Outcome attributability in performance-based contracting: Roles and activities of the buying organization

In buyer-supplier exchanges that feature services or service elements, performance-based contracts have gained increasing popularity. One key problem in such contracts is the possible lack of attributability of performance outcomes to supplier inputs and efforts; suppliers are reluctant to be penalized for performance shortfalls that they are not responsible for. Prior literature has indeed argued that in case of low performance attributability (or: high outcome uncertainty), performance-based contracts are less effective, but has studied this uncertainty mainly in relation to external factors. Attributability of performance has not been studied in terms of the responsibilities of the supplier and the buying organization in service design and production. In addition, there has been little literature on how buyer activities during contract execution can help address some of the problems. This paper aims to fill this gap by developing a conceptual model on how outcome attributability relates to the roles of the buying organization in the service exchange, and how contract management activities can attenuate the effects of (low) outcome attributability on the level of supplier inputs and effort, which directly affects actual performance. We engage in theory elaboration to formulate a conceptual model based on two cases of performance-based contracting of cleaning services.     

The effects of geographic and network ties on exploitative and exploratory product innovation

Addressing the inconsistent findings in the literature, we first distinguish the type of innovation and study the relationship of industrial clusters with exploitative and exploratory product innovation. Furthermore, we study how focal cluster firms' network ties with their suppliers and buyers in their clusters might moderate these relationships. Our empirical study showed that, while cluster membership enhanced firms' exploitative product innovation, it hindered their exploratory product innovation. Moreover, the results showed that focal cluster firms' network ties with their suppliers and buyers in their clusters strengthened the effects of cluster membership on exploitative product innovation. They also showed that focal cluster firms' network ties with their buyers but not suppliers in their clusters reduced the negative effects of cluster membership on exploratory product innovation. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Co‐creation in Radical Service Innovation: A Systematic Analysis of Microlevel Processes

This empirical paper presents the results of a detailed case‐study investigation of co‐creation in radical service innovation. The rationale for the paper is that detailed interventions must be tracked to offer a realistic account of how co‐creation occurs. This provides a strong empirical contribution to the emerging body of scholars developing the co‐creation paradigm, predominantly characterized by conceptual advances in service‐dominant logic. Our focus is on radical service innovation, which is disruptive in the sector. The overall aim of the paper is to unravel the nature of microlevel processes of co‐creation in radical service innovation. The study adopts sequential analysis to examine co‐creation. Patterns of sequences of actions and interactions associated with 40 incremental developments, involving multiple actors, are investigated. These co‐created innovative developments underpin the emergence of a radical telematics‐based motor insurance service. The findings suggest that the co‐creation path is not simple or uni‐faceted, and the paper unravels the nature of complex patterns of activities and interactions, Our in‐depth systematic analysis illuminates a combination approach with two main patterns of sequences: one dominated by ad‐hoc and enduring independent innovation activities by network actors and one dominated by lead‐firm innovation and interaction activity. The findings advance knowledge of the way co‐creation occurs in radical service innovation. The study results suggest that managerial attention be placed to, first, finding ways to induce independent innovative behavior from network partners and, second, to the development of interaction mechanisms to foster sharing and visualization of such innovation advances.     

What drives customer Re-engagement? The foundational role of the sales-service interplay in episodic value co-creation

As existing business-to-business value co-creation (VCC) contracts approach their planned expiration, customers evaluate incumbent suppliers when forming their decisions to re-engage or defect. During this late stage of VCC, supplier sales and service personnel perform unique activities to support one another and foster VCC re-engagement. To investigate this sales-service interplay, the authors employ an exploratory inquiry consisting of 115 depth interviews across 63 customer accounts. Interviews were conducted with customers following the decision to re-engage or defect from an incumbent supplier. Findings suggest that sales' efforts to renew the VCC contract depend on tactical insights provided by service. Through their involvement with customers, service holds a tactical perspective that can extract micro-level customer insights. Findings also suggest that service's ability to influence supplier-specific knowledge stores within the customer organization depends on macro-level strategic customer directives that may be shared by sales. Further, service's activation of such knowledge stores moderates the relationship between sales' RFP response and the customer's VCC re-engagement decision. The results have implications for the industrial sales and service fields, since the integration of the sales and service teams is critical for garnering intrafirm knowledge flows that drive recurrent VCC within collaborative customer-supplier relationships.     

Marketing of competence-based solutions to buyers in exploratory relationships: Perspective of OEM suppliers

In face of mounting challenges from delocalized production, commoditized products, and escalated demand from professional buyers, providing solutions rather than selling products has been put forward in the normative literature as a promising business model for creating high-value differentiated offerings. Nonetheless, empirical survey research into the processes whereby traditional suppliers of “basic products, spare parts and services” migrate towards marketing of “integrated solutions” is still sparse. Grounded in a competence-based marketing view, the current research addressed the research problem of how OEM suppliers upgrade their value offerings via competence-based solutions. The research model was tested by a sample of 403 contract/OEM manufacturers located in China. This resultant findings revealed the processes undertaken by OEM suppliers during the development of competence-based solutions, found out the internal coordination and innovation capabilities required to support competence-based solutions, and uncovered the external communication/disclosure of competence needed to strengthen the link between competence-based solutions and upgraded relationship value.     

零售商主导的创新成本共担期权契约研究

本文在不确定市场环境中,考虑期权契约在零售商主导的单周期二级供应链成员间创新投入的协调,分别讨论在是否允许期权信用违约情形下,要实现供应链协调各决策主体的决策模型。研究发现单纯的期权契约难以实现供应商单方面创新投入行为,为此引入创新投入成本共担机制,对原契约加以修正则可以实现供应链协调。研究表明在创新成本共担下的期权契约机制可以满足零售商主导的供应链协调,能够提高供应商和零售商的期望收益,实现帕累托改进。     

Control of intellectual assets in client relationships: implications for innovation

This empirical study of business‐to‐business service firms examines the determinants and effects of control rights to intellectual assets in a property rights theoretic framework. Regression analyses using survey data suggest that service suppliers that retain control over their intellectual output are more innovative. In long‐term relationships, service firms' clients may thus be better off balancing their need to control outsourced activities with the suppliers' incentives to invest in learning and innovation. Additionally, and aligned with property rights theoretic predictions, service suppliers' bargaining power and their indispensability in service projects are positively associated with their ability to retain control rights. In contrast, innovation capabilities are not very significant in determining control rights allocation between service suppliers and their clients. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Priorities when selecting business partners for service innovation: The contingency role of product innovation

Firms increasingly engage in business-to-business cooperation to develop relevant innovations. Scholars have shown that firms can improve service innovation either by cooperating with suppliers or by cooperating with competitors. However, there is a dearth of research examining the relative importance of cooperating with suppliers and competitors to improve service innovation, and how this relative importance depends on embracing product innovation. Based on a cross-industry sample of 16,062 Spanish firms, this article addresses these research gaps, finding that firms can benefit from cooperating with both suppliers and competitors to boost service innovation, without prioritizing either. However, this article also shows that, if firms embrace product innovation, they should prioritize cooperating with competitors to boost service innovation.     

Effects of Supplier and Customer Integration on Product Innovation and Performance: Empirical Evidence in Hong Kong Manufacturers

While the beneficial impacts of supplier and customer integration are generally acknowledged, very few empirical research studies have examined how an organization can achieve better product performance through product innovation enhanced by such integration. This paper thus examines the impact of key supplier and customer integration processes (i.e., information sharing and product codevelopment with supplier and customer, respectively) on product innovation as well as their impact on product performance. It contributes to existing literature by asking how such integration activities affect product innovation and performance in both direct and indirect ways. After surveying 251 manufacturers in Hong Kong, this study tested the relationships among information sharing, product codevelopment, product innovativeness, and performance with three control variables (i.e., company size, type of industry, and market certainty). Structural equation modeling with correlation and t‐tests was used to test the hypothesized research model. The findings indicate a direct, positive relationship between supplier and customer integration and product performance. In particular, this study verifies that sharing information with suppliers and product codevelopment with customers directly improves product performance. In addition, this study empirically examines the indirect effects of supplier and customer integration processes on product performance, mediated by innovation. This has seldom been attempted in previous research. The empirical findings show that product codevelopment with suppliers improves performance, mediated by innovation. However, the sampled firms cannot improve their product innovation by sharing information with their current customers and suppliers as well as codeveloping new products with the customers. If the adoption of supplier and customer integration is not cost free, the findings of this study may suggest firms work on particular supplier and customer integration processes (i.e., product codevelopment with suppliers) to improve their product innovation. The study also suggests that companies codevelop new products only with new customers and lead users instead of current ones for product innovation. For managers, this study has demonstrated that both information sharing and product codevelopment affect performance directly and indirectly. Managers should put more emphasis on these key processes, especially when linked with product innovation. Managers should consider involving their suppliers and customers in the early stages of design. Information sharing with suppliers is also important in product development. As suggested by this study, extensive effort on supplier and customer integration should be made to directly augment current product performance and product innovation at the same time.     

Variety in the innovation process of UK research and development service firms

Research and development service firms (RDSFs) are a particular type of technology-based knowledge-intensive business services (KIBS). RDSFs provide clients with R&D services on a contract basis, and operate as knowledge intermediaries linking research and market. They are innovative in their own right, as well as supporting innovation efforts by their clients; they rely on their own innovation efforts to be competitive and to develop new value propositions for their clients. The present paper explores the innovation process in RDSFs, drawing on semi-structured interviews with founders and senior managers of 32 companies in the United Kingdom. Our findings suggest that RDSFs vary considerably in terms of their primary innovation drivers (i.e. whether they are mainly driven by market demands or by technological opportunities) and the outcomes they pursue (i.e. whether their outputs are mainly services to clients or a mixture of services and products and/or intellectual property). Four major orientations of RDSFs were identified: (i) technology-based innovation exploiters; (ii) science-focused innovation explorers; (iii) client-driven innovation integrators; and (iv) open innovation translators. This variety among firms normally belonging to the same, small subsector of KIBS, suggests the need for caution in generalising about behaviour in terms of such statistical groupings.     

Open Service Innovation: The Role of Intermediary Capabilities

This study examines how intermediaries, in general, and those with digital service platforms specifically, engage with clients to help them innovate their services within their service ecosystem. Based on an embedded, longitudinal case study, the results reveal the cumulative development and deployment of technological, marketing, and co‐creation capabilities by intermediaries, and how these capabilities allow intermediaries to engage with clients, so as to enable clients’ open service innovation despite their internal challenges. In turn, this article extends theory on service innovation by clarifying the role and function of intermediaries in service ecosystems in enabling clients to leverage open service innovation. Second, this study contributes to resource‐based scholarship by clarifying how these three sets of capabilities and their micro‐foundations relate to each other. Despite the obvious importance of technological capabilities, online intermediaries are more than just “virtual” service platform providers. The intermediary’s technological and marketing capabilities assist clients in dealing with project‐related and organizational challenges to open service innovation. Acting as a higher‐order capability, co‐creation capabilities—through shaping marketing and technological capabilities over time and also through conditioning their deployment—improve the proficiency of these capabilities. The findings advance insights on the agential role of the intermediary’s co‐creation capabilities, purposefully developed and deployed to foster client engagement, and thus support service organizations in leveraging open service innovation.     

Strategic dalliances as an enabler for discontinuous innovation in slow clockspeed industries: evidence from the oil and gas industry

The concept of ‘strategic dalliances’– defined as non‐committal relationships that companies can ‘dip in and out of,’ or dally with, while simultaneously maintaining longer‐term strategic partnerships with other firms and suppliers – has emerged as a promising strategy by which organizations can create discontinuous innovations. But does this approach work equally well for every sector? Moreover, how can these links be effectively used to foster the process of discontinuous innovation? Toward assessing the role that industry clockspeed plays in the success or failure of strategic dalliances, we provide case study evidence from Twister BV, an upstream oil and gas technology provider, and show that strategic dalliances can be an enabler for the discontinuous innovation process in slow clockspeed industries. Implications for research and practice are discussed, and conclusions from our findings are drawn.     

Do resource differences between manufacturers and suppliers help or hinder product innovation of manufacturers? The moderating role of trust and contracts

It is a common practice of manufacturers to involve suppliers in new product development (NPD). Extant literature indicates that supplier integration has mixed effects on manufacturers' NPD and the contradicting findings result from either the external contingent factors or the tactical integration practices. We argue instead that the mixed effects are rooted in resource differences between manufacturers and suppliers. Further, we examine the functions of trust and contracts as the resource integration and coordination mechanisms to manage the effects of resource differences on product innovation of manufacturers. Based on a survey among 189 manufacturing firms, our research shows that resource differences follow an inverted U-shaped effect on product innovation of manufacturers and that trust strengthens while contract complexity attenuates the curvilinear relationship. As such, our research extends the existing body of literature to account for the divergent outcomes of supplier integration from the perspective of resource differences. Moreover, it demonstrates the double-edged effects of trust and contracts as devices of resource integration and coordination. Our research offers useful research and managerial implications.     

Value innovation,deliberate learning mechanisms and information from supply chain partners

Although marketing scholars have emphasized both the importance of internal learning mechanisms and of external learning through supply chain partners research findings on how these factors influence each other are merely lacking. Analyzing survey data of 182 industrial firms, we examine how information provision by upstream and downstream supply chain parties moderates the effect of internal deliberate learning mechanisms on value innovation ability. Results of the PLS analysis suggest that internal learning mechanisms and external information exchange do not always work symbiotically. Our findings provide interesting results for (the management of) innovation processes and supply chain relations.     

The Role of Suppliers in Market Intelligence Gathering for Radical and Incremental Innovation*

Drawing on transaction cost economics theory, this study addresses the following research questions: (1) Does supplier involvement in market intelligence gathering activities have a greater impact on innovation success in predesign or commercialization activities? and (2) Does supplier involvement in market intelligence gathering activities have a greater impact on success in radical or incremental product innovation? Hypotheses are tested using both subjective and objective measures of success from a study of 205 incremental and 110 radical new product development projects. Results from the estimation of a two‐group path model suggest that this theoretical framework is useful in providing guidance as to when product developers should emphasize the gathering of market intelligence through suppliers. Consistent with conventional wisdom, the findings suggest that supplier involvement in market intelligence gathering activities are positively related to success in incremental innovations across predesign and commercialization activities. However, supplier involvement in market intelligence gathering activities is found to have no significant impact on market share and is negatively associated with perceived product performance in radical innovations in predesign tasks. Also, while there was no significant difference in market share for supplier involvement in market intelligence gathering activities between radical and incremental innovation in commercialization activities, supplier involvement in these activities did have a greater impact on perceived product performance in radical innovation than it did in incremental innovation. Although current practice suggests that teams allocate fewer resources to the gathering of market intelligence through their suppliers during predesign activities in incremental innovation projects compared with radical innovation projects, the findings in this study suggest that they should do the opposite. Shifting resources allocated for engaging suppliers in market information gathering activities in predesign activities from radical innovation projects to incremental innovation projects could increase the return on these investments. Alternatively, these resources currently allocated to the gathering of market intelligence through suppliers in predesign activities of radical innovation projects could also provide greater benefits if allocated to commercialization activities of radical innovation projects, where they have the greatest positive impact.     

Managerial perceptions of service-infused IORs in China & India: A discursive view of value co-creation

This paper explores the managerial challenges facing firms seeking to build relationships with other network actors while doing business in foreign markets. By taking a critical perspective on an area of increasing importance in both manufacturing and service sectors, that of value co-creation, the paper explores how managers in different cultural contexts make sense of the notion of ‘value’ in inter-organizational B2B relationships between New Zealand service and service-infused supplier firms and buyers in China and India. From an analysis of the interview-based accounts on both sides of the buyer–seller dyad marked differences emerge regarding value-creation within managers' discourse around partnerships, collaboration and cooperation. Our findings suggest that the Indian manager's discursive use of ‘partnership’ draws on service-dominant logic in viewing this type of interaction as a means for co-creating value; they and their New Zealand suppliers are jointly involved in co-creating value within a service system, creating value-in-use. In contrast, the predominant perspective seen in the discourse of Chinese managers is the use of cooperation as a means of making transactions more cost-effective, or to fill gaps in their supply chains, resulting in the creation of transaction-based, co-production of value, which suggests a value-in-exchange orientation. In both cases, there is repeated reference to more peripheral actors whose efforts result in what we interpret as network value creation, based on their interactions with actors within the buyer–seller dyad.     

Can cooperation drive the success of suppliers in B2B crowdsourcing innovation projects? A large scale data perspective

Crowdsourcing innovation projects (CIPs), that enterprises outsource the non-core projects to outside individuals or organizations for innovation, are critical forms for business to business (B2B) innovative service collaboration. Based on value network theory, this paper investigates whether cooperation is a critical influencer of supplier performance and examines how suppliers in CIPs can achieve and maximize value capturing under the customer value dominant condition. Large-scale data is collected from >110,000 CIPs suppliers from 2010 to August 2018 on Kaggle, one of the most well-known crowdsourcing platforms. According to econometric calculation results: 1) Suppliers' predominant capabilities and resources contribute to their workforce and financial performance improvement. 2) Excessive competition intensity has a negative impact on suppliers' performance. 3) The cooperation between suppliers is extremely important for their performance. More detailed, the accumulation of cooperation experience, the increase of partners and the heterogeneity of members in the organization have positive impact on suppliers' workforce and financial performance. The results demonstrate that for suppliers in the CIPs platform, cooperative is more optimal than competitive. The cooperation is more significant when the needs of customers are gaining more and more attention. Therefore, suppliers should explore a more flexible way of cooperation to achieve value capture. Subsequently the value balance between demanders and suppliers can be achieved.     

Interfirm Innovation under Uncertainty: Empirical Evidence for Strategic Knowledge Partitioning*

This paper analyzes how uncertainty and life‐cycle effects condition the knowledge boundary between assemblers and suppliers in interfirm product development. Patents associated with automotive emission control technologies for both assemblers and suppliers are categorized as architectural or component innovations, and technology‐forcing regulations imposed by the government on the auto industry from 1970 to 1998 are used to define periods of high and low uncertainty. Results confirm that suppliers dominate component innovation whereas assemblers lead on architectural innovation. More importantly, when facing uncertainty firms adjust their knowledge boundary by increasing the knowledge overlap with their supply‐chain collaborators. Suppliers clearly expand their knowledge base relatively more into architectural knowledge during such periods. But assemblers' greater emphasis on component innovation in periods of greater uncertainty is only true as a relative deviation from an overall trend toward increasing component innovation over time. This trend results from an observed life‐cycle effect, whereby architectural innovation dominates before the emergence of a dominant design, with component innovation taking the lead afterward. Thus, for assemblers life‐cycle effects may dominate over task uncertainty in determining relative effort in component versus architectural innovation. This work extends research on strategic interfirm knowledge partitioning as well as on the information‐processing view of product development. First, it provides a large‐scale empirical justification for the claim that firms' knowledge boundaries need to extend beyond their task boundaries. Further, it implies that overlaps in knowledge domains between an assembler and suppliers are particularly important for projects involving new technologies. Second, it offers a dynamic view of knowledge partitioning, showing how architectural knowledge prevails in the early phase of the product life cycle whereas component knowledge dominates the later stages. Yet the importance of life‐cycle effects versus task uncertainty in conditioning knowledge boundaries is different for assemblers and suppliers, with the former dominating for assemblers and the latter more influential for suppliers. Finally, it supports the idea that architectural and component knowledge are critical elements in the alignment of cognitive frameworks between assemblers and suppliers and thus are key for information‐exchange effectiveness and resolution of task uncertainties in interfirm innovation.     

The Influence of Knowledge Accumulation on Buyer-Supplier Codevelopment Projects

This article investigates innovation across a supply chain and considers how knowledge accumulation as a consequence of buyer‐supplier codevelopment projects can influence the projects' specifications. The setting is the semiconductor industry, and the players are chip producers who cooperate with their suppliers to modify their manufacturing equipment used to produce new semiconductor devices. Two detailed case studies were undertaken to determine the tradeoffs encountered by the buyer and supplier when setting the parameters that govern codevelopment projects. The findings from the case studies inform a conceptual framework that outlines the net payoffs to buyers when deciding whether to “make” or “buy” their production equipment. If buyers pursue the “make” option, they then have to decide the degree to which they sponsor modifications tailored to their production processes or modifications more generally applicable across the industry. More generally applicable modifications likely would prompt suppliers to invest relatively more in follow‐on knowledge creation for upgrades and field support while leading to lower equipment costs due to economies of scale from larger production runs of the new equipment. The framework suggests that when making this sequence of decisions, an innovative buyer also weighs the importance of codevelopment for securing intellectual property rights, guaranteeing early access to new equipment enabling early product launch, and achieving high production yields quickly due to “previewing” the equipment. The conceptual framework leads to a multi‐period model that focuses on the importance of knowledge accumulation for project parameterization. As captured by the model, buyers may prefer generally applicable modifications to customized ones, because generally applicable modifications may lead to greater knowledge accumulation at the supplier. This knowledge accumulation may be either “embodied” in equipment upgrades or “unembodied” in improved field support. In addition to shaping the nature of particular codevelopment projects, knowledge accumulation also may have profound implications for long‐run industry structure. As seen in the semiconductor industry, knowledge accumulation at equipment suppliers has contributed to the rise of contract manufacturers, because these manufacturers can outfit their production facilities with equipment that embodies the accumulated knowledge. These findings suggest that for both short‐run and long‐run reasons, the dynamics of knowledge accumulation merit thorough attention when members of a supply chain cooperate during the course of new product development.