Technology Strategy in a Software Products Company

An overly narrow focus on core competencies and technologies may cause a firm to miss market opportunities. On the other hand, a firm's ongoing success depends on its ability to recognize and nurture the technologies necessary for the continual refinement and extension of its product families. This process of product renewal requires effective management of technological innovation, which in turn requires a clear understanding of the technological basis for a product family–that is, the product platform from which derivative or follow-on products are created. Using a software company as an example, Marc H. Meyer and Luis Lopez present a method for understanding the relationship between the nurturing of core technologies and the evolution of a product family. At the foundation of this method is the concept of a product platform–the core technologies that are common to all members of a product family. In other words, a platform provides the basic technological architecture for a series of derivative products. From an initial platform, a product family can evolve in two ways: through platform extensions or platform renewals. Platform extensions may involve changes to existing subsystems or the addition of new subsystems without altering the primary subsystems and interfaces in the existing design. Platform renewal is the redesign of a product to create an entirely new platform. To provide a basis for evaluating the effects of the software company's allocation of R&D expenditures, the authors created a product family map that differentiated between platform improvements and derivative product developments. Using the product family map, they examined R&D budgets and identified the allocation of spending among the core technologies embodied in the firms's products. The visual presentation of the product family maps and core capability investments were particularly useful for helping company management understand and learn from the consequences of past decisions. The analysis of the product family maps and R&D expenditures also provides a guideline for future decision-making. Specifically, to achieve desired amounts of technical and commercial leverage, successive product platforms in a product family must provide both balance and strength in the embodied core technologies. For market applications involving more than one core technology, a firm must pursue a balanced, inclusive technology strategy. In such cases, overemphasis on one core technology typically results in poor market performance.     

Application and performance impact of stage–gate systems – the role services in the firm’s business focus

Although service innovation is important, knowledge of new product and service development, including the positive effect of stage‐and‐gate‐type systems, has been derived almost exclusively from studies in the manufacturing sector. In the present paper, we address two important questions: How do differences in the firm’s business focus, which describes whether a firm puts more emphasis on products or services in its business activities, influence the usage of such formal innovation processes? Is stage‐and‐gate‐type systems’ impact on innovation program performance contingent on the firm’s business focus? Unlike previous studies, we not only differentiate service and manufacturing by industry classification codes but also apply a continuous measure to take into account the blurring of boundaries between the manufacturing and service businesses. Based on a comprehensive discussion of service‐specific characteristics and their implications for innovation management and using a cross‐industry, multi‐informant sample of innovation programs from 272 firms with 1,985 informants, we find empirical support for firms with a stronger focus on the service business being less likely to use stage‐and‐gate‐type systems. Furthermore, the use of stage‐and‐gate‐type systems fosters innovation program performance, and this effect becomes stronger as the business focus shifts toward services. This result implies that service‐based firms can benefit from stage‐and‐gate‐type systems to a greater extent than product‐based firms. Our research also demonstrates the gap between the desired level of innovation process formalization and its current usage in practice, especially for firms with a dominating service business.     

Networking as a Means to Strategy Change: The Case of Open Innovation in Mobile Telephony

The purpose of this article is to investigate how innovation networks can be used to deal with a changing technological environment. This study combines different concepts related to research and development (R&D) collaboration strategies of large firms and applies these concepts to R&D alliance projects undertaken by Nokia Corporation in the period 1985–2002. The research methodology is a combination of in‐depth semistructured interviews and a large‐scale quantitative analysis of alliance agreements. For the empirical analysis a distinction is made between exploration and exploitation in innovation networks in terms of three different measures. As a first measure, the difference between exploration and exploitation strategies by means of the observed capabilities of the partners of the contracting firms is investigated. The second measure is related to partner turnover. The present article argues that in exploration networks partner turnover will be higher than in exploitation networks. As a third measure, the type of alliance contract will be taken; exploration networks will make use of flexible legal organizational structures, whereas exploitation alliances are associated with legal structures that enable long‐term collaboration. The case of Nokia has illustrated the importance of strategic technology networks for strategic repositioning under conditions of change. Nokia followed an exploitation strategy in the development of the first two generations of mobile telephony and an exploration strategy in the development of technologies for the third generation. Such interfirm networks seem to offer flexibility, speed, innovation, and the ability to adjust smoothly to changing market conditions and new strategic opportunities. These two different strategies have led to distinctly different international innovation networks, have helped the company in becoming a world leader in the mobile phone industry, and have enabled it to sustain that position in a radically changed technological environment. This study also illustrates that Nokia effectively uses an open innovation strategy in the development of new products and services and in setting technology standards for current and future use of mobile communication applications. This article presents one of the first longitudinal studies, which describes the use of innovation networks as a means to adapt swiftly to changing market conditions and strategic change. This study contributes to the emerging, but still inconsistent, literature on explorative and exploitative learning by means of strategic technology networks.     

PERSPECTIVE: Creating a platform-based approach for developing new services

This article explores the design and renewal of services. We do this through the lens of methods and processes for developing product platforms for physical products. We first articulate principles for effectively developing next generation product lines using platform concepts, and illustrate these principles with examples drawn from computer and electronic products. These principles include creating new insights into a firm's market segmentation, understanding both the perceived and latent needs of users, and doing so for new as well as existing groups of customers. These platform principles also include the design and implementation of subsystems and interfaces that can be used across different products and across different product lines. Such subsystems and interfaces become the operational platforms for new product development purposes. An approach to platform-centric organization design is also presented.
We then make the extension to services by applying these principles to understand the innovations of a large international reinsurer. This company has resegmented its market to identify unfulfilled needs and growth opportunities. It also defined new service platforms, comprising operational activity areas that closely follow the value chain of how it wished to provide new reinsurance solutions to its customers. This reinsurer also had to organize differently to facilitate the development and deployment of the capabilities required for its new services. The analogies between these service innovations and those platform innovations of manufacturers are both clear and striking.
We conclude by considering the difficulties faced by firms seeking to transition from a single product, nonplatform focused approach to new product development to the platform-centric ones described here.     

Learning Capability,Technological Parity,and Innovation Mode Use*

The purpose of this research was to examine whether a firm's learning capability interacts with industry technological parity to predict innovation mode use. Learning capability is conceptualized in the current research as a firm's ability to develop or acquire the new knowledge‐based resources and skills needed to offer new products. Industry technological parity is conceptualized as the extent to which similarity and equality exist among the technological competencies of the firms in an industry. Three generic modes of innovation are considered: internal, cooperative, and external innovation. These modes reflect the development of new products based solely on internal resources, the collaborative development of new products (i.e., with one or more development partners), and the acquisition of fully developed products from external sources, respectively. The premises of this research are that (1) technological parity can create incentives or disincentives for innovating in a particular mode, depending upon the value of external innovative resources relative to the value of internal innovative resources and (2) firms will choose innovation modes that reflect a combination of their abilities and incentives to innovate alone, with others, or through others. Survey research and secondary sources were used to collect data from 119 high‐technology firms. Results indicate that firms exhibit greater use of internal and external innovation when high levels of industry technological parity are matched by high levels of firm learning capability. By contrast, a negative relationship between learning capability and industry technological parity is associated with greater use of the cooperative mode of innovation. Thus, a single, common internal capability—learning capability—interacts with the level of technological parity in the environment to significantly predict three distinct innovation modes—modes that are not inherently dependent upon one another. As such, a firm's internal ability to innovate, as reflected in learning capability, has relevance well beyond that firm's likely internal innovation output. It also predicts the firm's likely use of cooperative and external innovation when considered in light of the level of industry technological parity. A practical implication of these findings is that companies with modest learning capabilities are not inherently precluded from innovating. Rather, they can innovate through modes for which conditions in their current environments do not constitute significant obstacles to innovation output. In particular, modest learning capabilities are associated with higher innovative output in the internal, cooperative, and external modes when industry technological parity levels are low, high, and low, respectively. Conversely, strong learning capabilities tend to be associated with higher innovative output in the internal, cooperative, and external modes when industry technological parity levels are high, low, and high, respectively.     

How Canon and Sony Drive Product Innovation Through Networking and Application-Focused R&D

To ensure the ongoing vitality of a company's product offerings, R&D professionals must play a daunting array of roles. The already rapid, yet still accelerating, pace of technological change may lead some companies to devote more resources to intensive internal research efforts. However, the shift toward global competition demands a more market-oriented focus from R&D; clear understanding of current and potential markets must drive R&D efforts. And efficient, cost-effective manufacturing of new products requires an R&D organization that understands and interacts effectively with the production department. How does a company create an environment in which its R&D organization comprises market-savvy, production-friendly experts in diverse technologies? With case studies of R&D efforts at Canon and Sony, Sigvald Harryson identifies and illustrates the key mechanisms that these companies use to foster product innovation. His examples show how Canon and Sony use a combination of external and internal networking mechanisms to identify and acquire key technologies and related skills, gain market knowledge, improve the results of internal R&D efforts, and ensure the successful transfer of these results to efficient production processes. He identifies four key mechanisms underlying successful product innovation at Canon and Sony: strategic training and job rotation for engineers, application-driven R&D, direct transfer of development teams from R&D to production, and extensive networking with external centers of excellence and key suppliers. At Canon, the initial training program for all researchers and engineers begins with three months of work on a production line. Sony's new researchers and development engineers spend one month in production. Both companies also give their new R&D professionals three months of training in sales and marketing. The emphasis on market-driven research at both companies means that researchers have identified some commercial application for almost every initial research proposal that gains approval. Neither company treats research as a long-term assignment; almost all engineers at both companies eventually move from the labs to production. And rather than viewing this job rotation strategy as a drain on the technological expertise in their labs, both companies rely on strong external networks with key suppliers and university-based researchers as important sources for acquiring new technologies and the competencies needed to support them.     

Development of Novel Products Through Intraorganizational and Interorganizational Networks

The pendulum appears to be swinging away from the merger mania of the 1980s, with many leaner-and meaner organizations refocusing on their core competencies. However, these more focused organizations often lack the breadth of skills and expertise necessary for developing products and services which cut across traditional technological and marketing boundaries. Complex product systems such as those under development in the home automation industry include elements from such disparate sectors as consumer electronics, telecommunications, construction, and energy. A narrow focus may prevent the novel forms of innovation necessary for successful development of such products. Using the home automation industry as an example, Joe Tidd examines the challenges involved in the development of complex product systems. When products and services cut across traditional marketing and technological boundaries, radical innovation is difficult because different firms and industries are typically responsible for developing the various subsystems and components. Successful development efforts may require novel forms of innovation–for example, architectural innovation and technology fusion. Architectural innovation involves changes in the way the components of a product are linked together, but leaves the core design concepts untouched. Technology fusion creates new products and market opportunities through the blending of diverse technologies from various fields. Two organizational factors affect a firm's ability to develop and commercialize new products based on novel forms of innovation: the internal organization of the firm, and the firm's links with other organizations, including suppliers, customers, and networks of collaborating organizations. Within a firm, the development of complex product systems is likely to require managing across traditional product-division boundaries. The breadth of competencies required may necessitate strong interfirm linkages. Comparing organizational approaches and the networks of alliances for home automation in the United States, Europe, and Japan, it appears that European firms tend to be more narrowly focused then American and Japanese firms. A rigid focus on core competencies may cause these European firms to overlook the potential for new products. Because various technologies and industries are involved, open networks are more effective than closed networks or alliances. European and American firms tend to favor closed strategic alliances, while Japanese firms typically participate in open networks and overlapping consortia. This approach gives Japanese firms an edge in the home automation industry.     

The phoneless in the broadband age: A pilot study in Massachusetts

Questions about universal service continue to evolve as information and communication technology advances, bringing new platforms, services, and business models. Concerns about exclusion remain, particularly in times of transition to new technologies and platforms. While the universal service literature is rich in econometric studies that indicate the drivers of household telephone penetration, without qualitative data directly from those households that experience phonelessness, we cannot understand the causes well enough to design effective policy. This research explores why people are phoneless in the current environment of increased platform and business model choices. Particular focus is placed on understanding the relationship between new technology, platforms and business models and phonelessness. Data is obtained from surveys completed by approximately 100 individuals in Massachusetts who are currently without any voice connection, either landline or mobile, or have been sometime in the past ten years. The survey includes questions about different platforms and communication services in order to learn how they have led to phonelessness. The results of the pilot study show that the vast majority of phoneless households do not choose to be phoneless. The study also shows that the most frequent causes of phonelessness in this population are unemployment and unpredictable bills. Many instances of unpredictable bills leading to phonelessness occur with wireless service or bundled services but are the result of business models for service provision rather than the platforms themselves. Prepaid wireless service is a market-based solution that helps households prevent phonelessness by reducing unpredictability. Universal service policy for voice and broadband can better reduce exclusion with greater attention to business models and practices versus technologies and platforms, and increased emphasis on prepaid service to reduce unpredictability.     

Platform competition with complementary products

We characterize the pricing structure in a model of platform competition in which two firms offer horizontally differentiated platforms and two sets of complementors offer products that are exclusive to each platform, respectively. We highlight the presence of indirect network effects: platforms and complementors benefit from the quality and number of firms in their group and suffer from the quality and number of firms in the rival’s group through their effects on prices and market share. We then determine the incentives of platforms to subsidize the independent complementors in an equilibrium. We further analyze the incentives of each platform to form a strategic alliance with complementors through contractual exclusivity or technological compatibility, or to integrate with the complementors. Finally, we discuss the welfare consequences of these strategies.     

The role of intermediaries in cross‐industry innovation processes

In this article, we investigate the role intermediaries play in the cross‐industry innovation process. Intermediaries are external institutions that support companies in their innovative activities. They are frequently used to bridge gaps between different industries. Our research focuses on the question of which capabilities an intermediary should have in order to achieve success in initiating a cross‐industry innovation. Our empirical base consists of a survey of 107 European manufacturing companies and an analysis of six collaborative cross‐industry innovation projects. The company survey is used to identify the capabilities an intermediary should have during each of the three phases of the innovation process. The cross‐industry projects, each of which involves a Swiss or a German industrial company and an intermediary, provide us with analyzable data. We conclude our study by identifying three types of intermediary: the innovation broadener, the innovation leverager, and the innovation multiplier.     

Complementors as connectors: managing open innovation around digital product platforms

In the digital age, open innovation is increasingly organized around platform ecosystems. This paper investigates how firms can coordinate open innovation as a platform strategy for the development of complementary products by independent third parties. We draw on a qualitative case study of Philips Hue – a connected lighting platform for consumers with its variety of complementary products. We identify three increasingly complex ways in which independent complements connect to a focal platform. Our findings show that managing these connections requires a hybrid open innovation approach that combines arm’s length coordination, with a large number of complementors through open interfaces, and intensive bilateral collaboration, with a selected number of partners. Our findings demonstrate that complex interconnections across digital platforms and products lead to the management challenge of navigating an ‘ecology of platforms’, which warrants future research.     

The Interplay of Customer and Product Innovation Dynamics: An Exploratory Study

The challenges of successfully developing radical or really new products have received considerable attention from a variety of marketing, strategic, and organizational perspectives. Previous research has stressed the importance of a market‐driven customer orientation, the resolution of market and technological uncertainty, and organizational processes such as cross‐functional teams and organizational learning. However, several fundamental issues have not been addressed. From a customer's perspective, a more innovative product tends to have uncertain benefits and requires customers to learn new behaviors. Customer preferences can, therefore, change as product experience and learning increase. From a firm's perspective, it is unclear how to be customer‐oriented under such dynamic preferences, and product strategies using evolving technologies will tend to interact with how customers learn about an innovation. This research focuses on identifying unresolved issues about these customer and product innovation dynamics. A conceptual framework and series of propositions are presented that relate both changing technology and customer learning to a firm's strategic decisions in developing and launching really new products. The framework is based on in‐depth interviews with high‐tech product managers across several sectors, focusing on the business‐to‐business context. The propositions resulting from the framework highlight the need to consider relevant customer dynamics as integral to a firm's product innovation process. Successful innovation strategies and future research challenges are discussed, and applications to better understanding customer needs and theories of disruptive innovation are examined. Several key insights for innovation success hinge on a broad, downstream orientation to customer needs and product innovation dynamics. To be effective innovators, firms must know their customers' customers and competitors as well as or better than their immediate customers do. Market research must extend downstream for a comprehensive understanding of customer needs dynamics. In the context of disruptive innovation, new dimensions of customer needs may become more valuable based on perceived downstream customer trends. Firms may also innovate on secondary needs because mainstream customers do not always give firms the design freedom to radically innovate on primary features. Understanding customer commitments and how they develop under evolving needs can help firms focus resources on innovative efforts more likely to be accepted by customers.     

Strategy,human capital investments,business‐domain capabilities,and performance: a study in the global software services industry

Research summary : In knowledge‐based industries, continuous human capital investments are essential for firms to enhance capabilities and sustain competitive advantage. However, such investments present a dilemma for firms, because human resources are mobile. Using detailed project‐level operational, financial, and human capital data from a leading multinational firm in the global IT services industry, this study finds that deliberate investments in improving general human capital can help firms develop superior capabilities and maintain high profits. This paper identifies two types of capabilities essential for success in this industry—technological and business‐domain capabilities—and provides empirical evidence justifying such investments. Theoretical and practical implications of capability‐seeking general human capital investments are discussed. Managerial summary : The primary managerial implication of this research is that capability‐seeking investments in developing general human capital through strategic learning (training and internal certifications) can enhance firm performance. Although investing in general human capital is risky, the firm considered this a strategic necessity in order to thrive in the fast paced IT services industry. By leveraging general technological skills in combination with business‐domain knowledge to address customer's business problems firms can earn and sustain higher profits. Our study also demonstrates how a developing‐country firm responded to strong competitive challenge from global rivals possessing superior capabilities by upgrading the capabilities of its employees through internal development. In doing so the firm was able to narrow the capability gap vis‐à‐vis its foreign peers and expand its business globally. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Exploring the Contributions of Involving Ordinary Users in Ideation of Technology‐Based Services*

Lead users have long been acknowledged as important contributors to the market success of innovative products and services. The ability of lead users to be such effective innovators has been ascribed to a combination of adequate technological expertise and superior knowledge of the user domain so‐called use experience. Drawing on the apparent success of lead users in innovation, many companies are now attempting to involve other types of users, namely, ordinary users, for ideation at the fuzzy front end (FFE) of new product and service development. However, ordinary users do not usually possess the technological knowledge of lead users, and the existing literature provides little guidance on how to manage such user involvement or its expected contributions. The purpose of the present study is, therefore, to contribute to scholarly knowledge regarding the benefits and management of user involvement during the ideation phase of innovation in technology‐based services. More specifically, the study investigates the contribution made in this respect by “ordinary” users, as opposed to professional developers. The research questions that are addressed are as follows: (1) What contributions do ordinary users make when involved in the FFE for ideation of new technology‐based services; and (2) how is the contribution of the users affected by their knowledge of the underlying technology? The study addresses these questions through a literature review and conceptual analysis of the involvement of users in innovation in mobile telephony, followed by an empirical study using a quasi‐experimental design in which the independent variable is the users' technological knowledge of the underlying mobile telephone system and the dependent variable is the quality of the created idea‐proposals from an innovation perspective. Various scenarios involving guided users, pioneering users, and professionals are investigated. The study finds that the users' knowledge of the underlying technology has an effect on their propensity to contribute with incremental or radical new ideas. The ideas from guided users tend to be more incremental whereas the pioneering users' ideas are more radical. Contrary to the users in the guided user scenarios, the users in the pioneering user scenarios have a propensity to produce ideas that challenge the prevailing dominant logic of the company; these ideas can be used to assist the company to think in new trajectories. The paper proposes that ordinary users should not be expected to contribute ideas that can be directly put into the new product development process; rather, ordinary user involvement should be regarded as a process whereby a company learns about users' needs and is inspired to innovate. The paper concludes that user involvement can actually be a stimulus for review of a company's business strategy.     

The Impact of Product Portfolio Strategy on Financial Performance: The Roles of Product Development and Market Entry Decisions

Innovation is one of the most important issues facing business today. The major difficulty in managing innovation is that managers must do so against a constantly shifting backdrop as technologies, competitors, and markets constantly evolve. Managers determine the product portfolio through key decisions about product development and market entry. Key strategic questions are what portfolio strategies provide the greatest reward. The purpose of this study is to understand the relative financial values of each component of a product portfolio. Specifically, the paper examines the short‐term and long‐term financial impacts of product development strategy and market entry strategy. These strategies reflect two critical tensions that must be balanced in product portfolio decision making and essentially determine a firm's product portfolio. In doing so, the paper also investigates how a firm's capabilities drive each component of a product portfolio. From the empirical analyses in the context of the biomedical device industry, the paper found important insights regarding product portfolio strategies. First, a large product portfolio helps a firm's financial performance. In particular, the pioneering new products have strongest impacts on short‐term performances, and nonpioneering mature products do not provide significant contribution. Second, the results indicate a persistent first‐mover advantage. The first‐to‐market new products yield not only an immediate effect, but also persistent long‐term effects, suggesting that it is important to be first in the market even though there may be short‐term losses. Third, the results suggest the need to balance between “mature” and “new” products. Also, firms need to balance “first‐to‐market” and “late‐entered” products. Because a new or pioneering product requires more resource, it may hurt other products in the portfolio. Thus, without support from mature or follower products, new products and pioneering products alone may not increase firm sales or profit. Fourth, from a long‐term perspective, the paper found that the financial market only rewards a firm's overall capability to deliver new products first in the marketplace. Thus, short‐term performance is mainly driven by product‐level innovativeness, whereas firm‐level innovativeness enhances forward‐looking long‐term performance. Fifth, the paper also found that pioneering new products are driven by integrating both primary and complementary technological capabilities. And nonpioneering new products are mainly driven by the capabilities in primary technology domain. These results provide important insight into the relative value and timing of return on investment in radical versus incremental innovation and alternative market entry strategies. By understanding the performance trade‐offs of these different factors in the short and long term, one can develop better guidelines for optimizing innovation strategies, and their dependence on both external and internal environmental conditions.     

Product Development Strategy and Organizational Learning: A Tale of Two PC Makers

The personal computer (PC) marketplace in the US presents a dizzying array of component suppliers and products. No single firm dominates the industry with a complete package of hardware and software components. Although one company's operating systems and general-purpose applications are installed on most PCs in the US, the other system components—processors, memory, storage devices, display adapters, monitors, specialized applications, and so on—come from any number of sources. David T. Methe, Ryoko Toyama, and Junichiro Miyabe point out that the PC industry in Japan also exhibits this decentralized nature. However, they also note that despite the decentralized network structure of the Japanese PC industry, one company—NEC—was able to achieve a dominant market share. To provide insight into the key issues involved in the management of complex technology, they contrast NEC's strategic approach to product development and organizational learning with the approaches taken by Fujitsu—the firm that placed a distant second in this market. Despite matching NEC in terms of technological capabilities, financial resources, and managerial talent, Fujitsu never managed to threaten NEC's dominance of the PC market in Japan. Fujitsu continually emphasized technological leadership, even at the expense of protecting its installed base. Poor coordination of resources and product development efforts resulted in incompatibilities among Fujitsu's various products, and the company failed to foster close relationships with suppliers of such key technologies as software and peripherals. NEC's PCs did not enjoy the advantages of first-to-market status or technological leadership. Instead, NEC achieved market dominance by finding the combination of product technologies that met the needs of the greatest number of consumers. Throughout almost 20 years of competition in the PC industry, NEC successfully maintained consistency and backward compatibility across its product lines. NEC also recognized the importance of third-party software developers, and carefully cultivated relations with these firms as a source of competitive advantage. In other words, NEC struck the right balance between three key factors: technological innovation, motivation of third-party developers of software and peripherals, and service to its installed base of customers.     

Does an extrinsic reward for R&D employees enhance innovation outcomes? Evidence from a Japanese innovation survey

This paper examines the effects of extrinsic rewards for R&D employees on innovation outcomes based on evidence from a Japanese innovation survey. Theoretical and empirical studies present conflicting findings regarding the relationship between extrinsic rewards and innovation outcomes. This article seeks to shed light on the relationship between rewards and outcomes, as represented by the development of new products and services and their technological superiority and profitability. The analysis produced the following findings. First, companies that have introduced an evaluation system based on R&D performance are more likely to develop new products and services. The introduction of the evaluation system brings about success in product innovation with greater technological superiority. Second, monetary compensation has a negative impact on the development of new products and services and technological superiority. Third, these effects vary with the company size. Small- and medium-sized companies achieve higher technological superiority with performance-based evaluations. Large companies tend to adversely impact the development of new products and services and their technological superiority with monetary compensation.     

Managing Knowledge for Innovation: The Case of Business‐to‐Business Services*

The present study builds a typology of organizational knowledge in business services and empirically examines the effects of knowledge on innovation performance. It is suggested that firms differ with respect to their knowledge creation approaches and that these approaches have implications for firms' innovation activities. A conceptual framework of knowledge assets with degrees of tacitness and collectiveness as the principal axes is used to ground the empirical analysis. The organizational knowledge framework is empirically operationalized using survey data from 167 business service firms and supplementary case study evidence from 16 other firms. It is found that business service improvements and new service introductions are significantly associated with collectively held knowledge, such as codified service solutions or team‐based competences and procedures. In contrast, relying solely on tacit knowledge held by individuals may hamper innovation. The results also suggest that tacit collective knowledge is more closely associated with new service introductions, whereas explicit collective knowledge is associated with service improvements. Tacit collective knowledge is thus conducive. A managerial implication is that new service introductions necessitate team competences and routines, whereas incremental service improvements are more likely if procedures are in place to codify services into explicit solutions or technologies. Thus, the knowledge management approach should depend on the strategic orientation of the service firm toward continuous improvement of existing services or development of completely new services.     

Antecedents of open innovation at the project level: empirical analysis of Korean firms

The concept of open innovation has recently gained wide academic attention, as it seems to have significant impact for company performance. Most empirical investigations about this emerging concept have been case studies of successful early adopters of open innovation, and their analyses have largely been at the company level. Although case studies at that level provide meaningful implications, the new phenomena merit a more in‐depth examination: that is, we need to collect and analyze data on multiple companies to explore more systematic findings about open innovations across companies. Moreover, analyses may need to go down to the individual project rather than the whole company level because innovation activities are often conducted as part of research and development (R&D) projects. To meet these needs, this study examines companies' open innovation efforts at the level of the individual R&D project. Specifically, the present study focuses on project‐level openness to better understand the mechanisms of open innovation. It explores systematic relationships between various antecedent factors and the degree of openness. Project‐level openness could be affected by team and task characteristics, such as team size, learning distance, strategic importance, technology and market uncertainty, and relevance to the main business. Relevant data collected from 303 companies in Korea were used to identify the antecedents that affect inbound and outbound openness. The research findings are expected to help provide a concrete theoretical framework suited for more generalized application and further practical development of open innovation strategy.     

Building Dynamic Capabilities in New Product Development through Intertemporal Integration

Although successful development of a given product may help explain the current success of a firm, creating longer‐term competitive advantage demands significantly more attention to developing and nurturing dynamic integration capabilities. These capabilities propel product development activities in ways that build on and develop technological and marketing capabilities for future product development efforts and create platforms for future product development. In this article, we develop a conceptual model of a dynamic integration process in product development, which we call intertemporal integration (ITI). In its most general form ITI is defined as the process of collecting, interpreting, and internalizing technological and marketing capabilities from past new product development projects and incorporating that knowledge in a systematic and purposeful manner into the development of future new products. Research propositions outlining the relationship of ITI to performance are presented. We provide specific examples of managerial mechanisms to be used in implementing ITI. We conclude with implications for research and practice. Effective management of ITI can increase new product development success and long‐term competitive advantage. This implies that management needs to engage in activities that gather and transform information and knowledge from prior development projects so that it can be used in future development projects. Project audits, design databases in computer‐aided design (CAD) systems, engineering notebooks, collections of test and experimental results, market research and test market results, project management databases, and other activities will all be important in the acquisition of knowledge from prior new product development (NPD) projects. Managers also should initiate the creation and maintenance of databases of technical and marketing information from prior projects, job performance reports, seminars and workshops related to technological issues and advances, and publication of technical journals to assist in the process of knowledge acquisition. Similarly, techniques such as assigning project managers from earlier development projects, reusing key components and technologies, and developing a company‐wide methodology for managing projects can be used to boost the application and use of knowledge.