From experience: applying the risk diagnosing methodology

No risk, no reward. Companies must take risks to launch new products speedily and successfully. The ability to diagnose and manage risks is increasingly considered of vital importance in high-risk innovation. This article presents the Risk Diagnosing Methodology (RDM), which aims to identify and evaluate technological, organizational and business risks in product innovation. RDM was initiated, developed and tested within a division of Philips Electronics, a multinational company in the audio, video and lighting industry. On the basis of the results the senior Vice President (R&D) of Philips Lighting decided to include the method in the company's standard innovation procedures. Since then, RDM has been applied on product innovation projects in areas as diverse as automobile tires, ship propellers, printing equipment, landing gear systems and fast-moving consumer goods such as shampoo, margarine and detergents.
In this article we will describe how Unilever, one of the world's leading companies in fast-moving consumer goods, adopted RDM after a major project failure in the midnineties. At Unilever, RDM proved very useful in diagnosing project risks, promoting creative solutions for diagnosed risks and strengthening team ownership of the project as a whole. Our results also show that RDM outcomes can be used to build a knowledge base of potential risks in product innovation projects.     

Breakthrough innovations in the U.S. biotechnology industry: the effects of technological space and geographic origin

How are breakthrough innovations created? Our study suggests that the type of external knowledge sourced determines the likelihood of creation of breakthrough innovation. We characterize the external knowledge utilized on two dimensions: its technological space and geographic origin. We draw on the concepts of local search and national innovation systems to identify critical knowledge inputs. We hypothesize that external knowledge characterized by technological distance or proximity and the national or international context can have a differential impact on breakthrough innovation. This is due to the contradictory implications of its value created by distance and to absorptive capacity limitations in effectively utilizing knowledge from a different context. To test our hypotheses we use patent data from the U.S. biotechnology industry. Our findings suggest that technologically distant knowledge of national origin has a curvilinear effect and technologically proximate knowledge of international origin has a positive effect on breakthrough innovation. However, simultaneous exploration along technologically and geographic dimensions is not useful to generating breakthrough innovation; technologically distant knowledge of international origin does not have a significant impact. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The up- and downside of collaboration in core and non-core technologies – Selective,contingent, and orchestrated openness in R&D collaborations

This paper contributes to the current debate about the “knowledge sharing-protecting” tension in R&D collaborations by introducing a new angle for analyzing this paradox. Considering the role of internal knowledge sources of the firm, the paper introduces and empirically analyses the interplay between three knowledge governance mechanisms (selective, contingent, and orchestrated openness) and the different technological fields of the firm (core, related non-core, and distant non-core technologies). Based on a unique first-hand large-scale project-level dataset from a Global 100 firm across a 10-year span, this research finds that R&D collaborations selectively conducted in firm’s related non-core technological fields promise the best innovation performance. Further, by orchestrating its projects across core and non-core technological fields in the same knowledge portfolio, the firm can leverage a network of inter-connected projects when collaborating with external partners. As such, the firm can strategically “distribute” collaboration risks across multiple projects, while optimize its access to external knowledge that it intends to get. Finally, contrary to the common assumption, this study does not find any discriminating factors against market-based partners in their contribution to innovation in both core and non-core technologies.     

中部崛起的突破口：提升科技创新能力

中部六省如何抓住21世纪头20年的战略机遇期实现中部崛起，在很大程度上取决于是否拥有自己的核心竞争力。因此，大力提升科技创新能力，尤其是自主创新能力，是实现中部崛起的突破口。文章分析了中部地区科技创新能力不强的原因，并在此基础上提出了提升中部地区科技创新能力的对策建议。     

Beating the odds in the innovation arena: The role of market and technology signals classification and noise

Innovation is a risky business. Notwithstanding the attention in research on the determinants of innovation success, the estimates of the extremely high failure rates (ranging from 40% to 90%) have not come down. As a result, new approaches have to be found to address the issues that prevent organizations from reaching innovation success over a longer period of time. In this study, Signal Detection Theory (SDT) is introduced to show that it may be less important to improve innovation practices in companies, than it is to change the nature of the projects that enter the corporate innovation funnel. In our empirical study of 44 innovation projects in the pharmaceutical and electronics industry, we show that pursuing more noisy signals (uncertain technological and market opportunities) is currently beneficial for innovation success. In general, companies allocate too few resources to noisy innovation opportunities. Interestingly, we find a positive, and not an inverted U-shaped, relationship between noise/signal ratios and innovation success. This indicates that there are almost no companies that take too much risk in the current competitive environment and that many can gain from increasing their noise tolerance. The implications from this study are quite counter-intuitive in a sense that ‘risk’ is not the cause of the innovation problems, but may be a solution.     

The Role of Future‐Market Focus in the Early Stages of NPD across Varying Levels of Innovativeness

The concept of future‐market focus (FMF) arose out of the debate about firm size and incumbency in the face of radical or disruptive innovations, and has been demonstrated to have a positive correlation with radical innovation (RI) success. This study examines the relationship between FMF and the processes used in the early stages of NPD for four types of innovation projects: incremental innovations, technological breakthroughs, market breakthroughs, and radical innovations. We found that the future‐market focus of a project team can influence the early stage processes used in a new product innovation project, and does so differentially across levels of innovativeness. In particular, the concept generation process, understanding of market needs, and screening decision criteria are different for low‐ versus high‐FMF projects and there are differences based on the level of innovation. In addition, we found that radical innovation projects rated low in FMF are markedly different than the radical innovation projects described in prior studies.     

Rethinking the ‘mirroring’ hypothesis: implications for technological modularity,tacit coordination,and radical innovation

Studies of the ‘mirroring’ hypothesis have demonstrated the relationships between technological modularity and explicit coordination, yet little is known about the ‘mirroring’ relationship between technological modularity and tacit coordination, and how the ‘mirroring’ relationship may affect radical innovation. This paper contributes to the ‘mirroring’ hypothesis by identifying the interaction mechanisms embedded in and surrounded over the mirroring relationships. Using survey data of 121 high-tech firms in China, our study indicates that technological modularity enhances interfirm tacit coordination between module-makers (‘mirroring’ hypothesis), and will also positively influence radical innovation (‘outcome’ hypothesis). Moreover, tacit coordination negatively moderates the impact of technological modularity on radical innovation (‘interaction’ hypothesis), indicating that the ‘mirroring’ relationship may offset the benefit obtained from modularization. It also suggests that, in a high-technology industry in underdeveloped areas, tacit coordination could lead to exposure of hidden knowledge, thus lowering module-makers' motivation for technology breakthrough.     

制药企业技术创新风险及风险控制

目的增强企业的创新风险防范意识,提高企业技术创新风险控制能力。方法对技术创新风险因子进行横向解剖,从本质上分析技术创新风险的来源及对其的控制。结果与结论我国制药企业技术创新能力比较弱,技术创新风险控制体系不健全。因此,要加大制药企业技术创新各阶段的风险控制管理力度,从而降低制药企业技术创新的主观意识风险。     

Boards of Directors,Innovation, and Performance: An Exploration at Multiple Levels

This work reports on an investigation of the dynamics of governance over breakthrough innovation within Fortune 1000 firms. The primary research question investigates the boundary of agency theory within the firm. Using agency and stakeholder theoretic perspectives, the study tests the hypothesis that innovation will thrive in firms that combine a board of directors operating in accordance with a high agency theoretic focus in addition to an innovation governance board operating deeper within the firm that employs a strong stakeholder theoretic orientation in its behavior. The model is tested with data from 98 large firms. Results suggest that the relationship between board of directors' behavior and the firm's overall innovativeness is mediated by innovation decision‐making boards that (1) promote projects that are breakthrough in scope, (2) incorporate input of diverse constituencies within the firm, (3) exhibit patience with financial results, and (4) engage in frequent, informal interactions with project teams. Firms exhibiting high board of director agency orientation in combination with loyalty to mandate, patient financial capital disposition, inclusiveness, and project team interaction as described above for innovation governance board decision‐making prove to be the most innovative as measured by external indicators. For firm innovativeness, consolidated managerial power and behavior is frequently present at the upper levels of the firm, but must be broken down at deeper levels of the firm. This research offers implications to innovation decision‐makers as to how to proceed if the intent is to offer commercializably successful breakthrough innovations.     

The Decision to Exploit an R&D Project: Divergent Thinking across Middle and Senior Managers

Research and development (R&D) generates projects, but the question often remains: which projects should be exploited? Building on the innovation, strategy, and managerial cognition literatures, we use a conjoint field experiment to collect data on 4032 decisions made by 126 R&D managers to test how project attributes, strategic context, and managers' characteristics influence innovation exploitation decisions. Using hierarchical linear modeling, we find that (1) experience impacts project exploitation decision policies of middle managers more than senior managers, (2) divergent thinking across middle and senior managers increases with experience, and (3) experienced middle managers diverge from experienced senior managers in their decisions to exploit opportunities by placing greater emphasis on strategic context (relative to competitors and fit within the portfolio) and lesser emphasis on uncertainty (technological and demand). These findings have implications for the strategy and innovation literature.     

Incapability of Technological Capability: A Case Study on Product Innovation in the Japanese Facsimile Machine Industry

Technological leadership in an industry certainly seems like a ticket to ongoing success. However, overemphasis on existing technological capabilities may produce a form of myopia in product development. In other words, by focusing primarily on developing and improving their core technologies, organizations miss opportunities to exploit new technologies and thus create breakthrough products. Ken Kusunoki proposes that problem-solving approaches in a technologically leading firm paradoxically may impede radical product innovation. Suggesting that such firms are inherently oriented toward incremental innovation, he presents a conceptual framework of the dynamic interaction between technological and product development problem-solving in the context of product innovation. He then illustrates this conceptual framework by examining a case of radical innovation in the Japanese facsimile industry. For a technological leader, product innovation typically is driven by technology development. In other words, such a firm quite reasonably relies on the technological advantage it holds over competitors as the basis for its product developments. By refining and enhancing its industry-leading technological capabilities, the firm can successfully introduce incremental innovations in its products. Because of this strong emphasis on exploiting existing technological capabilities, however, the technological leader may fail to capitalize on new technologies that can produce radical innovations. In the race to develop high-speed, digital facsimile equipment during the early 1970s, for example, Matsushita held a decided technological advantage over competitors such as Ricoh. Notwithstanding Matsushita's technological edge, however, Ricoh brought this radical innovation to market two years before Matsushita introduced its first digital machine, causing a serious decline in Matsushita's market share. Ricoh's approach to technological and product problem-solving—an autonomous team structure, with a strong project manager and frequent transfers of engineers among interdependent units—contrasts dramatically with Matsushita's functional structure and strong emphasis on technological problem-solving. Interestingly, Matsushita regained its technological advantage by 1976, thanks to a rapid series of incremental innovations in its product technologies.     

中国制造业最优环境规制强度的选择——基于绿色全要素生产率的视角

按照污染排放强度,本文将中国28个制造业部门分为重度污染产业、中度污染产业和轻度污染产业三大类,在测算1999—2009年三大产业部门环境规制强度和绿色全要素生产率的基础上,利用面板数据模型对环境规制与绿色全要素生产率的关系进行检验,力图从促进生产率的角度找出不同产业最优环境规制强度的拐点。研究结果表明:重度污染产业当前环境规制强度相对合理,能够促进产业绿色全要素生产率提高、技术创新和效率改进;中度污染产业环境规制强度较弱,环境规制与绿色全要素生产率、技术创新和技术效率的关系呈"U"型,相对于生产率和技术创新而言技术效率可以更早地突破"U"型拐点;轻度污染产业环境规制强度与三者的关系也呈"U"型,相对于生产率和技术效率而言,技术创新能够更早突破"U"型拐点。在制定适当的环境规制强度同时,政府应推进环境规制政策从控制型向激励型转变,诱导企业进行技术创新,实现环境和经济发展的双赢。     

R&D Partnerships and Innovation Performance: Can There Be too Much of a Good Thing?

R&D collaboration facilitates the pooling of complementary skills, learning from the partner as well as the sharing of risks and costs. Research therefore stresses the positive relationship between collaborative R&D and innovation performance. Fewer studies address the potential drawbacks of collaborative R&D. Collaborative R&D comes at the cost of coordination and monitoring, requires knowledge disclosure, and involves the risk of opportunistic behavior by the partners. Thus, while for lower collaboration intensities the net gains can be high, costs may start to outweigh benefits if firms perform a higher share of their innovation projects collaboratively. For a sample of 2735 firms located in Germany and active in a broad range of manufacturing and service sectors, this study finds that increasing the share of collaborative R&D projects in total R&D projects is associated with a higher probability of product innovation and with a higher market success of new products. While this confirms previous findings on the gains for innovation performance, the results also show that collaboration has decreasing and even negative returns on product innovation if its intensity increases above a certain threshold. Thus, the relationship between collaboration intensity and innovation follows an inverted‐U shape and, on average, costs start to outweigh benefits if a firm pursues more than about two‐thirds of its R&D projects in collaboration. This result is robust to conditioning market success to the introduction of new products and to accounting for the selection into collaborating. This threshold is, however, contingent on firm characteristics. Smaller and younger as well as resource‐constrained firms benefit from relatively higher collaboration intensities. For firms with higher collaboration complexities in terms of different partners and different stages of the R&D process at which collaboration takes place, returns start to decrease already at lower collaboration intensities.     

Organizing for Radical Innovation: Exploring Novel Insights

While radical innovation brings extensive economic rewards to firms, it is an activity fraught with risk. Prior research has shown that such risks mainly stem from organizational arrangements (at the level of individuals, teams, firms, and inter firm collaborations), which are inadequate or inefficient to support radical innovation. The papers in this special issue on “Organizing for Radical Innovation: Exploring Novel Insights” take stock of past work and provide novel insights about how to organize for radical innovation. The overarching idea linking them is that radical innovation hinges on the creation of fundamentally new knowledge and the continuous stimulation of creativity. Thus, organizational arrangements that support such processes play a crucial role in explaining and predicting the successful commercialization of breakthrough ideas, radically new technologies, and solutions. In particular, the field of science, which in essence aims for the systematic production of new knowledge, can be a valid source of inspiration for how individuals, teams, firms, and interfirm collaborations should organize for radical innovation. Moving from these premises, in this introductory paper, we offer an overview of the topic of organizing for radical innovation and highlight possible linkages with the organizing principles. Then, we summarize the main insights from the papers in this special issue and use their core ideas to sketch a novel research agenda for scholars working at the intersection of organization theory, economics of science, and management of innovation.     

网络嵌入性与技术创新间关系实证研究

文献表明,有关网络嵌入性作用的研究得出了不同的、甚至截然相反的结论,本文对这一现象进行揭示,建立了网络嵌入性———跨组织学习———两类技术创新之间的关系模型。运用实证研究方法,发现了网络嵌入性、跨组织学习以及技术创新等变量之间的内在联系。研究结果表明嵌入性通过跨组织学习对技术创新结果的确有显著影响;现有研究结论的不尽统一,是因为没有对技术创新等变量进行分类而形成,本文用分类研究的方法,将涉及的变量细分为关系嵌入性、结构嵌入性、渐进性技术创新与突破性技术创新等,实证研究后发现,不同的网络嵌入性特征具有不同作用途径并会产生不同的结果。     

Information asymmetries and technological innovation in large engineering construction projects

Research on technological innovation shows that information asymmetries between suppliers and buyers constitute a major barrier to the successful introduction of new products. Most of this research, however, puts the burden of overcoming these asymmetries on producers of new products. In the case of large engineering construction projects innovation is often the result of joint problem solving by owners, prime contractors, consultants, and equipment suppliers. In this paper we examine the relationship between innovativeness of large engineering construction projects and internal owner capabilities, degree of control over project, and dependence on external organizations, We use data on power plant construction projects to test hypotheses derived from agency and organization theories of innovation. Our results indicate that organization theories of innovation are on the whole better predictors of the impact on innovativeness of owner's capabilities and relationship to external organizations.     

基于ERP系统的建筑企业信息化建设风险评价研究

从建筑企业管理者的角度出发,针对建筑企业实施ERP的盲目性,在问卷结果分析和建筑企业内部风险因素分析的基础上,建立了实施ERP阶段的内部风险评价指标体系.引入了技术创新项目风险评价的典型模型,考虑ERP项目实施的失败概率及其预期损失,结合专家调查法,提出集值统计一专家调查法的多因素风险评价模型,并给出了风险标准参考值,为实现企业不同需求的风险自评价提供了简便易行的操作方法和可靠科学的后期决策依据,以期促进建筑企业信息化建设.     

The contribution of Design Thinking to the R of R&D in technological innovation

Literature on Design Thinking has mainly focused on whether its key principles enhance performance in the development phase (the D of R&D) of the technological innovation process. However, it has dedicated scant attention to the earlier research phase (the R of R&D). This aspect is surprising, given that many innovations fail as a result of early research actions and decisions. This article examines how it is possible and desirable to apply Design Thinking to the research phase of the technological innovation process. How can Design Thinking support innovation, even when advanced breakthrough technologies are at stake, the market is distant, and product applications and specific user needs have not been identified yet? To respond to this question, we investigate the research work of the design center of a global electronics company that uses a design approach called Proxemics to envision future interactions between bodies (people), objects (technology), and spaces (context). Although Proxemics is consistent with and implements the human centeredness and experimentation principles of Design Thinking, results of this study show that its logics and tools are different from those used in Design Thinking in the D of R&D due to the more abstract nature of the tasks in the R of R&D.     

Managing the search for new product concepts: a strategic approach

Abstract
The authors point out that there is little in the academic literature about the way ideas for new products emerge and how the emergence is managed. They have identified the main top management problem as the strategic one of achieving the right balance between resources put into new product search and those put into current business operations. To obtain more information on good and bad practice in this area they have investigated how a specially selected sample of small to medium-sized Canadian technological companies actually carry out new product search.
The research method was to ascertain how far corporate goals, organization structures and corporate values affected the effectiveness of new product search. Unstructured interviews were conducted with senior staff in the companies, during which information was sought about company goals, innovation strategy, internal relationships and how these impinged on the genesis of 35 projects.
The authors found an important corporate goal spurring innovation was growth (or survival), to be achieved by using new products to dominate their markets. R&D was oriented to achieving a technical edge, though not necessarily a radical breakthrough in market driven ways. Few had effective formal strategic plans for new product search. On the whole, top managements emphasized the importance of individual initiative and commitment to get results and the necessity of open communication throughout the organization.
Overall, this research reveals once more that any organization that wishes to pursue a strategy of product innovation has to build a climate which explicitly favours that strategy. Corporate strategy, itself, has a major influence on that climate. New product search requires resources and a place in the strategic plan but the extent to which it can be formalized is limited. It must be possible for new ideas, wherever generated, to emerge and gather momentum informally.     

The value of a ‘failed’ R&D project: an emerging evaluation framework for building innovative capabilities1

In literature and R&D organizations alike, project success consists in minimizing the deviations from set targets in terms of quality, cost and time. The main management task is to execute and monitor progress to reduce risks – assuming that project attributes are known, necessary resources can be estimated and a reasonable time table can be agreed upon. In such a context, evaluating project success is easy. However, in an innovative context, setting project targets initially is difficult and the contributions of the projects sometimes are of an unexpected nature. This paper investigates if projects can be evaluated in terms of how they contribute to the building of innovative capabilities of the firm instead of independently. Based on a case study at the Régie Autonome des Transports Parisians and the theoretical framework of innovation fields, a framework for evaluating projects from an additional perspective is proposed. Based on the following four criteria: financial resources, the development of a structured, refined and expanded strategic vision, developed competences (with related suppliers) and identification of knowledge gaps (occasionally with related partners for knowledge production), this framework shows how seemingly failed R&D projects can instead be considered as invaluable to the overall innovation process.