The organizational impact on R&D: Computer aids for the disabled

R&D often reflects social concerns which are represented in the organization and implementation of scientific inquiry. An analysis of R&D projects for the disabled provides a glimpse into the link between such social concerns and its consequent organizational basis.
A content analysis of 89 R&D computer-related projects between 1979 and 1983, focussing on R&D, interest areas, funding sources, research emphasis, institutional setting and prototype production, illustrates the organizational influence involved in this type of specialized R&D.
Specifically, a model is created, arguing that public funding mechanisms influence the type and direction that research takes, while factors in the form of institutional division of resources and specialization, lead to specific research concentrations. These findings add support to the argument that the organization of R&D of computer aids is influenced by societal priorities which, through a series of constraints, affects its output.     

Career orientations of R&D professionals in Korea

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

The link between managerial style and the job characteristics of R&D professionals

Despite a growing body of evidence as to the importance of linking job design to supervisory practices, almost no empirical studies have been conducted on the issue specifically for R&D professionals. The effectiveness of supervisors should differ primarily with respect to their leadership styles. Data obtained from three major types of R&D organizations in Taiwan were used to examine how leadership styles affect the job characteristics of R&D professionals with personal attributes of professionals themselves as the concomitant variables. The leadership styles were defined in terms of a two dimensional construct with the supportive dimension focusing on enhancing relationship and participatory decision making, and the directive dimension emphasizing telling and directing to get tasks accomplished. The results supported most of the hypotheses proposed in the study. In particular, the high correlation of the supportive leadership style and overall job characteristics, across the three types of organizations in the test, demonstrates the importance of incorporating the role of supervision in the R&D job design. The findings have implications for enhancing the leadership effectiveness in managing R&D professionals. Such findings are not only important for R&D managers in newly industrialized countries, but are also valuable to their counterparts in industrialized countries.     

The effects of national culture on the theory and practice of managing R&D professionals abroad

G. Hofstede's research on 'Culture's Consequences' (1980) greatly shaped the discussion of cross-cultural differences in management theory and practice during the 1980's. And yet, his 4-D Model's applicability to the management of R&D laboratories and their professionals worldwide remained in doubt due to the fact that his four dimensions of Power Distance, Uncertainty Avoidance, Individualism, and Masculinity were derived from responses of mid-level IBM employees with lower levels of formal education than those of typical R&D professionals. This paper reports on results of the first comprehensive follow-up study that (1) show Hofstede's four dimensions to be equally valid for highly educated respondents from 17 Western European countries, Turkey, and the USA, (2) describe significant similarities between the respondents' work goals and those of R&D professionals, and (3) suggest implications of cross-cultural differences along the dimensions for the theory and practice of managing R&D professionals abroad.     

Innovation and productivity in R&D: associated individual and organizational variables

The relationships of organizational variables with innovation and productivity of scientists and engineers in R&D laboratories were explored. Peer ratings of innovation (original and useful output) and productivity (quantity of output) were utilized as criteria. Information was obtained on 154 scientists/engineers in 35 work groups in three Air Force R&D laboratories, Significant relationships found between organizational variables and innovation and productivity included: rewards for innovation, communication on technical matters with other scientists/engineers within the work group, and an age-education demographic group of variables. Level of participation in goal setting and group leader's level of empathy were also consistently related to level of productivity.     

R&D 'programmes-competencies' matrix: analyzing R&D expertise within the firm

The author suggests that the systematic identification of a firm's technologies opens up the possibility of evaluating, protecting, optimizing, enriching and exploiting these technologies to the full. A firm's technologies fall into two parts: those embodied and exploited in current operations and those evolving from the collective competencies of its R&D staff. The author's aim is to evaluate and describe the firm's R&D competencies.
The identification of R&D competencies proceeds in three steps: tracing the background of the current and past programmes, constructing a programmes/competencies matrix, and deriving an expertise profile. The construction of the matrix is the key activity and requires much care in its execution, if competencies are to be properly defined and truly existing, and if it is to be exhaustive. The author sketches a procedure for constructing a matrix and discusses problems of implementation and draws attention to some of its limitations.
The author claims that such an inventory of expertise could improve the efficiency of the use of the R&D resource, identify a laboratory's strengths and weaknesses, direct R&D into hitherto neglected channels, assist individuals to identify and evaluate their own expertise, justify obtaining funding for building expertise in shortage areas. The method should be considered as a starting point to formulate appropriate strategies to gain access to technology.     

The impact of EC R&D programmes on corporate R&D practice in Europe: a knowledge-base approach

This paper examines the role of additionality in the impact of EC R&D pro-grammes on firms. It comes from a study of the Impact of the EC Framework Pro-gramme on European Industry, which was sponsored by the Support Programme for Evaluation Activities in Research (SPEAR) of the EC. The argument is that there is an interaction between ie use of additional R&D resources, the organization of the R&D process, and the exploitation of R&D results. The analysis of the R&D process takes place within a framework based on the concept of the knowledge-base of the firm. A number of case studies are discussed and conclusions are drawn as to the impact of the EC Framework Pro-gramme on European firms.     

Towards networked R&D management: the R&D approach of Sonera Corporation as an example

In this paper the authors delineate the challenges of a dynamic environment to R&D management. The authors build on most recent ideas, such as the dynamic capability view of the firm, as strategic foundation for modern R&D management. Collaboration is emphasized as a meta-capability for innovation. These ideas are merged into a 'Networked R&D Management' approach that emphasizes internal and external collaboration networks as critical for companies operating in a dynamic business environment. The approach is illustrated with ICT industry as an example. The implementation of Networked R&D Management is reflected in the illustrative case discussion of R&D management of Sonera Corporation.     

Improving R&D/Marketing relations: R&D's perspective

Abstract
Successful product innovation hinges on close R&D/marketing relationships, especially in technology-based organizations. However, there is evidence that linkage problems are common and when they are not overcome failure is the usual result.
R&D's perspective on what R&D, marketing and senior management can do to improve their relationship with marketing is presented. The recommendations are based on suggestions from R&D directors involved in new product development efforts in 83 technology-based companies. Also presented is how the need for integration has changed over time and where it is going in the future.     

International management of R&D: The Swedish Experience

This paper summarizes the results of in-depth case studies of international R&D management in four Swedish multinational corporations. The results suggest that foreign volumes and shares of R&D expenditures are rapidly increasing. Through a rapidly increasing number of foreign acquisitions, foreign R&D laboratories have been added. As part of international rationalization of production, foreign units have been given global product mandates with responsibility both for manufacturing and R&D. In maturing foreign subsidiaries, routine technical activities have often evolved into proper R&D. Tight labour market conditions for engineers in Sweden have made it increasingly necessary to exploit existing technical capacity, regardless of location.
Concurrently, companies face new pressures for international coordination and control of R&D. Coordination is required to reduce product differentiation, to facilitate technology transfer and to ensure the technical and market compatibility of products and components developed at different locations but sold as part of total systems. Drawing on the experience in the four investigated companies, the paper discusses how systems and procedures can be developed to meet the need for coordinated international R&D management.     

Controlling new product R&D projects

New products are critical to the success of most corporations. But managing the R&D projects that produce new products has proven to be a risky and tricky business. Theorists and practitioners claim that one of the major obstacles to higher new product output is the ‘tight’ control practices found in large corporations. The conventional wisdom argues that, to correct this, firms need to find ways ‘to loosen-up.’ But is that all there is to it? This article presents five findings for effectively controlling new product R&D projects. These findings emerged at the conclusion of an empirical research investigation into the formal and informal control practices that business unit managers use to control various new product R&D situations. The article concludes with several recommendations for those managers who want to control their new product R&D projects better.     

The effects of funding source and management ownership on the productivity of R&D

This study investigates the influence of the source of R&D funds and management ownership on R&D productivity. The lagged effect of the source of R&D funds on R&D output is investigated for a sample of US manufacturing firms in five industries over the 1996–99 period. Estimates based on 779 firm-years show that R&D productivity increases with the proportion of stock held by managers and directors of firms primarily in the Other Electronics industry. The estimates also show that recipients of government-sponsored R&D funds in the Chemicals industry have lower levels of output (sales) for each dollar committed to R&D. In addition, output for firms in the Chemicals industry worsens as management stockholding increases, implying an agency cost rationale for the observed difference in output. The implication is that firms with high manager-owner content are less productive with government-sponsored R&D than with company-financed R&D. The reported results suggest that potential agency costs should be incorporated in government-sponsored R&D contracts. It also suggests that the source of R&D funds should be disclosed and incorporated into the valuation of intangible assets attributable to research and development.     

R&D strategies and variable demand

This paper looks at some of the factors imposing on the resourcing of R&D in the face of fluctuating demand. R&D has various features that differentiate it from other aspects of corporate activity and consequently managerial strategies for dealing with R&D may vary substantially. The implications for R&D strategies and the acquisition of technology are considered under different demand conditions. Various alternative strategies are developed including contracting out, technology licensing and the maintenance of an in-house facility through labour hoarding. New and existing empirical estimates are used to support the arguments and explain corporate strategy in this area.     

OPEN ARCHITECTURE AND R&D INCENTIVES

In open systems, firms give up their property rights to technologies and permit other companies to use these technologies. We ask how an incumbent's architecture choice affects social welfare by altering R&D competition among firms. More specifically, we ask whether an incumbent, by adopting an open system, can establish its socially inefficient technology as the market standard, while an entrant is developing a more efficient technology. It is shown that an incumbent has an incentive to preempt an entrant's competing technology by choosing an open system, but that the open system might result in a premature market standard.