is high, which implies that product quality may more likely lead to new product performance when the environment is stable and changes are easy to predict, analyze, and comprehend.     

Extending Lead‐User Theory: Antecedents and Consequences of Consumers' Lead Userness*

Lead users are found to come up with commercially attractive user innovations and have been shown to be a highly promising source of innovation for new product development tasks. According to lead‐user theory, these users are defined as being ahead of an important market trend and experiencing high benefits from innovating. The present article extends lead‐user theory by exploring the antecedents and consequences of consumers' lead userness in the course of three studies on extreme sports communities. Regarding antecedents, it uncovers that field‐related variables (consumer knowledge and use experience) as well as field‐independent personality variables (locus of control and innovativeness) help explain an individual's lead userness. These variables might therefore be used as a proxy to identify the rare species of lead users. With regard to consequences, it uncovers that lead users demonstrate innovative behavior not only by creating new product ideas but also by adopting new commercial products more heavily and faster than ordinary users. This highlights the idea that lead users might not only be valuable to idea‐generation processes for radically new concepts; instead, they might also be relevant to more general issues in the marketing of new products.     

The impact of team‐member exchange,differentiation, team commitment,and knowledge sharing on R&D project team performance

This paper integrates team‐member exchange (TMX), affective commitment, and knowledge sharing to examine how work unit TMX influences employees' R&D project team commitment and intention to share knowledge, and how team knowledge‐sharing intention and TMX differentiation influences team performance. The results support the relationships between work unit TMX and employees' intention to share knowledge and team commitment. In addition, the results show that work unit TMX increases intention to share knowledge through increasing group members' team commitment. At the group level, the results support the relationships between team knowledge‐sharing intention and team performance. The results also show that TMX differentiation moderates the relationship between work unit TMX and team performance. That is, greater work unit TMX is more likely to achieve higher team performance in a team with low TMX differentiation as opposed to a team with high TMX differentiation. Implications for theory building, future research, and R&D management are discussed.     

The Credibility–Cooperation Connection at the R&D-Marketing Interface

Research and development (R&D) managers' perceptions of both marketing information and marketing managers are analyzed using an information and source credibility framework. The findings are based on a study of R&D directors in 80 technology-intensive companies and focus on activities and interactions during the new product development process. The authors found that the R&D managers' perceptions differed significantly in high and low integration companies. These perceptions also were influenced by various organizational practices. The R&D-marketing cooperation was highest where organizational practices were conducive to cooperation and R&D perceived marketing input as credible. Several implications for creating a corporate climate conducive to interfunctional cooperation are developed.     

An Empirical Investigation into the Antecedents of Knowledge Dissemination at the Strategic Business Unit Level

Knowledge dissemination is of crucial importance for the strategic planning in new product development. Many new ideas stem from recombination of previously successful, disseminated actions, and knowledge dissemination offers a clear overview of market needs, technology developments, and competitors' actions. Moreover, in dynamic environments, where strategic planning has to be added by some kind of improvisation, knowledge dissemination leads to a high quality of improvisation. It leads to a quick awareness of external or internal surprises, gives an opportunity to learn quickly from the past, and compensates for a coordination mechanism instead of planning. The dissemination of knowledge does not always happen spontaneously. Especially, people with a technical background often are highly individualistic and do not disseminate knowledge naturally. So, this must be fostered by the organization. In management research, particularly on technology and innovation management, many facilitating factors have been identified that enhance communication. Intuitively, they also would seem useful in enhancing knowledge dissemination; however, these factors have not been tested empirically for this specific use. Research on knowledge and its management has not given much attention to the way knowledge in an organization is disseminated and the factors that can facilitate it. If such factors are mentioned, they are not tested empirically and their relative impact is not addressed. In this study we identified 17 important factors in enhancing knowledge dissemination and validated 10 of these factors empirically and determined their relative impact. We focused on technological knowledge in new product development—not on the project level but on the level of the strategic business unit. The field research comprised three parts. In the first step, we conducted in‐depth interviews with research and development (R&D) managers and their supervisors to select the most important potential facilitating factors. In the second step, in‐depth interviews with senior executives, information technology (IT) officers, and R&D experts were conducted to determine whether the constructs regarding knowledge dissemination and the potential facilitating factors had face validity. Finally, the potential factors were tested empirically in 277 U.S. high‐technology firms at the strategic business unit (SBU) level. It was our intention to examine potential factors beyond the level of the particular project, so we looked for antecedents in an SBU environment with a longer‐term impact. Our results indicate that individual commitment to the firm is very important to facilitate knowledge dissemination as well as organizational crises and risk‐taking behavior. Individual commitment was found to have the greatest impact on the level of knowledge dissemination, followed by organizational crisis and risk‐taking behavior. It is thus up to management to find new ways to control individual commitment. More research, however, is required to better understand the ways by which managerial interventions stimulates knowledge dissemination.     

Innovation and control in the multinational firm: A comparison of political and contingency approaches

This study focuses on control mechanisms used by multinational corporations (MNCs) to manage their extra‐national R&D units. Drawing on both the literature on organizational power and contingency theory, this study develops and empirically tests a set of hypotheses aimed at explaining how headquarters control their overseas R&D units. Data collected from 134 R&D units of German MNCs serve to test the hypotheses. Results highlight the importance of the units' R&D mandate and its interdependence in explaining control mechanisms. Moreover, they indicate a relatively weak predictive power of political approaches compared to contingency approaches. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.