Chief executive scanning emphases,environmental dynamism,and manufacturing firm performance

Chief executives must allocate their scarce time for scanning efforts among relevant domains of their firms' external environment and their firms' internal circumstances. We argue that high‐performing CEOs vary their relative scanning emphases on different domains according to the level of dynamism they perceive in their external environments. The concepts of dominant logic and sector importance were used to develop predictions about which external domains and which internal domains should receive relatively more or less scanning emphasis in external environments that, overall, are more dynamic or more stable. A field survey of 105 single‐business manufacturing firms evaluated CEOs' scanning emphases and firm performance. Results indicated that, for dynamic external environments, relatively more CEO attention to the task sectors of the external environment and to innovation‐related internal functions was associated with high performance. In stable external environments, however, simultaneously increased scanning of the general sectors in the external environment and efficiency‐related internal functions produced higher performance. These relationships were strongest between relative scanning emphases among domains and sales growth. We discuss the implications of these results for researchers and practitioners. Copyright © 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The Role of Marketing Resources in Radical Innovation Activity: Antecedents and Payoffs

While radical product innovations represent significant engines of firm growth, questions remain over whether marketing helps or hurts (1) a firm's radical product innovation activity and (2) its rewards from radical product innovation activity. By attaching an attention‐based view of the firm to a market‐based assets view of marketing, this paper examines the role of three marketing resources—market knowledge, reputation, and relational resources—on radical innovation activity. Our conceptual framework posits differentiated effects among marketing resources as antecedents of radical innovation activity and as moderators of its impact on firms' financial performance. Using a survey of a broad set of high‐tech business‐to‐business (B2B) firms to test hypotheses, it is found that firms with strong relational resources enjoy a higher propensity for, and stronger financial rewards from, radical innovation activity. Reputational resources come with a trade‐off as they hurt the incidence of radical innovation but enhance its financial rewards. However, market knowledge resources appear to hurt both radical innovation activity and its financial rewards. Our results point to the multifaceted role of marketing in radical innovation activity, which is unlikely to come with a single benefit or liability as prior work often posits. Rather, our research heightens the alertness of managers to assess their firms' marketing strength as a bundle of stocks of several marketing resources. Managers must understand the distinct benefits and drawbacks of each resource in developing and launching radical innovations. Our research underscores the differentiated value of marketing in radical innovation activity in B2B high‐tech contrary to the entrenched idea of a limited or even stifling role of marketing in this context.     

Alliance Concentration in Multinational Companies: Examining Alliance Portfolios,Firm Structure,and Firm Performance

Research summary: This article explores the distribution of alliances across firms' internal structure. Focusing on multinational companies, we examine the impact of alliance portfolio concentration—i.e., the extent to which alliances are concentrated within a limited number of geographic units—on focal firms' performance. Relying on Knowledge‐Based View (KBV) insights, we hypothesize that an increase in alliance portfolio concentration positively influences firm performance and that alliance portfolio size negatively moderates this relationship. Our empirical results enrich the emerging capability perspective on alliance portfolios, point to the relevance of conceptualizing focal firms in alliance portfolio research as polylithic entities instead of monolithic ones, and provide new insights into how firms create value by potentially recombining externally accessed knowledge. Managerial summary: In the setting of multinational companies, we examine whether alliance activities are concentrated in a limited number of subsidiaries or are highly dispersed across multiple subsidiaries. We find that, over time, firms exhibit different patterns in terms of alliance portfolio concentration. In addition, the results show that, for MNCs with a relatively small alliance portfolio, an increase in alliance portfolio concentration is positively related to their financial performance. However, when MNCs' alliance portfolios are relatively large, the relationship between alliance portfolio concentration and firm performance becomes negative. Jointly, these findings suggest that the distribution of alliances across firms' internal structure is an important factor in shaping potential knowledge recombination benefits from alliance portfolios. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Whose Innovation Performance Benefits More from External Networks: Entrepreneurial or Conservative Firms?

The primary contribution of this research is positing and empirically supporting the proposition that learning through external networks disproportionately benefits conservative, risk‐averse firms. The construct, entrepreneurial orientation (EO), is used to discriminate conservative, risk‐averse firms from proactive, risk‐seeking firms. Organizational learning theory and social capital theory are employed to support our hypotheses. Based on a study of 1978 U.S. firms, the paper suggests that the utilization of external networks (i.e., the process of learning from information, perspectives, and insights embedded in external networks) may act as a primary driver for innovation for those firms that are either not inclined and/or do not have the capabilities to adopt entrepreneurial culture. Specifically, weak EO firms' innovation performance benefits from utilizing external networks more than strong EO firms'. This research also tests for the moderating role of firm size and finds that the negative moderating effect of EO on the external network utilization–innovation performance relationship is more pronounced in small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs) than large firms.     

Will firms go green if it pays? The impact of disruption,cost, and external factors on the adoption of environmental initiatives

Research summary : Research on the link between financial and environmental performance implicitly assumes that firms will pursue profitable environmental actions. Yet, clearly, factors beyond profitability influence firms' environmental choices. We treat these choices as organizational change decisions and hypothesize that adoption of environmental initiatives is influenced by a combination of profit, level of disruption caused, and external influences. We test our hypotheses by examining firms' choices regarding implementation of energy‐savings initiatives. We find that degree of disruption, number of prior local adopters, and strength of environmental norms affect the adoption decisions. In addition, the effect of disruption is amplified by the implementation costs, but is mitigated by the number of prior local adopters. Managerial summary : Often, in trying to improve firms' environmental performance, academics and stakeholders have focused on actions that simultaneously improve environmental and financial performance. This assumes that firms will undertake projects that offer such dual benefits. We consider what might prevent firms from pursuing such ‘win‐win’ initiatives. We focus on how the degree of disruption of an energy‐saving initiative affects its probability of adoption. We find that firms are significantly more likely to adopt moderately profitable, but easy initiatives than more profitable but disruptive ones. We also examine internal and external factors that moderate the effect of disruption. Our findings suggest that in order to incentivize firms to improve environmental performance, it might be more beneficial make these activities less disruptive than to make them more profitable. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

An inquiry on dimensions of external technology search and their influence on technological innovations: evidence from Chinese firms

A central part of technological innovation for industrial firms involves search for new external knowledge. A well‐established stream of literature on firms' external knowledge search has demonstrated that firms investing in broader search may have a great ability to innovate. In this paper, we explore the influences of technology search on firms' technological innovation performance along three distinctive dimensions: technical, geographic, and temporal dimensions, using a unique panel data set containing information on Chinese firms that were active in technology in‐licensing and patenting during the period 2000–2009. Our findings reveal that Chinese firms' technological innovation performances are related to external technology search in quite different ways from the ones suggested in the extant literature using evidence from developed countries. We find that Chinese firms searching ‘locally’ along the technical dimension have better technological innovation performance than those searching ‘distantly’. However, when a Chinese firm in‐license relatively old (mature) technologies or those from geographically nearby areas, it will be less bounded to searching familiar technical knowledge.     

The path of R&D efficiency over time

In this paper we investigate the pattern of R&D efficiency in terms of the number of product innovations achieved by firms over time. Using a panel dataset of Spanish manufacturing firms for the period 1990–2006, we follow the innovative performance of R&D active firms and observe that innovation rates change over firms' R&D histories. To explain these facts we propose a model that explicitly acknowledges the twofold composition of firms' R&D expenditures, comprising spending on both physical capital for R&D projects and payments to researchers. We regard this latter component of R&D as a source for dynamic returns to firms' R&D investments. Consequently firms' innovation outcomes clearly depend on how long they have been investing in R&D and also on whether there have been any interruptions in the temporal sequence of R&D activities. Our results suggest that R&D activities exhibit dynamic returns that are positive but at a decreasing rate, and that interruptions in R&D engagement reduce R&D efficiency.     

Patenting Activities and Firm Performance: Does Firm Size Matter?

Whereas prior research has provided valuable insights into the willingness of small and medium‐sized enterprises (SMEs) and large firms to engage in patenting, a comparison of the performance implications of patenting activities across small and large firms is still lacking. This gap is important because SMEs and large firms, having different resources and capabilities, might benefit from patenting activities in different ways. In particular, SMEs can be expected to benefit less from patenting activities in terms of protection against imitators than large firms. On the other hand, the propensity and ability of SMEs to license out their patents and generate additional revenue streams might be relatively higher than that of their large counterparts. This paper studies the impact of patenting on licensing, innovation, and financial performance for both SMEs and large firms, using multiple‐group path analyses on a sample of 358 manufacturing firms. Contrary to expectations, this study demonstrates that not only large firms, but also SMEs benefit from patenting in terms of commercializing product innovations. Moreover, for both SMEs and large firms, such increased innovation performance in turn contributes to higher profit margins. Patenting activities also increase the ability of SMEs and large firms to license out knowledge to external parties, and this positive effect is significantly stronger for large firms. However, neither in SMEs nor in large firms, these outward licensing activities generate short‐term financial benefits. Finally, the study demonstrates that patenting activities do not trigger significant cost disadvantages for either SMEs or large firms. Jointly, these findings provide unique insights in the value‐generating and cost‐increasing effects of patenting, suggesting that not only large firms, but also SMEs should consider patenting as a viable strategy to fully reap commercial benefits from their innovation activities. At the same time, they temper open innovation scholars’ expectations regarding the financial benefits of licensing out knowledge. Overall, these findings point to opportunities for optimizing the intellectual property management of both SMEs and large firms.     

The Innovation Value Chain in New Technology‐Based Firms: Evidence from the U.K.

Innovation is central to the survival and growth of firms, and ultimately to the health of the economies of which they are part. A clear understanding both of the processes by which firms perform innovation and the benefits which flow from innovation in terms of productivity and growth is therefore essential. This paper demonstrates the use of a conceptual framework and modeling tool, the innovation value chain (IVC), and shows how the IVC approach helps to highlight strengths and weaknesses in the innovation performance of a key group of firms—new technology‐based firms. The value of the IVC is demonstrated in showing the key interrelationships in the whole process of innovation from sourcing knowledge through product and process innovation to performance in terms of the growth and productivity outcomes of different types of innovation. The use of the IVC highlights key complementarities, such as that between internal R&D, external R&D, and other external sources of knowledge. Other important relationships are also highlighted. Skill resources matter throughout the IVC, being positively associated with external knowledge linkages and innovation success, and also having a direct influence on growth independent of the effect on innovation. A key benefit of the IVC approach is therefore its ability to highlight the roles of different factors at various stages of the knowledge–innovation–performance nexus, and to show their indirect as well as direct impact. This in turn permits both managerial and policy implications to be drawn.     

Exploring proactive market strategies

Proactivity is an important driver of firm performance and for the creation of customer value on business-to-business markets. It is however not entirely clear what it is proactive firms actually do to achieve success. By investigating proactive firms' market strategies, i.e. the sets of activities they perform in order to create superior customer value, a holistic overview of the activities involved in proactive market strategies is provided. Through a case study of five proactive firms, proactive activities are identified. Using three strategic orientations—customer, competition, and innovation orientation—unique proactivity profiles are created, reflecting the patterns in the identified proactive activities. Through these profiles, three overarching proactive market strategies are forwarded: market shaping, customer engagement, and innovation leadership. These are proposed to act as generic proactive market strategies, representing coordinated proactive activities driven by multiple strategic orientations and aimed at creating customer value. These generic strategies help us understand of the role of proactivity in crafting high-performing market strategies by representing different routes to success.     

In search of El Dorado: The elusive financial returns on corporate political investments

Although many believe that companies' political activities improve their bottom line, empirical studies have not consistently borne this out. We investigate the relationship between corporate political activity (CPA) and financial returns on a set of 943 S&P 1500 firms between 1998 to 2008. We find that firms' political investments are negatively associated with market performance and cumulative political investments worsen both market and accounting performance. Firms placing former public officials on their boards experienced inferior market performance and similar accounting performance than firms without such board members. We find, however, that CPA is positively associated with market performance for firms in regulated industries. Our results challenge the profit‐maximizing assumptions underlying CPA research and focus on agency theory to better understand CPA. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

CEO incentives,innovation, and performance in technology‐intensive firms: a reconciliation of outcome and behavior‐based incentive schemes

Building on the agency view of corporate governance, we propose that technology‐intensive firms use both outcome and behavior‐based performance criteria for rewarding CEOs. Using a sample of 206 firms from 12 U.S. manufacturing industries, we find that as technological intensity increases CEO bonuses are more closely linked to financial results and that total CEO incentives are associated with two indicators of desirable innovation behaviors: invention resonance and science harvesting. Invention resonance refers to the impact a firm's inventions have on other firms' inventions, while science harvesting reflects a firm's commitment to scientific research. As technological intensity increases, aligning bonus with financial results, total incentives with invention resonance, and total incentives with science harvesting predict firm market performance. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

New Product Development Practices and Early‐Stage Firms: Two In‐Depth Case Studies

New product development practices (NPD) have been well studied for decades in large, established companies. Implementation of best practices such as predevelopment market planning and cross‐functional teams have been positively correlated with product and project success over a variety of measures. However, for small new ventures, field research into ground‐level adoption of NPD practices is lacking. Because of the risks associated with missteps in new product development and the potential for firm failure, understanding NPD within the new venture context is critical. Through in‐depth case research, this paper investigates two successful physical product‐based early‐stage firms' development processes versus large established firm norms. The research focuses on the start‐up adoption of commonly prescribed management processes to improve NPD, such as cross‐functional teams, use of market planning during innovation development, and the use of structured processes to guide the development team. This research has several theoretical implications. The first finding is that in comparing the innovation processes of these firms to large, established firms, the study found several key differences from the large firm paradigm. These differences in development approach from what is prescribed for large, established firms are driven by necessity from a scarcity of resources. These new firms simply did not have the resources (financial or human) to create multi‐ or cross‐functional teams or organizations in the traditional sense for their first product. Use of virtual resources was pervasive. Founders also played multiple roles concurrently in the organization, as opposed to relying on functional departments so common in large firms. The NPD process used by both firms was informal—much more skeletal than commonly recommended structured processes. The data indicated that these firms put less focus on managing the process and more emphasis on managing their goals (the main driver being getting the first product to market). In addition to little or no written procedures being used, development meetings did not run to specific paper‐based deliverables or defined steps. In terms of market and user insight, these activities were primarily performed inside the core team—using methods that again were distinctive in their approach. What drove a project to completion was relying on team experience or a “learn as you go approach.” Again, the driver for this type of truncated market research approach was a lack of resources and need to increase the project's speed‐to‐market. Both firms in our study were highly successful, from not only an NPD efficiency standpoint but also effectiveness. The second broad finding we draw from this work is that there are lessons to be learned from start‐ups for large, established firms seeking ever‐increasing efficiency. We have found that small empowered teams leading projects substantial in scope can be extremely effective when roles are expanded, decision power is ground‐level, and there is little emphasis on defined processes. This exploratory research highlights the unique aspects of NPD within small early‐stage firms, and highlights areas of further research and management implications for both small new ventures and large established firms seeking to increase NPD efficiency and effectiveness.     

Nonmimetic Knowledge and Innovation Performance: Empirical Evidence from Developing Countries

The knowledge‐based view suggests that the innovative performance of a firm is a function of the utilization and recombination of internal and external knowledge. The process of knowledge utilization and recombination to create new products can occur internally, through research and development activities, as well as externally, by making investments in creating links with suppliers, universities, customers, and a wide range of actors in the innovation system. This study focuses on the impact of unique, nonmimetic external knowledge, which is defined as unique technological knowledge that is not tapped by other firms in the new venture's operating environment, on the new venture's innovative performance. The purpose of the research is to investigate whether firms really benefit from utilizing and recombining unique, nonmimetic knowledge in creating innovative products in a developing country context. Drawing on the knowledge‐based view and institutional theory, this study argues that entrepreneurs in their utilization and recombination of unique, nonmimetic knowledge are not always successful at creating new products. The empirical context is drawn from the Enterprise Survey produced by the Investment Climate Group of the World Bank. The findings based on a large sample of new ventures in developing countries reveal a curvilinear relationship with marginal diminishing returns between the degree of unique, nonmimetic knowledge and innovative performance. The results also show significant moderating effects of strategic product planning and economic and regulatory policy uncertainty. Specifically, strategic product planning helps in converting very unique, nonmimetic knowledge into new products. In addition, policy uncertainty can also positively moderate the process of recombining and converting unique, nonmimetic knowledge into new products. This study provides a more complete account of how unique, nonmimetic external knowledge affects innovative performance of new ventures in developing countries.     

Biotechnology Commercialization Strategies: Risk and Return in Interfirm Cooperation

The management and exploitation of biotechnological product innovation have proven to be more difficult than initially expected because the number of currently marketed biotechnological products is far from sufficient to counter deficits in pharmaceutical innovation. This study provides insight into the role of governance structures in interfirm cooperation and their effects on biotechnological product innovation and company success. Most of the existing literature regarding alliances and mergers and acquisitions (M&A) examines their effects on technology recipients' innovation performance. Here, the effects of alliances and M&A on both the innovation success and financial performance of technology suppliers (i.e., sources) are examined. Drawing from a sample of 220 human therapeutic biotechnology and biopharmaceutical firms over a period of 32 years (1980–2011), an analysis of the effects of biotechnology clusters, strategic alliances, and acquisitions is provided. This study reveals the existence of a risk‐return trade‐off for strategic alliances between biotech companies and larger, more established firms. Increased biotech company involvement in product development alliances decreases risk by increasing the likelihood of future product introductions. The trade‐off, however, is that biotech companies earn lower returns when their products are developed through such alliances. A similar risk‐return trade‐off effect is found for clusters. However, acquisitions generally affect both product introductions and product returns in a negative way. These findings have strategic implications not only for managing the development of biotechnological product innovations and technology platforms but also for commercialization strategies with respect to interfirm cooperation and risk reduction.     

The Collaboration of Innovation Intermediaries and Manufacturing Firms in the Markets for Technology

Many manufacturing firms have opened up their product innovation processes and actively transfer knowledge with external partners in the markets for technology. However, the markets for technological knowledge have remained inefficient in comparison with the markets for most products. To reduce some of the market inefficiencies, manufacturing firms may collaborate with innovation intermediaries, which are defined as organizations that act as agents or brokers in the innovation process between two or more parties. These innovation intermediaries comprise different service providers ranging from consulting companies to Internet marketplaces for technology. In light of an increasing importance of intermediary services in the context of open innovation, this paper specifically focuses on the collaboration of manufacturing firms and innovation intermediaries, which may be critical for the success of intermediary services. Based on new interview data from 30 innovation intermediaries and 30 European manufacturing firms, this paper examines the question of how innovation intermediaries and manufacturing firms collaborate concerning the following issues, which emerged as the key themes from the interviews: potential of intermediation, roles of intermediaries, types of intermediation, drivers of intermediation, complementarity of intermediation, compensation of intermediation, and the importance of repeated collaborations. The findings indicate how manufacturing firms may reduce their transaction costs in technology markets by collaborating with intermediaries. However, intermediary services can only be regarded as a complement rather than a substitute of manufacturing firms' internal activities of managing technology transfer. Thus, manufacturing firms need sufficient internal capabilities for managing technology transfer, such as absorptive capacity and desorptive capacity.     

Learning Capability,Technological Parity,and Innovation Mode Use*

The purpose of this research was to examine whether a firm's learning capability interacts with industry technological parity to predict innovation mode use. Learning capability is conceptualized in the current research as a firm's ability to develop or acquire the new knowledge‐based resources and skills needed to offer new products. Industry technological parity is conceptualized as the extent to which similarity and equality exist among the technological competencies of the firms in an industry. Three generic modes of innovation are considered: internal, cooperative, and external innovation. These modes reflect the development of new products based solely on internal resources, the collaborative development of new products (i.e., with one or more development partners), and the acquisition of fully developed products from external sources, respectively. The premises of this research are that (1) technological parity can create incentives or disincentives for innovating in a particular mode, depending upon the value of external innovative resources relative to the value of internal innovative resources and (2) firms will choose innovation modes that reflect a combination of their abilities and incentives to innovate alone, with others, or through others. Survey research and secondary sources were used to collect data from 119 high‐technology firms. Results indicate that firms exhibit greater use of internal and external innovation when high levels of industry technological parity are matched by high levels of firm learning capability. By contrast, a negative relationship between learning capability and industry technological parity is associated with greater use of the cooperative mode of innovation. Thus, a single, common internal capability—learning capability—interacts with the level of technological parity in the environment to significantly predict three distinct innovation modes—modes that are not inherently dependent upon one another. As such, a firm's internal ability to innovate, as reflected in learning capability, has relevance well beyond that firm's likely internal innovation output. It also predicts the firm's likely use of cooperative and external innovation when considered in light of the level of industry technological parity. A practical implication of these findings is that companies with modest learning capabilities are not inherently precluded from innovating. Rather, they can innovate through modes for which conditions in their current environments do not constitute significant obstacles to innovation output. In particular, modest learning capabilities are associated with higher innovative output in the internal, cooperative, and external modes when industry technological parity levels are low, high, and low, respectively. Conversely, strong learning capabilities tend to be associated with higher innovative output in the internal, cooperative, and external modes when industry technological parity levels are high, low, and high, respectively.     

Technological Performance and Alliances Over the Industry Life Cycle: Evidence from the ASIC Industry

Technology development in firms is frequently based on a combination of internal and external technological learning. Consequently, firms need to develop both technological capital (a patent portfolio) and alliance capital (a portfolio of technology alliances). This paper examines the relationship between technological capital, alliance capital, and their joint impact on the technological performance of firms, with an application to the application‐specific integrated circuit industry. We find that positive marginal returns to alliance capital are decreasing at higher levels of alliance capital. Technological capital and alliance capital can either augment or reduce each others' influence on innovation performance depending on the stage of the technology life cycle in the industry. A reinforcing relationship related to absorptive capacity requirements and technological uncertainty is present in early stages, while technology leakage and market competition effects render the combination of high levels of technological and alliance capital counterproductive in later stages of the technology life cycle.     

Depth and breadth of external knowledge search and performance: The mediating role of absorptive capacity

Nowadays it is commonly accepted that exploiting external knowledge sources is important for firms' innovation and performance. However, it is still not clear how this effect takes place and what internal capabilities are involved in the process. We propose to open the black box between external knowledge search strategies, and innovation and performance by proposing absorptive capacity (AC) as the mediating variable. A sample of 102 biotechnology firms from Spain is used to test the proposed theoretical model through structural equation modeling taking the partial least squares approach. Results suggest that AC acts as a full mediator in the relationship between the depth of external knowledge search and the innovation and business performance of the firm. Finally, some suggestions for managers and future lines of research are highlighted.     

The Contribution of In‐house and External Design Activities to Product Market Performance

Design may be seen as one of several key factors contributing to new product development, along with research and development, marketing, manufacturing, purchasing, etc. More and more, creative design comes to the fore, and many companies believe that superior design will be the key to winning customers. It has the ability to create corporate distinctiveness and also possesses the potential to give a product an individual or new look. Furthermore, the model of open innovation suggests that firms can and should use external and internal knowledge flows in order to create valuable ideas, and also internal and external paths to the market. Also, in the design process, a common trend toward external design skills has emerged in recent years. Due to cost and control factors, firms are increasingly outsourcing design activities. By using a sample of Belgian companies, this paper explores the contribution of design activities to product market performance. While there is mounting evidence that design can be seen as a strategic tool to successfully spur sales of new product developments at the firm level, the topic of design innovation has not yet been linked to the open innovation concept. In this paper, it is empirically tested whether design activities conducted in house differ in their contribution to new product sales from externally acquired design. So, do design activities that have been developed only with internal resources lead to a greater success than those that have been carried out with external sources of knowledge? Using a large cross‐section of manufacturing and service firms, the effects on sales of products new to the market and of imitations or significantly improved products of the firm are investigated. At first glance, the findings indicate that externally acquired design is not superior to in‐house design activities: the results show that only design activities that are mainly conducted with internal knowledge sources play a crucial role regarding the product innovation's success with market novelties. Design conducted in collaboration with external partners, however, has no significant influence. This is not the case for imitations, that is, products only new to the firm. Their success is also influenced by design activities developed with external collaborators. This effect is robust for several modifications of the model specification. In contrast to earlier literature on new technological developments, this paper argues that external design may not affect the sales of market novelties as the “market news” may spill over quickly to rivals through common suppliers including external designers.