Managerial Political Behavior in Innovation Portfolio Management: A Sensegiving and Sensebreaking Process

By applying formalized innovation portfolio management systems, firms seek to ensure an alignment of their goals and strategy with their employees' different abilities, actions, and outcomes. However, research indicates that nonrational, political behavior also determines formalized innovation portfolio management decision‐making processes. Research on political behavior in respect of innovation portfolio management usually conceptualizes political behavior as a set of self‐serving activities, such as negotiation, bargaining, coalition building, and acquiring power, aimed at protecting, maintaining, or promoting an actor's self‐interest and power. Consequently, extant research tends to focus on political behavior's dysfunctional impacts on decision‐making processes and their subsequent outcomes. This paper challenges this negativity bias by exploring a novel, neutral specification of political behavior and its relation to innovation portfolio management decision‐making processes. By conducting an automotive industry case study focusing on the innovation portfolio management decision‐making processes, the paper analyzed the data from 43 interviewees. The conceptual model shows that managers' political capabilities determine their ability to behave politically. According to the results, political behavior comprises the activities that prepare the stage and orchestrate others in order to form a political coalition. Furthermore, results show that political behavior functions as a sensegiving and a sensebreaking process, with managers seeking to shape an innovation project's understanding according to their interests and to influence portfolio decisions. The resulting novel specification of political behavior extends the construct's scope and validity by investigating their functional and dysfunctional aspects, and by indicating that a political sensemaking process complements formalized innovation portfolio management decision‐making processes.     

A Study of the Performativity of the “Ambidextrous Organizations” Theory: Neither Lost in nor Lost before Translation

Ambidextrous organizations succeed both in incremental and discontinuous innovation. However, there is little direct empirical evidence on how managers implement the principles of the “ambidextrous organizations” theory to dynamically align the structure and culture of ambidextrous organizations. Our study does not focus on analyzing the factors that give rise to organizational ambidexterity but focuses on analyzing whether the factors suggested by prior theorizing on “ambidextrous organizations” are implemented by managers in their daily practice as suggested by prior theorizing. Accordingly, this study does not investigate the traditionally conceptualized gap between academic theorizing and managerial practice since “ambidextrous organizations” theory can be characterized as rigorous and relevant. We investigate whether the “ambidextrous organizations” theory is implemented as suggested by prior theorizing and whether successful implementation is subject to managing in the way that scholars' prior theorizing suggests. Based on qualitative and quantitative data from two longitudinal case studies, we find that managers overlooked the process dimension in evaluating the required degree of ambidexterity. Furthermore, the organizational structure and culture for incremental innovation did not differ from the structure and culture for discontinuous innovation alongside the expected dimensions. Finally, the discontinuous innovation business unit had to be reintegrated to ensure sustained growth. During the reintegration processes, organizational capabilities mutated. We linked our findings on the processes and performativity of ambidextrous organizing to extant theories and developed the rationale for the observed novel phenomena of innovation myopia, second‐order competency traps, and capability mutations.     

Integrating inside and outside innovators: a sociotechnical systems perspective

Innovation literature stresses the importance of opening the innovation process to internal and external innovators. The question of what determines the integration of these types of innovators in the innovation process remains open. We use a sociotechnical systems perspective to address a number of challenges with respect to this matter: an organization deploying different innovation practices to open the innovation process might not be aware which types of innovators are de facto integrated in its innovation process. Alternatively, an organization targeting the integration of a particular type of innovator might not use the suitable innovation practices to integrate the knowledge of this type of innovator. To address these challenges, our comparative case-study analysis in 15 medium-sized firms derives a theoretical framework proposing that a combined analysis of innovation practices and underlying social interactions is needed to decide about the integration of a particular type of innovator in the innovation process. Being aware of these interrelations will allow organizations to act more consciously when opening their innovation processes.     

A service design perspective on the stakeholder engagement journey during B2B innovation: Challenges and future research agenda

Innovation in business-to-business (B2B) contexts deals with highly dynamic, complex, and heterogeneous constellations of stakeholders with a diversity of goals, motives, and capabilities that further challenge successful management of B2B innovation processes and outcomes. Complex challenges, such as sustainability and digitization trends, push these B2B firms to embrace new innovation methods that help them manage disruptive change. Service design thinking has emerged as an innovation management practice emphasizing a human-centered innovation process of user interactions, creativity, and learning mindsets. In this article, we aim to evaluate the challenges and develop a research agenda on how service design can effectively enable stakeholders' engagement during the B2B innovation process. We argue that to advance service design opportunities for stakeholder engagement, we need to address the unique complexities and challenges of stakeholder engagement during innovation from a systemic and dynamic process perspective. From a systemic perspective, we zoom in on the building blocks of stakeholder engagement and address multi-level stakeholder engagement platforms (i.e., innovation networks). From a dynamic process perspective, we treat stakeholder engagement as an emerging process and zoom in on the temporal and relational connections and hybrid orchestration to allow for both structural and emerging stakeholder engagement during innovation. We develop a stakeholder engagement journey in which we integrate service and innovation stages and propose how service design activities can support and facilitate the aforementioned challenges and complexities. Finally, we identify concrete research questions and, accordingly, develop a research agenda for future research on stakeholder engagement in B2B innovation trajectories.     

The role of digital technologies in open innovation processes: an exploratory multiple case study analysis

Digital transformation has undoubtedly become a key enabler of innovation as evidenced by the numerous firms that use digital technologies to manage their innovation processes. This issue is even more relevant today when innovation processes have become more open and require greater resources in the different implementation phases to capture and transfer knowledge within and outside the firm's boundaries. This implies additional challenges in managing the increasing amount of knowledge and information flows. Accordingly, digital technologies can be used and implemented to manage open innovation processes through easier access and sharing the knowledge created and transferred. Nevertheless, literature in these fields does not provide a structured view of how and why digital technologies are used to manage innovation processes in an open perspective. This paper aims to bridge this gap by adopting the theoretical lenses of change management to identify the managerial actions at organizational and process level that companies perform to implement digital technologies in their open innovation processes. Accordingly, the paper investigates how and why these managerial actions required for and enabled by digital technologies help firms to develop and nurture open innovation. From an empirical point of view, the exploratory multiple case study analyzes nine firms operating in different industries and varying in size, market share, and organizational structure.     

Divergent and convergent logic of firms: Barriers and enablers for development and commercialization of innovations

This paper describes and discusses similarities and differences in the priorities, interests, and interactional goals of companies involved in the development and commercialization of innovation. We refer to such priorities, interests, and interactional goals as the logic of firms, and point to how differences among companies in these regards may enable or inhibit the development and commercialization of innovation. A case study in drug development, from a Taiwanese biopharmaceutical, illustrates two types of innovations: generic and novel drug development. Findings suggest how logic places focus on how certain actors may be more motivated toward innovation, but also on how the logic portrayed by actors can promote certain types of innovations (in this case generic ones), while inhibiting others (novel innovations). The paper concludes that companies need to have convergent logic (i.e. have the same priorities and similar or complementary interests and interaction goals) if an innovation process is to be successful. The focus on priorities, interests, and interactional goals of companies in innovation processes complements previous research that has primarily focused on the actual interaction, not what motivates it. The construct of shared logic nets as a means of analyzing convergent logic and gaps between different types of logic help to understand enablers and barriers to innovation.     

Making Up Is Hard to Do: Knowledge Acquisition Strategies and the Nature of New Product Innovation

Innovation creates significant challenges for firms in high‐technology industries. This article examines how the use of external knowledge acquired from mergers and acquisitions (M&As) and joint ventures (JVs) influence the nature of innovative competence in the global pharmaceutical industry. We create a unique database on never‐before approved products that measure the scientific merit of new, exploratory product innovations, ranging from radical to incremental. We then follow their market success by recording the number of new exploitative product innovations that stem from these product innovations and that are later approved and subsequently marketed. Using a large data set spanning a 15‐year period, we find that firms were able to “make up” for their lack of exploitation or exploration innovative capabilities through the use of M&As and JVs. These external knowledge acquisition strategies were found to overcome internal processes that otherwise could cause firms to overemphasize exploitation over exploration and vice versa. Our findings suggest that acquiring external knowledge via M&As is associated with diminished exploratory product innovation, while assimilating external knowledge sourced from JVs is associated with a reduction in new exploitative product innovation.     

Business model innovation in strategic alliances: a multi‐layer perspective

Business model innovation (BMI) has recently become a topic of interest for research as well as corporate practice. However, we lack specific insights into actors, drivers, and different forms of BMI as the concept is by now mainly addressed in a very general way. In this paper, we analyze how BMI takes place in strategic alliances with the focus of enhancing the recent knowledge about BMI by developing a concept that links firm‐level BMI with alliance‐driven innovation of business models. Against the background of an in‐depth explorative qualitative study, we shed light on the basic nature business model innovation alliances (BMIA) and their effects on both, alliance level and firm level. We develop a process model of BMIA that is the first model providing a holistic picture of this particular type of BMI. Our findings allow for deep insights into BMI processes in incumbent companies and uncover in detail the importance of boundary spanning activities in this realm. By providing these insights, we pave the ground for a new stream of BMI research that focuses on the in‐depth understanding of the role of collaboration and network effects in recent BMI processes. In addition, we show practical benefits for partners in BMI alliances. These insights may help to overcome the traditional fear of negative effects that is still very often prevalent in companies when it comes to issues of partnering with firm external players in strategic issues.     

Research priority setting in food and health domain: European stakeholder beliefs about legitimacy criteria and processes

Dietary factors are the most important risk factors affecting health and well-being of population in every Member State of the European Region. Finding sustainable solutions to the food and health challenges is one of the key issues that today’s society urgently needs to address. Research prioritisation thus has an essential role in directing public resources to addressing these challenges. However, the processes of prioritisation among the food and health funders are rarely subject to scrutiny and the calls for democratizing science continue, as a means of enhancing both input legitimacy (with its focus on the processes of decision-making) and output legitimacy (the utility and impact of such decisions). The current study examines what conceptualisations of legitimacy (input and output) are held by the European stakeholders of the food and health research and innovation (R&I) process such as business organisations, non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and public sector organisations. We analyse stakeholder views from a series of European Awareness Scenario Workshops across nine EU countries (N = 295). The content and thematic analysis of the outputs identified six criteria determining conceptualisations of legitimacy: Influence; Representation; Procedural issues; Epistemic focus; Strategic vision; and Impact. The statistical analysis of the coded data highlighted stakeholder differences with business sector organisations being significantly less concerned about influence and representation than either NGO or public sector organisations. The results indicate that input legitimacy is of major concern to civil society and public sector actors. They reflect the wider debate about the way in which food and health R&I should be funded and policy decisions conducted, suggesting a need for better delineation of stakeholder roles and power differentials in this process. The findings are discussed with reference to the current discussions about Responsible Research and Innovation.     

Change processes in open innovation networks – Exploring living labs

Examining change in business networks can illuminate how time, temporality and process unfold and engage different stakeholders in open innovation. Living labs are increasingly popular open innovation networks that provide a fruitful area in which to study change processes and their influencing factors in network dynamics. We adopt a longitudinal process perspective to analyze eight living labs focused on urban development in a Northern European city. Our analysis reveals six pertinent processes: (i) expansion, (ii) reinforcement, (iii) focusing, (iv) unification, (v) termination, and (vi) recurrence. These processes reflect change in networks characterized by diverse actors, the coexistence of individual and shared motives, a high degree of openness, and user involvement. The identified change processes are a result of living labs disclosing their needs, data, and operations to their stakeholders. We propose a theoretical concept, which we describe as “network boosters”, to illustrate the factors that foster change processes. Scholars and practitioners of innovation management can learn from these findings that understanding change in open innovation networks may help to depict and predict short- and long-term relationships, and it may assist them in managing innovation in open environments.     

Value creation in innovation ecosystems: how the structure of technological interdependence affects firm performance in new technology generations

The success of an innovating firm often depends on the efforts of other innovators in its environment. How do the challenges faced by external innovators affect the focal firm's outcomes? To address this question we first characterize the external environment according to the structure of interdependence. We follow the flow of inputs and outputs in the ecosystem to distinguish between upstream components that are bundled by the focal firm, and downstream complements that are bundled by the firm's customers. We hypothesize that the effects of external innovation challenges depend not only on their magnitude, but also on their location in the ecosystem relative to the focal firm. We identify a key asymmetry that results from the location of challenges relative to a focal firm—greater upstream innovation challenges in components enhance the benefits that accrue to technology leaders, while greater downstream innovation challenges in complements erode these benefits. We further propose that the effectiveness of vertical integration as a strategy to manage ecosystem interdependence increases over the course of the technology life cycle. We explore these arguments in the context of the global semiconductor lithography equipment industry from its emergence in 1962 to 2005 across nine distinct technology generations. We find strong empirical support for our framework. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

An incubation perspective on social innovation: the London Hub – a social incubator

In the context of incubators, particularly those that are driven to achieving social objectives, this paper investigates core processes that support the development of social innovation. Social innovation, as this paper argues, is underpinned by a new form of social collaboration and engagement built upon strong forms of sharing knowledge and learning. Coupled with this is the element of social capital reinforced by entrepreneurship and leadership that promotes sustainability in the community. These factors drive innovative thinking and ways of engaging among stakeholders in order to create new forms of socio-economic impact. Such value-creating activity occurs in firms that operate within incubators involving a wide range of stakeholders who work through networks to co-create and meet social challenges. Through a case study of a social incubator and an incubatee, we demonstrate the core processes that irradiate the argument on social innovation. The contribution of this paper is threefold: First, social innovation is an emerging area of research, of which there is a dearth in terms of examining the processes empirically. We address the gap in this field by demonstrating the value of social collaboration and engagement using different innovation models. Second, we establish links between social innovation and incubation using the concept of social capital. This allows us to achieve our third contribution: exemplification of a dyadic value-based partnership and collaboration processes between an incubator and an incubatee, through activities driven by social innovation that aim to have social impact. The paper concludes with practice implications and suggests directions for future research.     

Acts of hidden franchisee innovation and innovation adoption within franchise systems

Franchising, as an imitative business model, provides a challenging context to create and manage innovation, as franchisors may wish to limit their franchisees' innovative activities to ensure network consistency. Drawing on data from two related empirical studies of franchisees operating in the UK, we seek to understand how franchisees contribute to innovation within their systems. Our first quantitative study reveals that although many franchisees develop innovations, these innovations are not always adopted by the franchise system, suggesting acts of hidden innovation. These findings motivated our second, qualitative study. Through a case analysis of 29 franchisees from 7 different franchise systems, we identify a number of organizational and relational factors that influence both franchisee engagement in innovation, and the extent to which their innovations are disclosed to the network. From these, we develop a theoretical framework of franchisee-led innovation processes, which contributes to the role of social exchange theory in innovation practices within business-to-business contexts. Our findings extend emerging research on innovation in franchise systems, and also provide practical insights on how franchisees can be best supported in creating and disclosing innovations to benefit the franchise system.     

The co-development of innovative projects in CoPS activities

While CoPS literature extensively covers how suppliers use modularity and systems integration to innovate, it fails at providing insights on the marketing and sales processes supporting innovation. We aim to contribute at filling this gap by comparing the contrasted approaches developed by two suppliers to integrate an innovative sustainable demand related to a tramway project. Based on analytical grid derived from CoPS, project marketing and solutions literature, our in-depth case analysis enables to propose a preliminary model for the co-development of innovative projects in CoPS activities. Our findings capitalize on these complementary research streams and contribute an integrated model of the marketing and sales processes supporting CoPS innovation.     

企业动态能力提升、组织结构倒置与新型管理控制系统嵌入——基于海尔集团自主经营体探索型案例研究

本文基于竞争日趋激烈的商业时代,阐释了企业提升动态能力的关键因素和匹配组织结构倒置及其管理控制系统所应具有的创新特征,架构了动态能力、组织架构和管理控制系统之间交互影响的理论框架。然后,以近年海尔集团自创的自主经营体(ZZJYT)为案例研究对象,描述了以海尔"倒三角"为主体结构特征、ZZJYT的基本逻辑和运行体系,研究表明海尔这一管理机制彰显了在动荡竞争环境中,企业通过组织结构重构可以驱动其动态能力,并直接诱发了信息传递路径、经营目标与员工薪酬、流程结构、组织信任与文化等管理控制系统的全面创新。文章认为,海尔的ZZJYT是中国企业组织管理变革的有益探索,既扬弃了现有企业战略和组织管理的理论,也对以创新为主导的中外企业多维度的实践提供了启示。     

Managing the challenges of business-to-business open innovation in complex projects: A multi-stage process model

Research shows that knowledge sharing and system integration are two major challenges posed by openness to business partners in complex innovation projects. However, there remains limited research on the microfoundations (i.e., actions and practices) underpinning the organizational capabilities required to address these challenges. Drawing on a case study of a pioneering electric vehicle manufacturer, we develop a multi-stage process model showing how these capabilities are developed and phased out in terms of the organizational principles (e.g., hierarchical product architecture) and actions and practices (e.g., sharing knowledge by deputing staff to/from business partners). Our study contributes to the literature by taking a microfoundations approach to unpack the ‘black box’ of organizational capabilities critical for managing complex innovation projects into actions and practices, and emphasizes the importance of firms' internal preparedness for managing openness.     

Achievements and challenges of innovation co-production support initiatives in the Australian and Dutch dairy sectors: A comparative study

Policymakers and innovation scholars share an increasing interest in how to operationalize innovation support given the increasing number and range of stakeholders engaged in co-producing innovation. Using comparative case study analysis, this article examines support initiatives for dairy sector innovation in The Netherlands and Australia, addressing common challenges such as environmental issues, cattle health, new technology, and human resources. To this end, a review was conducted of documented information and articles published on the initiatives. The qualitative analysis focused on how the co-production process was supported and the achievements and challenges associated with each case. Across both countries and between different initiatives, the main achievements were found to be the generation of very different ideas addressing dairy sector challenges and attempting to bridge public and private sector interests. The main challenges included maintaining effort and momentum for high ambition targets and the potential for duplication as stakeholders became enrolled in different initiatives sponsored by different organizations in an increasingly devolved institutional setting. Furthermore, without strong institutional support for innovation co-production processes, individual actors were less able to operate effectively in innovation co-production roles. It is concluded that dairy sector innovation policies should address institutional constraints (e.g. provision of leadership and rewards for involvement in co-production processes), recognize that facilitation of innovation co-production needs to be adequately resourced, enhance support for initiative coordination to avoid duplication of effort, and take into account the specific institutional setting of countries and sectors to guide the design of innovation co-production support initiatives.     

Complementing open innovation in multi-business firms: practices for promoting knowledge flows across internal units

Over the past decades open innovation (OI) practices have gained prominence among both scholars and practitioners as a mean to accelerate time-to-market and reduce development costs of innovations. Thereby scholars have nearly exclusively focused on cross-boundary knowledge flows between the focal firm and (its) external collaborators. This paper argues that such a focus limits our understanding of how multi-business firms with a diverse knowledge base profit from internally applied open innovation practices that in turn provide complementary benefits to OI. We build on the current literature by investigating and describing OI activities that are conducted within the boundaries of the multi-business firm. Based on a multiple case study of 23 collaboration practices conducted across 14 firms, our findings reveal 5 archetypal forms of internally applied open innovation activities. We draw on the literature of cross-divisional innovation and crowdsourcing to highlight how these archetypes differ in terms of their purpose and underlying managerial processes. Multi-business firms regularly rely on internal practices due to lower transaction costs and for stimulating a collaborative culture. We conclude that internally applied OI practices are effectively stimulated by a combination of non-monetary reward systems and purposive integration mechanisms.     

Innovating through alliances: expectations and limitations

Abstract
In this paper we have analysed the innovation processes occurring in several cross-industry technology partnerships in order to suggest some key managerial issues pertaining to the effectiveness of these increasingly popular initiatives. Our general proposition, based on an extensive literature review and clinical research, is that the managerial hurdles in partnerships frequently offset, and in some cases eliminate, the expected innovation advantages. We submit that there is a fundamental tension between the dynamics of innovation and the logic of partnering. The extent of the tension, however, depends on the nature of the innovation project and on the characteristics of the partnership. Thus we recommend that managers involved in the formation of joint-R&D agreements should carry out an innovation-partnering assessment to design an appropriate management structure that would minimise the 'tension'. Lastly, we suggest some ingredients for carrying out such an assessment, and directions for further research.
Alliances seem to be today's answer to most management challenges. As recent surveys show, companies all over the world are forming partnerships to alleviate difficulties met in nearly every business activity —design, manufacturing, distribution, service… (e.g. Hergert & Morris, 1987; Urban, 1989), The popularity of such strategic initiatives in the 1980's has led to a dramatic increase in the number as well as in the forms of alliances (Hagedoorn and Schakenraad, 1990).