Social capital and creativity in R&D project teams

The existing research contributes to our understanding about the value of social capital in a wide range of social science disciplines; however, it does not well address the role of social capital in creativity for research and development (R&D) project teams in a given context. Using a sample of 54 R&D project teams in high-technology firms of Taiwan, we examined the impacts of social capital on creativity of R&D project teams from an intra-team perspective. Results of factor analysis revealed four factors extracted from the concept of social capital, namely social interaction, network ties, mutual trust, and shared goals. Findings suggested that social interaction and network ties had significant and positive impacts on creativity of R&D project teams, but mutual trust and shared goals did not. Managerial implications for managing social capital in R&D project teams are discussed.     

Cooperative Innovation Projects: Capabilities and Governance Mechanisms*

This paper is concerned with how firms in a project‐based industry cooperate in technological innovation projects in the construction industry. The main focus of the paper is on the sharing of capabilities in cooperative innovation projects and how these cooperations are governed. A knowledge‐based perspective is applied, and four cooperative innovation projects in the construction industry are compared. Based on the case studies, a set of propositions is defined. First, a cooperation aimed at a mutual strategic benefit in mutually gaining access to the knowledge bases of the involved firms, while maintaining their own differentiated knowledge base, can result in more stable and long term relationships with mutual trust between the cooperating firms. Second, in a cooperation aimed at a mutual strategic benefit in mutually gaining access to the knowledge bases of the involved firms, partners not only gain access to each other's technological capabilities but also develop and share knowledge about organizational aspects and market situations and gain knowledge about the way of working of the partner firm. Third, in a cooperation aimed at mutual strategic benefit in mutually gaining access to the knowledge bases of the involved firms, noncodifiability of the capabilities is conditional to create a win–win situation. And fourth, cooperation aimed at a mutual strategic benefit in mutually gaining access to the knowledge bases of the involved firms is based on mutual competence and intentional trust as its main governance mechanism, whereas contracting between market parties aimed at knowledge–output transactions is represented by limited trust and arms' length (contractual) relationships as its main governance mechanism.     

The Contributions of Firm Innovativeness to Customer Value in Purchasing Behavior

The purpose of this research is to examine the influence of firm innovativeness and product innovativeness on the components of customer value mediated by instrumental and symbolic brand benefits. Over the last 10 years, the mobile phone industry in Korea has grown rapidly, with the introduction of several innovative phone features. The research context therefore is mobile phones with Internet access and their users in Korea. A major research finding is that the firm innovativeness affects product innovativeness, and hence, the instrumental brand benefits. A firm's innovativeness also has a significant effect on the symbolic brand benefits and the partnership value. Our key academic contribution is to expand the previous fragmentary studies of customer value, by classifying customer value into four components: expectation, partnership, transaction, and relationship customer values, rather than just focusing on benefits and sacrifices. Implications for managers include the verification that firm innovativeness is a source of ability for mobile phone firms to create value for customers. Instrumental and symbolic brand benefits through innovation should be the focus area for marketers and new product development (NPD) managers in mobile phone firms to communicate with consumers to increase expectation values in the prepurchase step.     

The Mixed Blessings of Technological Innovativeness for the Commercial Success of New Products

This study addresses the contradiction that, although technological innovativeness of new products is often seen as a major driver of competitive advantage and commercial success, empirical research is not always able to show a significant performance influence. In order to find an explanation, the effects of technological innovativeness are decomposed as its influence on the market, the innovating firm, and the firm's environment is considered. The proposed model is tested on a sample of new product development projects. In order to avoid systematic biases, this paper uses a longitudinal survey design with two informants and a sample that includes both incremental and highly innovative projects. The results show that technological innovativeness has both positive and negative effects on the commercial success of new products. On the one hand, technological innovativeness can increase customer value, which in turn has a positive effect on success. On the other hand, incorporating new technologies into new products also implies changes in the innovating firm and potentially in its environment. These changes have a negative impact on commercial success. The positive and negative effects compensate for each other, so that the total effect of technological innovativeness on commercial success is close to zero. The findings imply that firms developing new products through incorporating radically new technologies often seem to underestimate the inherent complexities with respect to both internal and external changes. Developing and introducing new products with a radically changed technology also implies anticipating the need for new competences, processes, structures, and network partners. Social and political resistance against technological changes, large investments in new infrastructures, and the long duration of these changes additionally become frequent features of such innovation endeavors. Hence, firms embarking on a path of exploiting radically new technologies should consider those complexities very carefully when making their new product development decisions.     

Submission quality in open innovation contests - an analysis of individual-level determinants of idea innovativeness

The digital age allows for integration of dispersed groups into the innovation process. These heterogeneous groups of individuals varying in size and knowledge distribution, also referred to as crowds, build the basis for open innovation contests (OIC), one of the most common forms of crowdsourcing innovation. Different from more focused forms of open innovation, at OIC innovation managers often do not identify or evaluate participants ex-ante. Instead, innovation managers often make use of open calls for participation and assume efficient self-selection of participants i.e., that only motivated and qualified participants will volunteer and engage in the innovation contest. This behavior reflects one of the key assumption of crowdsourcing in participatory innovation settings. However, not every self-selected member is in the position to solve the contest task appropriately. Hence, innovation contests often result in large numbers of submissions, covering a wide range of quality levels, causing decision biases and significant workloads for innovation managers to select ideas. This problem is referred to as “crowding”. In order to reduce “crowding”, open innovation researchers are interested in understanding which types of individuals make the “best” contributions and therefore should be preferably encouraged to participate in in OIC. In this paper, we are assessing what characterizes those participants who submit innovative ideas to OIC, in particular those who submit incremental ideas vs. those who have more radical ideas. Drawing on the componential model of creativity and data generated in innovation contest held by chocolate producer Ritter Sport, we analyze the effect of participants‘ creativity, domain knowledge, and several motivational factors on the innovativeness of their contributions. We find all of these factors to affect the innovativeness of an idea. However, regarding generating incremental or radical innovations, some factors have opposing roles. Our findings imply for practice that innovation managers must decide which type of innovations they intend to generate and then design contests to attract participants with the required characteristics, if they want to increase the number of appropriate ideas and reduce the problems of “crowding”.     

Don't Trust Trust: A Dynamic Approach to Controlling Supplier Involvement in New Product Development

Prior literature stresses the importance for manufacturers to use formal and informal controls to coordinate collaborative new product development activities with suppliers. In doing so, the existence of trust between manufacturers and suppliers is believed to play a key role because it enables manufacturers to reduce investments in formal controls and rely more on less costly informal controls. Manufacturers and suppliers don't suddenly trust each other though: trust typically grows over time as the partners get to know each other. Trust may also decrease if manufacturers overuse formal controls or if suppliers underperform. These fluctuations in trust over the course of supplier–manufacturer relationships complicate the so‐called trust–control nexus and raise important questions about the impact of trust on the efficiency and effectiveness of formal and informal controls as coordination mechanisms. Therefore, this study examines how manufacturers should balance formal and informal controls over time to reap the full benefits of collaborative product development with suppliers. For that purpose, a conceptual and system dynamics model are developed, which incorporate the links among formal and informal controls, trust, and the supplier's development performance. In an empirical validation in the context of the shipbuilding industry, the results reject the notion that manufacturers must lessen formal controls and increase informal controls with trust. Instead, it is most efficient and effective to invest always in formal controls, particularly process control, to coordinate supplier involvement in new product development. These results have important theoretical and managerial implications: Informal controls are not as profitable as expected.     

Distinguishing supplier reputation from trust in buyer-supplier relationships

We argue that a firm's reputation (i.e., central, enduring, and distinctive corporate associations held by individuals outside of an organization), although under-researched relative to trust, is more important than trust in impacting buyer-supplier relationships. Our conceptualization draws on theories and extant research related to transaction cost economics, information economics, and interfirm trust. The constructs of trust and reputation are distinguished and their relative impacts on relationship commitment and willingness to invest in the future of the relationship are examined. Suggestive empirical evidence is provided from a survey of industrial buyers, and implications and specific directions for future research are discussed.     

Relationship governance for very different partners: The corporation-nonprofit case

Organizations increasingly form relationships with partners that have goals, values or operating cultures different to their own. These relationships have significant potential to generate innovative products or services and increase opportunities for service delivery. While they can provide greater access to resources, infrastructure or stakeholders, they can struggle with collaboration. Such partnerships may also encounter differences in the role of governance mechanisms such as trust and commitment. Only limited research however has addressed the governance implications of such relationships. We compared managers' perspectives on relationship governance mechanisms for 267 nonprofits and 276 corporations involved in corporate-nonprofit relationships. We found that ‘fit’ - compatibility and complementarity - was important to performance in such relationships. We found also however that nonprofits valued the role of trust in these relationships significantly more than corporations. Our findings suggest potential for significant success in these types of relationships but also possible complications from differences of opinion as to how they should be governed. While relationships between very different partners can succeed, they should remain cognizant of differences in each partner's expectations for relationship governance and its role in relationship performance.     

A Comparison of New Service versus New Product Development: Configurations of Collaborative Intensity as Predictors of Performance

Collaboration among firms for innovation has received considerable attention. However, little is known about how firm‐to‐firm collaboration is configured in new service development (NSD) versus new product development (NPD). This study takes a multidimensional approach and measures firm‐to‐firm collaboration on different intensity dimensions of (1) processes (mutual communication, joint engagement, sharing responsibilities) and (2) ownership (relationship commitment and mutual trust). By showing that the phenomenon of collaboration is multifaceted, this study is able to knit a more comprehensive and cohesive understanding of the differences between NSD and NPD success as the result of different patterns of collaboration. Specifically, it utilizes survey data collected from 194 alliances to substantiate how NSD and NPD differ on these collaborative dimensions and then explores their impact on NSD versus NPD performance. The findings suggest that collaboration between firms in NSD is configured and works differently than collaboration between firms in NPD. The results further show that there is a stronger, positive relationship of intensity levels of joint engagement among firms involved in product development and performance than when a new service is developed. However, the intensity of mutual trust has a stronger, positive relationship with development performance when a new service is developed than when a new product is developed. Implications are discussed, and suggestions for future research are given.     

Trust Formation in University–Industry Collaborations in the U.S. Biotechnology Industry: IP Policies,Shared Governance,and Champions*,†

Haggling over rights to potential inventions can be a major roadblock to successful university–industry (UI) collaborations. Yet such collaborations are critical for innovation in science‐based industries. This study examines the roles of universities' intellectual property (IP) policies and of shared governance for trust formation between academe and industry. The study also examines how UI champions moderate this process and how trust between university and industry partners affects UI collaboration outcomes. The analysis of survey data of 105 recent UI collaborations in the U.S. biotechnology industry indicates that the flexibility and transparency of university IP policies and shared governance by UI partners are both positively related to trust formation. The activities of UI champions amplify the positive effects of shared governance and at the same time reduce the importance of university IP policies for trust formation between UI partners. The amount of trust between partners is positively related to knowledge transfer and innovation performance. The findings suggest that despite widely reported industry concerns over the control of IP, UI research partners can develop a trustful environment and thereby plant the seeds for a successful collaboration. In order to enhance trust, companies should not only consider university IP policies, but also need to actively engage in shared governance with university partners. UI collaboration champions can help shift the attention of company managers from formal rules set by university IP policies toward shared project planning, coordination, and implementation with university partners.     

Temporal dynamics of trust in ongoing inter-organizational relationships

This paper reports the results of a qualitative study undertaken to understand the nature of trust and its consequences for both suppliers and buyers in short term (relatively new) and long term (older/more mature) relationships in inter-organizational contexts. Scholars have recently pointed out the importance of research that investigates the temporal characteristics and dynamics of trust in inter-organizational studies. Our paper responds to this call by indentifying the changing nature of the level of trust as the buyer–supplier relationship matures. Our findings contribute to sparse and conflicting previous research on the relationship between length of partnership and perceptions of trust, types of dark side consequences of trusting relationships, and reasons buyers and suppliers continue or terminate low/no-trust associations. Specifically, we illustrate that buyers and suppliers draw on substantially different metaphors for understanding the nature of trust in long and short term exchange relationships. Suppliers see marked differences in trust with long term versus short term exchange partners, while buyers see little or no difference. Suppliers and buyers also appear to have different conceptions of how trust is nested (or not) within the broader economic and/or personal relationship. Through our inductive model, we elaborate several types of betrayal and disappointment, distinguish several factors that lead suppliers and buyers to stay in relationships with partners they don't trust, and identify key issues that topple untrusting relationships into terminated relationships.     

When Western measures meet Eastern perspectives: A prototyping analysis of xinren in buyer-seller relationships

This paper contributes to our understanding of xinren within buyer-seller relationships. Xinren is often translated to trust and is critical for the development of strong business relationships. Previous conceptualizations and measurements of xinren have been inconsistent and questionable. Through a novel methodology, prototyping analysis, this research outlines a foundational structure for xinren. A series of 4 studies were conducted on xinren in buyer-seller relationships in China involving a total of 311 participants who were employed in sourcing and procurement (33.23%) or marketing and sales (31.29%), and had spent less than one year working outside China. Central prototypical features include high arousal emotions highlighting the importance of affect-based aspects when developing xinren. Negative features indicate that both trust and distrust may be synergistically operating within xinren. Contributions are also made by outlining both universal trust features and more culturally-nuanced trust features. Suggestions for managers indicate how both Eastern and Western partners may use these results to build deeper trust within their relationships. Future research includes undertaking further prototyping analysis on trust within other cultures to develop foundational structures that may include both universal and culturally-nuanced trust features.     

知识网络视角下虚拟科技园区发展模式研究

虚拟科技因区作为一种新型的产学研合作网络组织形式备受关注.本文从知识网络这一视角出发,分析虚拟科技园区知识网络的构成要素和相互作用关系,构建了虚拟科技园区知识循环创造模型,提出虚拟科技园区建立学习型组织的发展模式,在构建学习型组织的过程中应充分考虑虚拟化运营中合作伙伴文化背景复杂、合作意图差异及缺乏足够的相互信任所引发的学习智障,建立科学健全的基于组织层面和网络层面的学习机制,并以云南省大学科技园为案例进行分析.     

Market Orientation and Innovativeness in Supply Chains: Supplier's Impact on Customer Satisfaction

As today's firms increasingly outsource their noncore activities, they not only have to manage their own resources and capabilities, but they are ever more dependent on the resources and capabilities of supplying firms to respond to customer needs. This paper explicitly examines whether and how firms and suppliers, who are both oriented to the same customer market, enable innovativeness in their supply chains and deliver value to their joint customer. We will call this customer of the focal firm the “end user.” The authors take a resource‐dependence perspective to hypothesize how suppliers' end‐user orientation and innovativeness influence downstream activities at the focal firm and end‐user satisfaction. The resource dependence theory looks typically beyond the boundaries of an individual firm for explaining firm success: firms need to satisfy customer demands to survive and depend on other parties such as their suppliers to achieve customer satisfaction. Accordingly, the research design focuses on three parties along a supply chain: the focal firm, a supplier, and a customer of the focal firm (end user). The results drawn from a survey of 88 matched chains suggest the following. First, customer satisfaction is driven by focal firms' innovativeness. A focal firm's innovativeness depends, on the one hand, on a focal firm's market orientation and, on the other hand, on its suppliers’ innovativeness. Second, no relationship could be established between a focal firm's market orientation and a supplier's end‐user orientation. Market orientation typically has within‐firm effects, while innovativeness has impact beyond the boundaries of the firm. These results suggest that firms create value for their customer through internal market orientation efforts and external suppliers' innovativeness.     

How do internal capabilities and external partnerships affect innovativeness?

How do a firm’s internal capabilities and external partnerships contribute to its product and process innovativeness? How do their impacts differ? Based on the theoretical framework of exploitation and exploration, we develop an integrative model linking the impact of both internal capabilities and external partnerships on product and process innovativeness. Survey responses from Taiwanese biotechnology firms indicate that research and development (R&;D), marketing, and manufacturing capabilities have different effects on product and process innovativeness. Of the four types of external partnerships, only partnerships with universities and research institutes seem to add value, whereas partnerships with suppliers, customers, and competitors do not contribute to innovativeness. Moreover, marketing capability and customer partnerships have a positive interaction effect on product innovativeness, while manufacturing capability and supplier partnerships have a positive interaction effect on process innovativeness.     

Vertical and Horizontal Cross‐Ties: Benefits of Cross‐Hierarchy and Cross‐Unit Ties for Innovative Projects

Social networks are an important driver for successful innovation, both at the individual level as well as the organizational level. Recent research has also shaped that networks within teams can enhance performance. Innovative project teams are embedded in an organizational context, however, and teams typically consist of people with expertise from diverse backgrounds, and from different units. Team members may have ties to other teams, business units, and hierarchical levels. Although it seems clear that such ties can influence team performance, remarkably little research has focused on what is here referred to as vertical and horizontal cross‐ties. Previous research may have ignored the possibility that vertical and horizontal bridging ties may have different performance outcomes. Although the literature suggests that diversity of input, or horizontal cross‐unit ties will benefit team performance and innovativeness, there is reason to believe that ties to higher levels in the organization might have an effect on project team performance and innovativeness too. This article in particular studies the role of vertical cross‐hierarchy ties. In an exploratory analysis combining quantitative and qualitative results, it is distinguished between horizontal cross‐unit and vertical cross‐hierarchy ties and their contribution to new business development (NBD) project performance, thereby making a substantial contribution to both academic literature and managerial practice. Our study is based on a multiple case‐study approach of several NBD project teams in a large European financial service provider. Our results show that successful innovation project teams are characterized by a large number of cross‐unit ties in combination with a large number of cross‐hierarchical ties compared with less successful project teams. Additionally, proof is found that vertical cross‐hierarchy ties should be concentrated rather than scattered across project members.     

Team control mode,workers' creativity,and new product innovativeness

Scholars of creativity and innovation argue that successful innovations originate from the creative ideas of workers. However, few studies have empirically examined how management mechanisms, such as the control mode adopted by the new product development team, may work together with workers' creativity to deliver a successful new product. Drawing on the theory of opposing action strategies of team innovation, we propose that different team control modes may work together with team members' creativity to jointly influence the innovativeness of teamwork outcomes. With survey data collected from different sources in new product development teams, we find that restrictive control can effectively help teams composed of very creative members to successfully develop innovative new products. Conversely, promotive control can effectively help teams composed of less creative members to deliver innovative new products.     

When can you trust “trust”? Calculative trust,relational trust,and supplier performance

Our research empirically assesses two distinct bases for trust: calculative trust, based on a structure of rewards and penalties, versus relational trust, a judgment anchored in past behavior and characterized by a shared identity. We find that calculative trust and relational trust positively influence supplier performance, with calculative trust having a stronger association than relational trust. Yet, important boundary conditions exist. If buyers invest in supplier‐specific assets or when supply side market uncertainty is high, relational trust, not calculative trust, is more strongly associated with supplier performance. In contrast, when behavioral uncertainty is high, calculative trust, not relational trust, relates more strongly to supplier performance. These results highlight the value of examining distinct forms of trust. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

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.     

Knowledge Acquisition in University–Industry Alliances: An Empirical Investigation from a Learning Theory Perspective*

A firm's technological knowledge base is the foundation on which internal product and process innovations are generated. However, technological knowledge is not accumulated solely through internal learning processes. Increasingly, firms are turning to external sources in the technology supply chain to acquire the technological knowledge they need to introduce product and process innovations. Thus, the successful structuring and executing of partnerships with external “technology source” organizations is often critical to competitive success in technologically dynamic environments. This study uses situated learning theory as a basis for explaining how factors inherent to the knowledge acquisition context may affect the successful transference of technological knowledge from universities to their industry partners. Data collected via a survey instrument from 104 industry managers were used to explore the effects of various organizational knowledge interface factors on knowledge acquisition success in university–industry alliances. The organizational knowledge interface factors hypothesized to affect knowledge acquisition success in the current research include partner trust, partner familiarity, technology familiarity, alliance experience, formal collaboration teams, and technology experts' communications. Results indicate that partner trust predicts the successful acquisition of tacit knowledge but not explicit knowledge. Both forms of knowledge are predicted by partner familiarity and communications between the partners' technology experts. These findings suggest three principal managerial implications. First, although the development of a trusting relationship between the knowledge source and knowledge‐seeking parties is generally advisable, firms that seek to acquire explicit technological knowledge from their alliance partners may successfully do so without having made significant time and energy investments designed to assure themselves that they can trust those partners. The relative observability and verifiability of explicit knowledge relative to tacit knowledge may enable knowledge‐seeking parties to have greater confidence that knowledge has been acquired when partner trust is in question or has not been deliberately developed. A second implication is that, other things being equal, a knowledge‐seeking party's interests may be best served through repeated exposures to particular alliance partners, particularly if those exposures facilitate mutual understandings on relevant process‐related matters. A third managerial implication is that ongoing, broad‐based communications between the partners' technology experts should be used to effect technology transfer. A key quality of the organizational knowledge interface that promotes the successful acquisition of technological knowledge, both tacit and explicit, is multipoint, real‐time contact between the technology experts of the partner organizations. Such communications potentially enable the knowledge‐seeking party to directly access desired information through the most knowledgeable individuals on an as‐needed basis.