War for talents—How perceived organizational innovativeness affects employer attractiveness

Recruiting high potentials is the foundation for creating knowledge, innovation and competitive advantages. Unfortunately, many companies face the problem of having a hard time recruiting high potentials in a tightening labor market. To secure future innovation, growth and competitiveness companies must be attractive for potential employees. Within this respect, past research suggests that innovative companies might be at an advantage as they appear more attractive to employees in general and to those with an innovative personality in specific. Hence, HR communication might use an organization's innovativeness within employer branding to attract high potentials. However, current literature falls short to provide empirical evidence on whether and how the communication of organizational innovativeness affects employer attractiveness and especially attracts innovative employees. The results of our scenario-based experiment (n = 322) show that organizations with an innovative product portfolio and a strong innovation culture appear more attractive to potential employees. These effects turned out to be even stronger for employees which are highly innovative as they care a great deal about the organizational innovativeness of the company they work for. Thus, our findings suggest that communicating organizational innovativeness within employer branding is an effective measure not only to improve employer perceptions in general, but also to attract innovative employees.     

From Experience Dreams to Market: Crafting a Culture of Innovation

Do certain common principles guide uncommonly innovative companies down the risk-riddled road to value creation? Or do successful innovators break boldly through the barriers to new product development along pathways of their own unique making? Karen Anne Zien and Sheldon Buckler discern a strikingly consistent model of how companies craft and sustain cultures in which innovation is nurtured, rewarded, even demanded. An article by the authors in the September 1996 issue of JPIM recounts seminal tales from the cultures of innovation consciously nourished by 12 leading-edge corporations in the United States, Europe, and Japan. Gathered through an extensive series of interviews with key personnel in the management, technical, manufacturing, and marketing divisions of each firm, the stories revealed seven traits widely shared from one company to the next, irrespective of business focus, geography, or nationality. These traits, as discussed in this article, not only serve to reconcile the culturally contradictory demands of the three critical stages of innovation—the “fuzzy front end,” the product development process, and marketplace operations—but also condition the company as a whole to sustain its innovative capacity over time. The principles at work in highly innovative companies encompass corporate as well as individual attitudes and behaviors. On the one hand, company leaders demonstrate in every decision, action, and communication that innovation propels profitability. So, for the CD project at Sony, the R&D general manager heeded “a voice from above that does not question the possibilities and absolutely believes” in the potential of the enterprise. On the other hand, actively helping individuals create a linkage between their “work life” and longer term “life work” is a crucial step in generating an environment where innovation and high productivity flourish together. Thus, a divisional chief executive at ICI/Imperial Chemicals Industries recognizes the need to “create an environment where people will work at what they are best at doing and what they like doing best.” Although the trail to successful innovation inevitably follows the unique contours of any company's environment, some universal guideposts point the way.     

Perspective: The Innovation Dilemma: How to Innovate When the Market Is Mature

Most companies have ambitious growth goals. The trouble is there are only so many sources of market growth. Markets in many countries and industries are mature and increasingly commoditized; achieving growth in market share is expensive; and acquisitions often do not work. For most companies, product development means line extensions, improvements, and product modifications, and only serves to maintain market share. Markets aren't growing, so firms increasingly compete for a piece of a shrinking pie by introducing one insignificant new product after another. The launch of a truly differentiated new product in mature markets is rare these days. As a result, development portfolios have become decidedly less innovative since the mid‐1990s, and R&D productivity is down. The answer is bold innovation—breakthrough products, services and solutions that create growth engines for the future. This means larger‐scope and more systems‐oriented solutions and service packages. Examples such as Apple's iPod are often cited. (Note that Apple did not invent the MP3 player, nor was this opportunity in a blue ocean; in fact there were 43 competitors when Apple launched!) What Apple did succeed in was in identifying an attractive strategic arena (MP3s) where it could leverage its strengths to its advantage and then to develop a solution that solved users’ problems. The result—an easy‐to‐use, easy‐to‐download MP3 system, which also happened to be “cool.” Our benchmarking studies reveal that five vectors must be in place to undertake this type of innovation to yield bolder and more imaginative development projects. First, develop a bold innovation strategy that focuses your business on the right strategic arenas that promise to be engines of real growth. Most businesses focus their efforts in the wrong areas—on flat markets, mature technologies, and tired product categories. Break out of this box towards more promising strategic arenas with extreme opportunities. Next, foster a climate and culture that promotes bolder innovation. Leadership is vital to success. If senior management does not have the appetite for these big concepts, then all your efforts and systems will fail. Senior management plays a vital role here in promoting an innovative climate in your business. Next, create “big ideas” for integrated product‐service solutions. The best methods for generating breakthrough new product ideas are identified in this paper. Then drive these “big concepts” to market quickly via a systematic and disciplined idea‐to‐launch system designed for major innovation initiatives. Just because these projects are imaginative and bold is no reason to throw discipline out the window. In fact, quite the reverse is true. Finally build a solid business case and focus on the winners. Most innovation teams don't get the facts, and consequently build weak business cases; the result is that many worthwhile innovations don't get the support they need to be commercialized. It's essential to do the front‐end homework, and so build a compelling business case. Then make the right investment decisions—evaluating “big concepts” for development when little information is available. Note that financial models don't work well when it comes to evaluating major innovations, because the data are often wrong. But other methods can be used to make these tough go/kill decisions. Illustrations and examples are provided from many industries and companies to show how to implement these five vectors.     

Lighting the way or stealing the shine? An examination of the duality in star scientists' effects on firm innovative performance

Do star employees enhance or constrain the innovative performance of an organization? Using data from 456 biotechnology firms between 1973 and 2003, we highlight the duality of the effects that stars have on firm performance. We show that while stars positively affect firms' productivity, their presence constrains the emergence of other innovative leaders in an organization. We find that firm productivity and innovative leadership among non‐stars in a firm are greatest when a star has broad expertise and collaborates frequently. We offer cross‐disciplinary insights into the role of human capital as a source of competitive advantage, suggesting that the value of human capital in a firm is contingent on the mutual dependence inherent in high‐status employees' relationships with other individuals in a firm. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Stakeholders,reciprocity, and firm performance

The assumption that economic actors behave in a boundedly self‐interested manner promises fruitful new insights for strategic management. A growing literature spanning multiple disciplines indicates most actors' selfish utility maximizing behaviors are bounded by norms of fairness. Rather than being purely self‐interested, people behave reciprocally by rewarding others whose actions they deem fair and willingly incurring costs to punish those they deem unfair. Economists show that employers who are perceived as distributionally fair by their employees generate comparatively more value due to the positively reciprocal behavior of those employees. The organizational justice literature distinguishes two additional types of fairness assessed by employees. Drawing from both these bodies of work, we employ stakeholder theory to propose how perceptions of fairness result in reciprocity (1) extending to all stakeholders of the firm and (2) affecting firm performance. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Five stories that illustrate three generalizations about radical innovations

Why do organizations resist radical innovations? How can organizations make radical innovations when they want to do so? This paper offers three generalizations about the processes that generate radical innovations, and it illustrates these generalizations with five symbolic stories. Two stories tell about organizations that had trouble innovating but ultimately succeeded, and three stories tell about tremendously successful radical innovation. The generalizations assert that radical innovation is a discovery process that yields unintended outcomes, that participants in radical innovation have to market their innovations to intended coworkers, funding sources, and potential customers, and that social interaction can stimulate, reinforce, and steer radical innovation.     

Team member experiences in new product development: views from the trenches

Although cross-functional teams are often used for new product development (NPD), many companies struggle to implement them successfully. Through in-depth interviews with 71 team members from 18 companies in a variety of technology-based industries, this study focuses on the experiences of the people who actually do much of the work of NPD (team members) and explores their perceptions and attitudes about cross-functional team assignments. The purpose of our study is to identify the factors that influence and shape NPD team member experiences. Our results suggest that although NPD work can be rewarding and productive, NPD team members are often neglected by other team members, project leaders, and senior management. This sense of neglect has important implications for all of these constituencies, but particularly for senior management.     

Career orientations of software developers in a sample of high tech companies

The career orientations of software developers in 11 high technology companies of different sizes were studied. It was found that the proportion wanting a managerial career was higher than might be expected (34%) and increased with organisational size. Approximately 25% wanted advancement in a technical career, and this remained the same in organisations of different sizes. The same proportion wanted to start up their own company, but this decreased substantially with organisational size. The group wanting a project-based career was the smallest, at 15%, and this varied slightly with organisational size. The four groups showed differences in their ideal job characteristics, organisational versus technical orientation and expected tenure. The extent to which they actually expected to satisfy their career preference varied dramatically, with the great majority of managerially-oriented expecting to actually be managers, but the majority wanting to start their own company not expecting to actually do so. The small high technology company has become an important, almost mythical, component of popular and academic folklore. As Beyer says, the “prevailing wisdom from both lay people and researchers who have been around them says that these firms are somehow different” (Beyer, 1985, p. 483). Within such organisations, the software developer or computer hack has similarly developed a particular aura. As one commentator puts it, “the stereotyped image of the community of programmers is … of a collection of single-minded nerds possessing no interest in life outside the digital realm” (Sandberg-Diment, 1986, p.C3). In spite of the interest in both the nature of such companies and such employees, there has been very little empirical data collected (Turbin and Rosse, 1988, p.17) to substantiate the folklore. In particular there has been an almost complete absence of rigorous academic enquiry into what the individuals choosing to work in this type of company are really like, or what their work needs actually are. The present paper is aimed at filling some of this gap, by addressing the issue of what type of career path software developers in high tech companies want.     

An Exploratory Study of the Innovation Evaluation Process

In their search for the keys to successful product innovation, product managers and researchers typically focus on trying to identify the most effective organizational processes, strategies, and structures. Surprisingly, little or no effort is directed toward understanding the process that consumers use for evaluating an innovation. By gaining insight into this evaluation process, a firm can present an innovative product in a more effective manner and thus increase the likelihood that consumers will respond favorably to the innovation. Richard W. Olshavsky and Richard A. Spreng provide insight into this process by describing the results of an experiment in which subjects were asked to evaluate several innovative concepts. From their observations, they develop a model of the detailed information-processing steps that these consumers employed in order to evaluate the new products. Consistent with previous research, they found that judgment was the predominant evaluation strategy, particularly for the most innovative concepts. Various subjects also used a categorization strategy, though none used categorization for more than four of the nine concepts that were evaluated. Contrary to expectations, none of the evaluations relied solely on the manufacturer's reputation or the recommendation of a friend. In a simplified model of the evaluation process, when presented with an innovative concept, consumers first attempt to categorize the product. In other words, an innovation may be rejected simply because consumers somehow link it to an existing category that has a negative connotation. If consumers cannot categorize the product, they then employ a judgment process based on some evaluative criteria. Based on the data collected in this study, this simplified model is extended to include four other cognitive processes that strongly influence the evaluation process: forming evaluative criteria, forming expectations about the innovative concept, assessing satisfaction with an old product, and comparing the new and old products. When faced with a highly innovative concept, consumers may find it difficult to form their own evaluative criteria and expectations concerning that innovation. Consequently, managers may have an opportunity to shape the judgment process by educating consumers about the appropriate evaluative criteria or by clearly communicating the product's attributes, benefits, and appropriate use.     

The impact of leadership influence tactics and employee openness toward others on innovation performance

Despite the vital importance of leadership, employees, and their social interactions in the open‐innovation process, there is scarce evidence on the influence and connectedness of different sub‐firm levels related to open innovation. The aim of this study is to explore the influence of leadership influence tactics and employee openness toward others on innovation performance at the individual and team levels. We applied a multilevel analysis on a sample of 85 employees and their 15 direct supervisors/team leaders. We find that leaders’ building open‐innovation coalitions exhibits a positive cross‐level relationship with employee openness toward others and individual‐level innovative behavior, and also moderates the link between the latter two constructs. Additionally, the leaders’ building open‐innovation coalitions variable is positively related to the team‐level scope of innovations and the team‐level innovation implementation phase.     

Using performance-based contracts to foster innovation in outsourced service delivery

While many scholars claim that Performance-based Contracts (PBCs) foster supplier-led innovation, empirical research into their actual use and effects remains limited. We therefore explore two cases of IT outsourcing through such contracts to see whether, and if so how, PBCs foster innovation. Our findings suggest that in both cases, the low degree of term specificity in PBCs (i.e., their openness regarding how to render the contracted services) provides suppliers with autonomy in their daily service operations, which in theory allows them to innovate. However, only one of the suppliers exhibited high innovative performance. Other relevant factors aside, our findings further suggest that a lack of granted autonomy during contract execution is an important factor in explaining the level of supplier-led innovation. Our findings imply that outsourcers that remain too closely involved with the outsourced service delivery and do not allow their suppliers to act autonomously during contract execution limit their suppliers' innovation potential.     

The logic of innovation in construction

The paper investigates the logic of innovation in construction by addressing four questions: What is actually being renewed in construction? How is it being done? Who is involved? and Why do or do not the companies innovate? The paper draws on a combination of an industrial network perspective and the exploration–exploitation dichotomy to analyze data from a study of innovation in the Norwegian and Swedish construction industries. The findings show that construction companies are increasingly working more systematically to turn project-level ideas into company-wide knowledge. This indicates an innovation logic that is oriented towards exploitation of new combinations through the internal network. The companies are also increasingly concerned with establishing closer connections to customers and users, which have traditionally been weak. This has led to an orientation towards exploitation through the external network, at least on the customer side. In turn, this may lead to more innovative behavior and renewal in the industry as a whole. However, it requires that not only the customer relationships, but also the relationships on the supply side must change. Companies in the construction industry should be conscious about their innovation logic, in terms of whether they base their innovation behavior on a biased orientation towards exploitation or exploration or towards the internal or external network. A balance is needed.     

When does advice impact startup performance?

Why do some entrepreneurs thrive while others fail? We explore whether the advice entrepreneurs receive about managing their employees influences their startup's performance. We conducted a randomized field experiment in India with 100 high-growth technology firms whose founders received in-person advice from other entrepreneurs who varied in their managerial style. We find that entrepreneurs who received advice from peers with a formal approach to managing people—instituting regular meetings, setting goals consistently, and providing frequent feedback to employees—grew 28% larger and were 10 percentage points less likely to fail than those who got advice from peers with an informal approach to managing people, 2 years after our intervention. Entrepreneurs with MBAs or accelerator experience did not respond to this intervention, suggesting that formal training can limit the spread of peer advice.     

Benefiting from network position: firm capabilities,structural holes,and performance

While strategy scholars primarily focus on internal firm capabilities and network scholars typically examine network structure, we posit that firms with superior network structures may be better able to exploit their internal capabilities and thus enhance their performance. We examine how innovative capabilities—both those of focal firms and those they access through their networks—influence the performance of Canadian mutual fund companies. We find that a firm's innovative capabilities and its network structure both enhance firm performance, while the innovativeness of its contacts does not do so directly. Innovative firms that also bridge structural holes get a further performance boost, suggesting that firms need to develop network‐enabled capabilities—capabilities accruing to innovative firms that bridge structural holes. Copyright © 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

One foot in,one foot out: how does individuals' external search breadth affect innovation outcomes?

The “variance hypothesis” predicts that external search breadth leads to innovation outcomes, but people have limited attention for search and cultivating breadth consumes attention. How does individuals' search breadth affect innovation outcomes? How does individuals' allocation of attention affect the efficacy of search breadth? We matched survey data with complete patent records, to examine the search behaviors of elite boundary spanners at IBM. Surprisingly, individuals who allocated attention to people inside the firm were more innovative. Individuals with high external search breadth were more innovative only when they allocated more attention to those sources. Our research identifies limits to the “variance hypothesis” and reveals two successful approaches to innovation search: “cosmopolitans” who cultivate and attend to external people and “locals” who draw upon internal people. © 2014 The Authors. Strategic Management Journal published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.     

知识经济时代知识与权力的匹配对组织的影响

知识经济时代,知识成为组织中最重要的资源,生产、分配和使用这一资源的知识型员工遍布组织各部门。如何留住这些知识型员工并使他们充分发挥知识的力量为组织创造价值?本文从知识与权力匹配视角构建了一个多主体仿真模型,借助计算机仿真软件NetLogo动态模拟了组织中知识与权力是否匹配及不同匹配程度、组织中知识含量及收入分配方式等对员工努力程度、员工效用、组织规模及组织产出的影响。研究表明:知识与权力的匹配有利于留住知识型员工并使其更加努力为组织创造价值;而匹配程度越高,组织的各项指标越好;随着组织中知识含量的增加,这一结果越显著;而按劳分配方式下知识与权力完全匹配的组织能更好地实现组织的良性发展。     

Correlates of turnover propensity of software professionals in small high tech companies

Abstract
The intent of this study is to shed some empirical light on the turnover propensity of software professionals in small software companies. Different sized firms were included to examine whether organizational size affected the relationships between the time the employees expected to stay in their present company, and a range of personal and organizational characteristics. A sample of 339 employees completed a questionnaire on their experience of and reactions to working in their current firm. None of the usual demographic indicators, e.g. age or tenure, was related to turnover propensity. The more time spent on programming, debugging or implementation, the shorter the time expected to stay. Satisfaction with both job and senior management was strongly related to expecting to stay longer, although satisfaction with project team or immediate boss showed virtually no relationship at all. The effect of organizational size occurred primarily with different company atmosphere qualities and certain work conditions. A warm atmosphere, fun and enjoyment, and friends in the company were important correlates only for the companies with below 50 people. Autonomy was a critical theme in the companies with 150–250 people, and recognition and advancement were important in the large company with approximately 2,000 employees. This suggests that the critical issues managers are confronted with would be different in organizations of different sizes.     

Innovators, Organization Structure and Management of the Innovation Process in the Securities Industry

This article examines innovation in the securities industry with the central objective of identifying factors that separate innovators from non-innovators. Akira Iwamura and Vijay Jog report results based on their survey of corporate finance vice presidents or CEO's of 43 investment houses from around the world. They conclude that innovative companies seem to be larger and have a well-defined strategy, with management defining the focus of the business. In addition, the firms have developed better communication channels, both internally and with their customers. Yet, the most significant difference that separates innovators from non-innovators is their management of the idea generation process, including concept generation and management's support. Innovators tend to approach idea generation in the following ways: they employ a variety of idea sources, both internal and external; they assign a specific person or group to be in charge of developing new ideas; they encourage employees at all levels to generate new ideas; they use a variety of innovative techniques to stimulate creativity; they reward their employees by non-monetary means; and they encourage group-level participation in evaluation decisions.     

Red,blue, and purple firms: Organizational political ideology and corporate social responsibility

Research summary : Why do firms vary so much in their stances toward corporate social responsibility (CSR )? Prior research has emphasized the role of external pressures, as well as CEO preferences, while little attention has been paid to the possibility that CSR may also stem from prevailing beliefs among the body politic of the firm. We introduce the concept of organizational political ideology to explain how political beliefs of organizational members shape corporate advances in CSR . Using a novel measure based on the political contributions by employees of Fortune 500 firms, we find that ideology predicts advances in CSR . This effect appears stronger when CSR is rare in the firm's industry, when firms are high in human capital intensity, and when the CEO has had long organizational tenure . Managerial summary : Why do firms vary in their stances toward corporate social responsibility (CSR )? Prior research suggests that companies engage in CSR when under pressure to do so, or when their CEOs have liberal values. We introduce the concept of organizational political ideology, and argue that CSR may also result from the values of the larger employee population. Introducing a novel measure of organizational political ideology, based on employees' donations to the two major political parties in the United States, we find that liberal‐leaning companies engage in more CSR than conservative‐leaning companies, and even more so when other firms in the industry have weaker CSR records, when the company relies heavily on human resources and when the company's CEO has a long organizational tenure . Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

How Banks Apply Marketing Expertise to Develop New Derivatives

For banks operating in the fiercely competitive derivatives market, the difference between the leaders and the also-rans often boils down to their respective approaches to product innovation. To achieve market leadership in this highly volatile field, a bank must develop and continually refine the processes and the expertise necessary for identifying new areas of business and attracting and retaining customers. Although the development of derivatives is a complex, expensive process, such development efforts provide the means for satisfying existing clients as well as attracting new customers. F. Axel Johne and M. Panos Pavlidis examine the managerial practices of banks that are acknowledged leaders in bringing new derivatives to market ahead of their competitors. In particular, they examine how those first-mover banks apply their marketing expertise and they review the advantages those banks enjoy as a result of their success in product innovation. The banks studied fall into one of two groups: highly active innovators and less active innovators. The study reveals several significant differences between the two groups with respect to managing marketing inputs for product innovation purposes. First, compared to less active banks, the highly active innovators take a more sophisticated, market-based approach to identifying innovation opportunities. Rather than looking for innovations that offer a close fit with existing products and competencies, they analyze the benefits sought by target clients and initiate innovation efforts based on those analyses. Highly active innovators recognize the important role that internal marketing plays in encouraging functional specialists to work together for the purpose of identifying follow-on development opportunities. Internal marketing also helps to ensure that all parties understand and can support the planned innovation. The highly active innovators in this study do not take a formulaic approach to the development of new derivatives; instead, they rely on marketing expertise to identify and capitalize on business opportunities. Rather than concentrate solely on improving the core technical features of a product, the highly active innovators also recognize the importance of product augmentation innovation (to ensure the appropriate support for various market segments), process innovation (so they can reduce prices, when necessary), and market innovation (to ensure that they pursue the optimal mix of markets).